Racist History of Handgun Bans in America

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thank you Catfishman, well said.

If the topic keeps coming up, would the moderators consider making it a sticky?

I think the importance of the whole topic is to illustrate how those in power use disarmament as a way to subjugate those they feel threatened by. Ever notice how "may issue" permits are issued?
 
This is a pretty offensive statement. There may be a little truth to it but the offensive part is the phrase "was founded upon". If the ancient history of every country was known-racism, tyranny, genocide, and class warfare could be found everywhere. We live in a free country were anyone has the opportunity to better themselves.
Click to expand...

It is that way now, but it wasn't for the first 150 years. As I recall from my history, the issue of slavery was part of the Constitutional debate of our founding fathers and the decision was made to not make slavery unconstitutional. You may not consider the country as being founded on a racist past, but it really was, by elitist wealthy males who depended on slavery for their standard of living. They considered slavery to be a positive ideal and part of their pursuit of happiness. It was racist and tyrannical. Manifest destiny, while not part of the founding of the country, was a big part of the growth of the county and certainly was racist, tyrranical, and resulted in genocide.

The history of the country may have racist roots like gun laws, but do those really apply today? Nope. So what's the point of making a sticky?
 
The difference of a single letter...i vs o

the country as being founded on a racist past
Click to expand...

Lots of us find that statement offensive, and biased. It represents a specific political view, and one I do not share. Change a single letter, and it changes the statement into something I believe is factual and historically accurate. Our country was not founded on a racist past. Our country was founded in a racist past.

by elitist wealthy males
Click to expand...
I never saw this point of view in any of the history texts when I was in school. But that was quite some time ago. Apparently things are viewed differently now?

Yes, many of them were wealthy, but not all. And those elitists risked all they had, and ever would have, in order to create a system based on "all men are created equal", etc. Hardly seems an elitist ideal, that.

It has become fashionable (recently) to denigrate the Founding Fathers, because in their personal lives they were men of their era. The are called racists because some of them owned slaves. Elitists because of,.. I don't really understand why, because they were rich? or because they didn't include a particular group? or ? Focus on males, because women had no public part, implying they were excluded, (anyone who doesn't think the wives of the Founders didn't have any influence has never been married or had a serious relationship;).)

They slap these pejoratives on our Founders, because they are only looking at what the Founders did not accomplish, and not at what the did do.

Racist is a fine word. And so popular in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. Looking at history, one clearly sees that mankind has been racist from day one. Primitive tribal groups are intensely "racist", except that generally skin color doesn't matter all that much. Other tribes are enemies, because they compete for the same resources. The root word for "stranger" and "enemy" is the same in many old languages.

Tribes became nations, and nations still acted the same way. But the underlying beliefs remained largely unchanged. "those guys on the other side of the hill are different from us. They look different. They talk different. They think different. Heck, the smell different! They are not our friends. They will take from us, kill us if they can. We need to do them first!"

This was (and to some degree still is) the established order of things. One people don't dominate/exterminate another just because they are of different colors, hey do it because one is weaker in numbers, or technology, because they have something the first group wants, and because they can!

Blacks weren't enslaved because they were black, Native Americans weren't driven off their land and killed because they were "redskins". It was done because they were weaker and socially different from those who did it. Claiming it was done because of their skin color ignores the fact that the same things were done to other peoples, by people of the same skin color, in the past. It makes a convenient excuse, and one used by the individuals doing the oppressing, that "they are only ......" and so it was right and proper in their eyes, since their group was superior, that obviously meant that they were "better". The weaker group was only "ignorant pagan savages", and they were "God's chosen" or some variation on that theme.

We have come a long, long way from those days, and we still have a ways to go. Disparaging the Founding Fathers because the were not able to correct all the worlds woes in one fell swoop is just wrong. They were, after all, merely men. To imply that those concepts that they fought, bled, and died for, are somehow less than worthy because those men were not able to implement them completely and instantly is disingenuous.

Nations, like individuals, begin as infants. We learn and grow with time. Pointing out repeatedly how we crapped in our diapers ignores where we are today. Knowing where we came from is important, but where we are is what counts, and where we are going is what matters!
 
I think it is rather funny that one of the earlier gun bans was an attempt to remove the cheaper pistols from civilian hands and to try to have people buy the Army and Navy pistols of the day, but yet are currently trying to ban people from using guns used by the Army and Navy.
If someone could help with citation on this, it would be greatly appreciated!
 
I never saw this point of view in any of the history texts when I was in school.
Click to expand...

Exactly, and there is a reason for that. Because american history books are typically written by the winners, not the losers. They want us to be patriotic, and support everything the government does because it's always for the good. Nobody really cares about dead civilians during war, they think its all ok cuz they say its part of war and "civilian casualties are at a minimum." The books in school are ONE sided, its meant to be that way. Dissidence has always been frowned upon, they don't want the general population to have a different view. They want us to believe what they tell us.
Look at a key figure in history. Columbus is portrayed as a hero, even his own holiday. You don't learn in school that he and his men murdered hundreds of thousands of native americans, and enslaved thousands more. Reading books that were written by the oppressed (the blacks, native americans, women, the poor..etc) are fascinating. The history is radically different than what we were taught in school. I forget who said these quotes, but they stick in my mind. "We don't want to hear the words of the people in the white house, we want to hear the words of the people that are picketing the white house." "Democracy is in dissent, democracy is in resistance, it doesn't come from the top, it comes from the bottom.
 
Is this crap still going on? Every tyrannical leader since before Christ has taken up arms against some minority of people--caucasian, middle eastern, Asian, Indian, islanders, African tribes........................


The only difference is most all of them have failed to continually whine about it for hundreds of years.:barf:

-7-
 
I never saw this point of view in any of the history texts when I was in school. But that was quite some time ago. Apparently things are viewed differently now?

