2nd Amendment was written to control slaves ?


June 1, 2005, 01:37 PM
Hard to believe and I don't. >

If you enjoyed reading about "2nd Amendment was written to control slaves ?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
El Tejon
June 1, 2005, 01:56 PM
Professor Bogus? How apt. :D

Complete and utter distortion and inane expansion of the 3/5s provision. Bogus' linking the right to arms over slavery fails the straight face test.

The Second Amendment simply re-codified the right to arms of Americans that they enjoyed as Englishmen where there was no slavery in England. The right to arms predates slavery in the American South by thousands of years.

Further, states which flatly forbid slavery had explicit right to arms provisions. E.g., "The people shall have the right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the State." Indiana Constitution Article I, 32.

Applying Professor Bogus' test, why would Indiana recognize the right to arms? It had no slaves to police.

I am shocked that this paper would print such a thing. Gun control in Chicago was used to disarm African Americans and here they are reveling in their helplessness. :scrutiny:

June 1, 2005, 01:57 PM
Well, if this Professor Bogus that the author is referencing can actually produce something written by Madison or anyone else involved in drafting the Amendmet (i.e. Congress) saying it's about controlling slaves, I'd be more inclined to give it credence.

I haven't read anything about the slave issue being raised in deliberations/debates on the amendment. And Southerners in Congress weren't exactly what I'd call shy about defending their 'peculiar insitution' by name.

No, they just say Madison 'didn't want to put it on the table' and then move to a discussion about slave patrols, basically telling us the Madison is a dead white rich guy who must have had some sort of ulterior motive.

June 1, 2005, 01:57 PM
That was so rediculous, it's difficult to even start tearing it down.

June 1, 2005, 02:00 PM
Hard to believe when one understands that many of the early gun control measures were enacted to deprive newly freed blacks from exercising their right to self-defense.

"Saturday Night Special" comes from "Ni--ertown Saturday Night Special", and the original laws banning these cheap handguns were intended to deprive those who couldn't afford more expensive weaponry.

It is gun control that is racist, not the Second Amendment, which enumerates the God given right of all men to defend themselves.

Gun control kills.

Henry Bowman
June 1, 2005, 02:01 PM
Wow. That is one bizarro way of looking at things.

So many law review articles (this bigot's referenced source) are just so much intellectual masterbation meant to show off how big and contortable the author's brain is.

My motto in law school: "Make love, not law review."

2nd Amendment
June 1, 2005, 02:11 PM
Yes, the South was terrified of Blacks and yes, the Civil War was about slavery.

Why do you do this when you know someone is going to correct your error...for the next ten solid pages... :D

Old Dog
June 1, 2005, 02:18 PM
Hard to take seriously an eight-year-old law review article (UC-Davis?) Harder still to take when writings of the founding fathers lend an entirely different dimension to the arguments for the right to keep and bear arms than what Bogus attempts to prove. Here's Curry (himself a black man, interestingly) bashing Rice for making a great case for RKBA -- when, oh when, will liberal America (and liberal black America) stop finding fault with the founding fathers?

June 1, 2005, 02:24 PM
Let's pick apart Professor Bogus' (help yourself to a joke on that one) claims:

1. The meaning of the 2nd amendment is unclear. The founders were men of letters. They wrote down their thoughts and motivations, in the Federalist papers, and their private letters. Did he bother to read these?

2. The 2nd amendment was written to arm state militias. News flash: "the people" means individuals. How many times do we have to go over this?

3. State militias were used to repress slaves in the antebellum South. Okay, now we've actually reached something interesting. Bogus says they accomplished this in part by disarming slaves of any weapons they might use for starting an insurrection. Thus disarmed, slaves were powerless against their armed masters. So this is supposed to be an argument in favor of the narrow collective-rights interpretation? What about northern states that had militias and no slaves?

June 1, 2005, 03:15 PM
Yeah, slavery. Right.

That's why all the northern, non slave states had RKBA clauses in their state constitutions too....

June 1, 2005, 03:24 PM
Why do you do this when you know someone is going to correct your error...for the next ten solid pages... Because he loves flaunting his misconceptions? :eek:

El Tejon
June 1, 2005, 03:39 PM
gc, no misconception, just historical truth.

