While reading the book there were lots of things that struck me as strange.
Massachusetts was the first state to use the term keep and bear arms in their constitution. Several Massachusetts communities including Boston (this is a shocker) were also the first to legislate broad gun control measures “for public safety�. Gunpowder was outlawed inside the city and loaded firearms were not allowed. Violation of the law resulted in outright confiscation of firearms.
Seems like reasonable restrictions have been around for a long time too. I bet ever since Og stood upright, grasped his club with his fist equipped with an opposable thumb, some anti has been trying to disarm him “for public safety�.
Anygunanywhere
Search found 2 matches
Return to “Book Review - "A Well Regulated Militia"”
- Sun Feb 03, 2008 1:40 pm
- Forum: Books & Videos
- Topic: Book Review - "A Well Regulated Militia"
- Replies: 6
- Views: 2495
- Sat Feb 02, 2008 5:33 pm
- Forum: Books & Videos
- Topic: Book Review - "A Well Regulated Militia"
- Replies: 6
- Views: 2495
Book Review - "A Well Regulated Militia"
A Well Regulated Militia – The Founding Fathers and the Origins of Gun Control in America by Saul Cornell
The book is an easy read providing you are not coming off of six graveyard shifts in a row. It reads like the documentary it was meant to be with lots of citations for reference and lots of good quotes for signature lines if you have federalist or collective right leanings.
As I read I could not help but sense that the author did not side with the anti-federalist side nor subscribe much to the individual right argument. He contends that both the pro and anti gun crowd have the 2A wrong and that it essentially does deal with the organized civilian militia.
He traces the history of the RKBA from early pre-revolution days all the way to 2001. He even includes a little history on British common law and natural law with respect to RKBA as well. I did not know that under British law no one was allowed to travel armed and that this is founded in natural law!Shazzam!
One of his major points throughout the book is his contention that even during the federalist and anti-federalist period prior to the constitution ratification the typical American viewed his RKBA as more of a civic common defense duty than a self defense right which struck me as simple garbage. There was British army, French army, and Indians to fight.
I never saw where the author attempted to define “regulate�. He used the term consistently as in “legislate� and applied the term to firearm regulation as in control. We individual rights folks hold the term as in “trained�. The author does point out the lack of a well regulated militia in current time and details the deterioration of the militia over time.
An interesting point I discovered was that one of the first theorists to propose the profound thought that when firearms are outlawed only outlaws will have firearms was an Italian gentleman named Cesare Beccaria. Mr. Beccaria was a profound influence on Jefferson’s belief in the RKBA.
All I can say is I am an anti-federalist with severe Jeffersonian leanings.
"A little rebellion now and then is a good thing" Thomas Jefferson
Anyway, the book is at the League City library as soon as I turn it in.
The book is an easy read providing you are not coming off of six graveyard shifts in a row. It reads like the documentary it was meant to be with lots of citations for reference and lots of good quotes for signature lines if you have federalist or collective right leanings.
As I read I could not help but sense that the author did not side with the anti-federalist side nor subscribe much to the individual right argument. He contends that both the pro and anti gun crowd have the 2A wrong and that it essentially does deal with the organized civilian militia.
He traces the history of the RKBA from early pre-revolution days all the way to 2001. He even includes a little history on British common law and natural law with respect to RKBA as well. I did not know that under British law no one was allowed to travel armed and that this is founded in natural law!Shazzam!
One of his major points throughout the book is his contention that even during the federalist and anti-federalist period prior to the constitution ratification the typical American viewed his RKBA as more of a civic common defense duty than a self defense right which struck me as simple garbage. There was British army, French army, and Indians to fight.
I never saw where the author attempted to define “regulate�. He used the term consistently as in “legislate� and applied the term to firearm regulation as in control. We individual rights folks hold the term as in “trained�. The author does point out the lack of a well regulated militia in current time and details the deterioration of the militia over time.
An interesting point I discovered was that one of the first theorists to propose the profound thought that when firearms are outlawed only outlaws will have firearms was an Italian gentleman named Cesare Beccaria. Mr. Beccaria was a profound influence on Jefferson’s belief in the RKBA.
All I can say is I am an anti-federalist with severe Jeffersonian leanings.
"A little rebellion now and then is a good thing" Thomas Jefferson
Anyway, the book is at the League City library as soon as I turn it in.