Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The south after the war enacted gun control laws to disarm and disenfranchise freed Blacks. They were put at the mercy of the KKK who kept them from voting or otherwise being free. The issue of an infringement on the freed slaves' right to keep and bear arms was a reason for Congress enacting the 14th Amendment. Unfortunately the SCOTUS refused to really uphold the full power of this amendment (see the Slaughterhouse cases).
And those KKK Democrats are no different then today's Democrats. They still want to disarm us so they can control us. The only thing Democrats have done is change the color of their sheets.
Also you may want to specify that it's Democrats slave masters (North and South) doing it.
Even if the newly freed black population were able to legally buy guns they wouldn't have been able to afford it or wouldn't have found anyone local who would sell guns to them. So we would still end up with one group being armed and another being disarmed. As oppose to both groups being disarmed. Which would have been a far better scenario.
Even if the newly freed black population were able to legally buy guns they wouldn't have been able to afford it or wouldn't have found anyone local who would sell guns to them. So we would still end up with one group being armed and another being disarmed. As oppose to both groups being disarmed. Which would have been a far better scenario.
Guns were readily available at the end of the Civil War. It was fairly easy to pick up guns off the dead bodies found throughout the countryside by that point or to loot the abandoned plantations. The reason the south enacted those gun laws was because the Blacks were becoming armed.
Even if the newly freed black population were able to legally buy guns they wouldn't have been able to afford it or wouldn't have found anyone local who would sell guns to them. So we would still end up with one group being armed and another being disarmed. As oppose to both groups being disarmed. Which would have been a far better scenario.
Were the slaves armed? Please answer yes or no.
IF the slaves were armed, would you think they still become slaves? Please answer yes or no.
Guns were readily available at the end of the Civil War. It was fairly easy to pick up guns off the dead bodies found throughout the countryside by that point or to loot the abandoned plantations. The reason the south enacted those gun laws was because the Blacks were becoming armed.
Almost all of the battles during the civil war took place in Virginia. Most of the slave population were hundreds of miles south in states like Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, etc. So that scenario wouldn't have happened. Also civil war armies didn't leave usable weapons just lying in fields they would come back and collect anything they could use.
Almost all of the battles during the civil war took place in Virginia. Most of the slave population were hundreds of miles south in states like Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, etc. So that scenario wouldn't have happened. Also civil war armies didn't leave usable weapons just lying in fields they would come back and collect anything they could use.
No slavery would happen if the populace is well armed.
IF the slaves were armed, would you think they still become slaves? Please answer yes or no.
Yes. Since when slaves did get arms and fight back they were almost always either executed or returned to slavery. They were enslaved because they were black not because they were unarmed. Sure tt helped to keep them enslaved by making sure they were unarmed.
Would slavery had occurred if white southern plantation owners were not allowed access to guns?
Some of the Founding Fathers thought so. But they are not Gods, just men. They can be wrong. In any case, they wouldn't know about the examples below.
The greatest examples that I can think of people defending and even regaining their rights against oppressive regimes are the Civil Rights movement in the American South and the overthrow of Communist regimes in Eastern Europe. (I'm not a historian. There probably are others I don't know of.)
Neither of these involved arms. Guns were prohibited in Eastern Europe. If Southern American blacks were allowed guns, they didn't use them. The Civil Rights movement was non-violent and succeeded against a well-armed opposition. The opposition, admittedly, was not a particularly murderous one by historical standards.
But in Eastern Europe, the opposition thought nothing of murder and had committed much murder previously. Yet, unarmed people overthrew them regardless.
This thread is not at the heart of the gun control debate, just an attempt to illuminate one argument in it.
Your rights didn't come from man. They are natural rights.
Yes. Since when slaves did get arms and fight back they were almost always either executed or returned to slavery. They were enslaved because they were black not because they were unarmed. Sure tt helped to keep them enslaved by making sure they were unarmed.
Would slavery had occurred if white southern plantation owners were not allowed access to guns?
I'd have to ask the question: Would slavery have occurred if black southern plantations owners were not allowed to have guns????
The Second Amendment is in place in case the politicians ignore the others.
Quotes by James Madison;
“The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country.”
“Oppressors can tyrannize only when they achieve a standing army, an enslaved press, and a disarmed populace.”
"Wherever the real power in a government lies, there is a danger of oppression. In our government, the real power lies in the majority of the Community... Government is the mere instrument of the major number of constituents.”
“Whenever there is an interest and a power to do wrong, wrong will generally be done and not less readily by a powerful and interested party, than by a prince.”
“I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of the freedoms of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”
“Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”
The United States Constitution (c) 1791. All Rights reserved.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
