As I understand, the first Gun Control

Was this before or after restricting Native American use?

I thought the British soldiers told the colonists "lay down your arms" and then the shooting started. Look up Bunker Hill, Boston Massacre, and others.

Well we were still part of Britain at that time. They weren't invaders, they were our rulers and we rebelled against them.

I have a link to a very good article on my computer at home that I'll post as soon as I get there. The article covers the history of gun control, especially handgun control, in the US. Most of the laws from the late 1800's into the early 1900's were aimed at keeping guns out of the hands of the lower-class and undesirables. Many of them effectively banned cheap handguns so that those with money (and power) could have them, but those without couldn't own them. Much of it was racially motivated.

Along with that, the may-issue nature of many concealed carry permits for so long was used by government agencies to keep whole sections of society vulnerable to either crime (if they obeyed the law and were unarmed) or prosecution as criminals (if the carried anyway to defend themselves.) In my opinion, the shall-issue concealed firearms permit is the great equalizer in this society. The next step is a return to constitutional carry. No permit needed.

On the Red-coats/colonists thing, we were British citizens at the time, albeit lower-class citizens.

Matt

Look up General Gage.

He was the first gun-grabber; April 1775.

Don't forget the pre-Civil War "slave codes" in the South that strictly prohibited the possession of guns by slaves and free blacks. Any slave owner that lent guns to slaves (or taught them to read and write) was himself subject to severe penalties.

All the early efforts at gun control were mostly about "control" and not really about guns per se. The idea was to arm the ruling classes and disarm the ruled classes. Today, this same idea is at work in the case of wealthy antigunners (Hollywood glitterati, politicians, etc.) who can afford to hire armed guards for themselves. They are the "worthy" ones while the ordinary citizens are "unworthy." Hypocrisy and elitism run rampant.

I have a link to a very good article on my computer at home that I'll post as soon as I get there. The article covers the history of gun control, especially handgun control, in the US. Most of the laws from the late 1800's into the early 1900's were aimed at keeping guns out of the hands of the lower-class and undesirables. Many of them effectively banned cheap handguns so that those with money (and power) could have them, but those without couldn't own them. Much of it was racially motivated.

Click to expand...

a lot of the current laws are still aimed at keeping guns out of the lower class....

look at the laws on "gun melting point"....that ban firearms that melt below a certain temperature.....guns like the hi-point. then there are also the laws against "Saturday night specials" and "throwaway guns"......

many less fortunate people cannot afford a $500+ pistol......but a $150 hipoint is a serviceable weapon at an affordable cost.....but as we all know, only the elite class has a right to self protection.

Texshooter said:

efforts in the U.S. were after the War Between the States...

Click to expand...

Many believe it is more accurate to refer to it as the War of Northern Aggression.

slidemuzik said:

Many believe it is more accurate to refer to it as the War of Northern Aggression.

Click to expand...

Only on Tuesdays.

I can't find the article yet. Still looking.

Many believe it is more accurate to refer to it as the War of Northern Aggression.

Click to expand...

I have been known to use the term "War of Southern Treason" myself.

Originally Posted by Texshooter
efforts in the U.S. were after the War Between the States...

Click to expand...

Originally Posted by slidemuzik
Many believe it is more accurate to refer to it as the War of Northern Aggression.

Click to expand...

Well then it's a pretty good thing that has absolutely nothing to do with anything, guns in particular, and isn't really a topic of discussion on THR

In Nathaniel Philbrick's book Mayflower, he does discuss the fact that the colonists were not to allow weapons into the hands of the Natives. Hmmm. Imagine that.

Perhaps not codified into law, but certainly a form of gun control.

Most of his book deals with the aftermath known as King Phillips War, a bloody repercussion of settlement and angry armed Natives. So maybe it was a good idea, or maybe just a foreshadowing of future events.

Or maybe it is simply "human nature". Keep control of the underlings so they will do "us" no harm whilst we do what we will? Hmmm Imagine that.

Repercussions. More "human nature" at work.

Ragnar Danneskjold said:

Well then it's a pretty good thing that has absolutely nothing to do with anything, guns in particular, and isn't really a topic of discussion on THR

Click to expand...

Sorry. I'm noticing that PC, history, and sarcasm don't mix well here. I'm still adjusting to the THR neighborhood. My bad.

My point was history has to be fully understood to avoid repeating conflicts.

"I have been known to use the term "War of Southern Treason" myself."

And yet the concept of one or more states leaving the United States was accepted well prior to the Civil War.

Google the Hartford Convention of 1814-1815. Some of those New England folks wanted to leave the Union because they were angry at the president for the War of 1812 and his trade policies.

Actually somewhat back on topic, this is one reason we here in Texas can't open carry. The "Jim Crow" laws passed during reconstruction prevented the open carry of pistols, and that's STILL on the books today. Hopefully this session we can get it repealed.

I hope it's not too late to revive this thread

I've encountered a few arguments for the Founders having instituted a firearm registry of sorts during the Revolution from a few of those folks who wholly believe that the 2A applies to the militia and not to individual citizens. I haven't found any sources, it appears only to be conjecture. However, I'd like to know if there is any information pointing to the possibility of the Founders instituting a gun registry for private citizens before I am confronted with sources and have no means to defend my argument.

Edit; such as arguments concerning the Militia Act of 1792 found in this article by CBS;
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504383_162-5258192-504383.html

I'm reading a book called "living with guns" by Craig Whitney right now, and he has some sources noting gun control in colonial times, on both sides of the equation, e.g. Massachusetts requiring all free adult males to own arms, powder and bullets. On the other hand, in addition to native Americans, there were plenty of prohibitions: In New England; Roman Catholics, indentured servants, slaves, non-property owning whites, and any others who refused to swear allegiance to the government. Sounds like gun control to me, and sounds like not much has changed. Meet the new boss, same as the colonial boss.

The difference now of course being DC v. Heller.

Wow. I already have so many books on the go that I barely have time to read... eugenicists, black liberation theologists, and I'm getting ready to read a book by Saul Alinsky... now I want to read the book that you're reading. My inspiration for this inquiry came from trying to determine how our fight for firearms rights parallels with the rights of blacks to defend themselves following the Nat Turner rebellion, Jim Crow laws and the Mulford Act. Now I find myself asking the question, "what really WAS the first GC in the United States and was it utilized for good or for bad in each instance?" Anyone got any "History of US Gun Control" books that go all the way back to our inception, or know of any such books that exist?

Before and after the Revolution there were laws forbiding slaves to be armed, or learning to read.
Giving them arms or teaching them to read was forbidden to whites.

I'm looking for more "blanket" style regulations than those applying to one or another group. Did the founders really register all of the weapons in the colonies at the time of the Revolution? If so I would imagine that it would have been for the purpose of accounting arms as means of military logistics rather than under the guise of fighting violent crime.

They may have given numbers to muskets painted on the stock for inventory of an armory [like the British] but far more people lived rurally a nd kept those guns at home, and I would be surprised if any or all ever got counted out in the sticks.