I did see Rosewood. The story was what a a righteous black WW1 veteran can do with two shoulder-holstered 1911s and the sheep around him.
Rick
PS, you want more about the racist routes of gun control? As always, go to
www.jpfo.org.
As well, the antis have their own take on this. Carl T. Bogus and some other dude have been published in the UC Davis law review and some other, with the story about the southern states wanting the 2nd Amendment so that they could be assured they could control and recapture slaves. This of course is like saying that the First Amendment was required so that the slave owners could publish wanted posters for escaped slaves.
Bogus also writes that the RKBA could not possibly be a right since probate records "show" that guns were not often listed. They then estimate that the ownership rate for firearms was only, say, 10%. They make no effort to prove that this is a proper method for estimating gun ownership, as would be required in a true scholarly submission. Bogus says that firearms ownership became common only after that dastardly Samuel Colt began marketing his guns as "Peachmakers," and "Equalizers." And darn-it, after the Civil War, the government allowed all the ex soldiers to keep their guns, even the Confederates!!!
Well, let's assume the probate record method is a valid method to estimate gun ownership and that low ownership rates do actually mean that RKBA is not an individual right. One must then ask, "How common were printing presses, and if they were rare, does that mean we have no individual right to publish? Does that mean only newspapers way do this. Does that mean that word processors and fax machines are not protected?"
I just love using the First amendment as a test for the Second amendment, don't you?
------------------
"Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American." Tench Coxe 2/20/1788