2nd, I think it's important to acknowledge the obvious to clarify the issue. :)

2nd Amendment
June 1, 2005, 03:53 PM
I am NOT rising to the bait this time. I refuse. You can't make me. :neener:

El Tejon
June 1, 2005, 03:55 PM
O.K., I'll edit post so we can focus. :cool: :)

June 1, 2005, 04:22 PM
Is it just me, or do the anti's seem to dream up their arguments and talking points like a big vat of spaghetti noodles which they then toss against a wall?

Whatever sticks is what they will then repeat ad naseum in every media form they can get face or keyboard time with.

Highland Ranger
June 1, 2005, 04:42 PM
I refuse the click on the link.

So . . . . . what do you think is better for self defense, the .45 or the 9mm?


June 1, 2005, 04:49 PM
The Carl T. Bogus?


National Advisory Panel, 1993-Present.

Board of Visitors, 1979-2001.

State Governing Board, 1999-2001.

Board of Governors, 1992-93, Board of Directors, 1987-89.

Board of Directors, 1989-92.

Board of Directors, 1987-89."

Standing Wolf
June 1, 2005, 04:50 PM
Racism. It's all about racism all the time, right?

June 1, 2005, 04:59 PM
Gun control? Yeah, gun control is eaten right to the center with racial bigotry.

June 1, 2005, 06:31 PM
the following is from the "Nothing New" section of www.virginia1774.org and seems to contradict the absolute assertion that slaves (and Indians - how come nobody's mentioned Indians yet?) were to be absolutely prevented from owning and/or bearing arms.

Nothing New Under the Sun

The General Assembly passes laws each year to combat supposed new threats against the public safety. History shows that these new "problems" are not new threats and may infringe upon Article I, Section 13, of the Virginia Bill of Rights.

Regulating Gun Marts or Gun Shows

New: " Gun Show Loophole "




"provided alsoe that it shall not be lawfull or permitted any Indian or Indians resorting to or meeting at any those aforesaid marts or ffaires to travell with or carry armes, or appeare there armed, except only the carrying home such armes or ammunition as they shall then and there purchase, and shalbe found registred in the clarkes booke, for which they shall have with them his certificate;"


Regulating Amount of Arms a Person May Purchase or Keep

New: "One Gun a Month ; Exemption for certain classes of people or those who have a permit or permission to buy more than one gun. "

18.2-308.2:2.(P) Criminal history record information check required for the transfer of certain firearms.


May 1723 -- 9th GEORGE I:


XV. Provided nonetheless, That every free negro, mulatto or indian, being a house-keeper, or listed in the militia, may be permitted to keep one gun, powder, and shot; and those who are not house-keepers, nor listed in the militia aforesaid, who are now possessed of any gun, powder, shot, or any weapon, offensive or defensive, may sell and dispose thereof, at any time before the last day of October next ensuing. And that all negroes, mulattos, or indians, bond or free, living at any frontier plantation, be permitted to keep and use guns, powder, and shot, or other weapons, offensive, or defensive; having first obtained a license for the same, from some justice of the peace of the county wherein such plantation lie; the said license to be had and obtained, upon the application of such free negroes, mulattos, or indians, or the owners of such as are slaves, any thing herein contained to the contrary thereof, in any wise, notwithstanding."

stay safe.


June 1, 2005, 10:36 PM
I have Read Professor Bogus' thrilling research and have found a further revelation:
The right to free press was written only to ensure Slaveholders could post public notices of escaped slaves to aid in their apprehension.

Obviously the constitution is racist we need to throw it out.

June 2, 2005, 03:25 AM
Whatever sticks is what they will then repeat ad naseum in every media form they can get face or keyboard time with. I have had to deal with that a lot. A few other issues work the same way.

Those idiots just say stuff, and based on how we respond determines whether or not they will say it again.

If they where held accountable for their lies and the number of times they where wrong we would have completely won the gun control debate a long time ago. If John Lott screws up a tiny bit we never hear the end of it, but we are expected to stand still while they throw their feces at us on a daily basis. I think the main reason why the gun control groups no longer have any members (there are only a few thousand in the whole country, about a dozen in Minnesota) is because they come up with arguments that only make sense to the 100% uninformed. Once someone learns something or looks into things they quit, or even sometimes join our side.

June 2, 2005, 12:33 PM

If you enjoyed reading about "2nd Amendment was written to control slaves ?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!