Yes, many of them were wealthy, but not all. And those elitists risked all they had, and ever would have, in order to create a system based on "all men are created equal", etc. Hardly seems an elitist ideal, that.
Click to expand...

No, the weren't all wealthy, but the vast majority were. In fact, I am having trouble tracking down any who weren't. Holy cow, some even came from nobility. By the time they were participating in the signing of the Declaration of Independence and Consitution, they certainly weren't commoners any longer.

I am glad you decided to refute the racism issue and interject with the "all men are created equal" business, but that slavery and taking land from Native Americans was because the were, what did you say, oh here it is, ...
It was done because they were weaker and socially different from those who did it.
Click to expand...

So much for being created equal. Slavery was allowed not because all men were created equal. The government pushed for expansion not because of being gracious liberators of the land, but because they figured they could take what they wanted so long as it fit with their goals. Expansion of the country was not done with any sort of respectful consideration of Native Americans whose land was being taken.

Yeah, y'all can be offended that I don't see the founding of our country through the rose colored glasses of patriotism. I do recognize that our elitist white forefathers, most of whom were quite wealthy, land owners often with considerable holdings, did risk it all, but not everything they did was because they wanted a better country for everybody, otherwise they would not have allowed slavery to continue.

What they did might have eventually turned out pretty good, but it certainly wasn't pretty for millions of people for an extended period of time. You think the founding fathers risked it all for this country? What of the slaves and Native Americans who were forced into compliance at the end of a muzzle, whip, and sword?

Y'all act like your church going mom has been insulted. Just because she goes to church now doesn't mean she didn't raise hell earlier in her life.
 
Last edited:
"No, the weren't all wealthy, but the vast majority were. In fact, I am having trouble tracking down any who weren't."

Roger Sherman wasn't particularly wealthy, nor was the Rev. John Witherspoon.

Caesar Rodney I'm not so sure about.

Samuel Adams was by no stretch of the imagination wealthy. When he was elected to Congress his friends pitched together to buy him new clothes so that he presented a good image to the rest of the delegates.

John Morton of Pennsylvania wasn't particuarly wealth, either, I don't think.

Obviously most of these men were considered to be at least prosperous. At that time the entry way into politics at virtually every level was to own land, and to own land meant that you at least had some property. Even Sam Adams owned some property, but mainly through his family and his wife.
 
I completely agree with 44Amp and the only thing I agree with #18IndyColts about is his favorite football player.

We don't want to hear the words of the people in the white house, we want to hear the words of the people that are picketing the white house." "Democracy is in dissent, democracy is in resistance, it doesn't come from the top, it comes from the bottom.
Click to expand...
Few people trust powerful politicians less than me. But remember there are lying, cheating, ignorant fools at the top and the bottom of society. Just because someone pickets and questions power doesn't make them wise.

Nations, like individuals, begin as infants. We learn and grow with time. Pointing out repeatedly how we crapped in our diapers ignores where we are today. Knowing where we came from is important, but where we are is what counts, and where we are going is what matters!
Click to expand...

Extremely well put.
 
"Racism, Tyranny, Genocide and Class Warfare"???

Am I out of touch here? Maybe I just don't have all the facts? But I gotta go with Antipitas's comments myself.

18indycolts: I'm sure you are a good guy. But to me, these kind of statements (you just made here) are a little overboard. I'm sure you pushed a lot of folk's buttons with your comments. But I do respect your right to espouse your beliefs. It is good that we have a forum here on the Firing Line to do just that.
 
Much as I would like to continue...

To discuss our opinions of the Founding Fathers, I fear that the continued drift from the OP would lead to thread closure.

However, before I leave this subject (perhaps we might discuss these things privately? or in a different thread?) I would like to explain two things in my point of view.

1) That I consider the "Founding Fathers" to be more than just those individuals signing the Declaration of Independence, and so well remembered in history. To me, our Founding Fathers includes all those who joined in and made the Revolution successful. Not just the "wealthy elitist males", but the rank and file citizen soldiers too. And those at home who supported them and their cause, men and women.

2) "All men are created equal" A true phrase. All of us are created equal, through the biological act of procreation. The same for the rich and powerful as it is for the poor and powerless. It doesn't mean that all men are equal, and it never did. Only that since we are all created equal, we should all be equally treated under the law.

As to the origins of our gun control laws, I see them as racist, broadly as the term is commonly used today, by application, if not outright design. Even the Sullivan Laws, aimed at ethnic groups racially white, would be in that category, as well.

It is a well recognised fact that laws always have unintended consequences. Even though many of the laws originators fail to behave as if they understand this. I think the "racist" originators of our early gun control laws would be quite upset at how their laws are being applied today! Too bad for us they didn't think of that, and kept their pens and their votes to themselves.

The law is the law, and must be applied to everyone equally. I don't agree with the need or the usefulness of most gun control laws, but until they are changed, they are the law, and what we must comply and live with.

Until they pass a law saying I can't complain about them, I will continue to do so. And I think you should too!
 
Just because someone pickets and questions power doesn't make them wise.
Click to expand...

Tell that to the women that fought for their rights, tell that to the working class that fought for better conditions, shorter work days, workmans comp and PAID holidays and vacations. Tell that to the blacks that fought for equality and civil rights. Those that picket and question power are those that bled and died for others rights. I'm sorry but I feel it to be a WONDERFUL thing for people to question power, especially Government power...if you don't then will you be ok for them to take your gun rights away? You have to fight and think for yourself.
 
It looks as if my comments have sidetracked this thread.

The only remedy I can apply, since everyone appears to want to discuss the side issue instead of the main issue, is to close the thread, due to thread veer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top