another okie
Member
American Heritage magazine, 57-3, July 2006, page 31.
This article is a shorter version of the author's book.
He discusses "What would the founders (of our nation) do" about the death penalty, gun control, terrorism, etc.
You can tell it kills him to write it, but he gives an accurate background for the 2nd amendment, resisting tyranny, and pointing out that they had just fought a violent revolution. He writes:
"The Founders lived among guns; they would never make them illegal; they would subject them to necessary laws, following Blackstone. And as in the due that put Hamilton in his grave, they broke their own laws when honor demanded it." (p. 35)
He points out that Blackstone (a contemporary legal writer whose opinons were regarded as very important in the 18th century) does say that Parliament can do as it wishes. Of course, the whole point of the Bill of Rights was to put the right to keep and bear arms and other rights beyond the power of a simple majority in Congress to infringe.
But overall it's a pretty sympathetic and fair piece.
I know the fire-eaters among us will find something to disagree with in the article, (and in the quote I've provided) but for those of us over forty it is simply amazing to read such a positive slant on the right to keep and bear arms in a major magazine. I think sometimes the younger shooters don't realize how far we have come in winning over the public and the media.
This article is a shorter version of the author's book.
He discusses "What would the founders (of our nation) do" about the death penalty, gun control, terrorism, etc.
You can tell it kills him to write it, but he gives an accurate background for the 2nd amendment, resisting tyranny, and pointing out that they had just fought a violent revolution. He writes:
"The Founders lived among guns; they would never make them illegal; they would subject them to necessary laws, following Blackstone. And as in the due that put Hamilton in his grave, they broke their own laws when honor demanded it." (p. 35)
He points out that Blackstone (a contemporary legal writer whose opinons were regarded as very important in the 18th century) does say that Parliament can do as it wishes. Of course, the whole point of the Bill of Rights was to put the right to keep and bear arms and other rights beyond the power of a simple majority in Congress to infringe.
But overall it's a pretty sympathetic and fair piece.
I know the fire-eaters among us will find something to disagree with in the article, (and in the quote I've provided) but for those of us over forty it is simply amazing to read such a positive slant on the right to keep and bear arms in a major magazine. I think sometimes the younger shooters don't realize how far we have come in winning over the public and the media.