Second Constitutional Amendment, Slavery and the NRA

History And Truth Behind The Second Amendment

Second Constitutional Amendment, Slavery and the NRA
I read an article, and performed some historical research, into the real reason for the second amendment. The NRA continually spouts their mantra about how the 2nd amendment protects our right to bear arms. They ignore or have no knowledge as to the intent of the amendment.

Thomas Jefferson, was among the majority of our founding fathers who were slave owners. Thom Hartmann, of “Truthout”, uncovered facts that point to the enactment of the second amendment as a tool to preserve slavery. The wording of the amendment was crucial. The word “State” was used instead of “Country”, deferring to states the right to make laws pertaining to them individually when these rights were not specifically granted to the federal government.

Before the Declaration of Independence was signed, their were militias. In the south, they were called “slave patrols” and were regulated by the individual state. Laws were passed in each state requiring slave owners to ensure armed patrols inspect slave quarters and ensure that they were not planning an ‘uprising’. The Georgia laws were the most defined. They were to specifically search slave housing for weapons and ammunition. And any slave that was discovered outside of plantation grounds was to be whipped.

At the time of the signing of the Constitution, revolts by slaves had greatly increased. Blacks outnumbered Whites in many areas. The “police state”, created by southern militia laws controlled the uprisings.

Northern anti-slavery movements saw a way of using these militias to strengthen the defense of the new country, and at the same time supplant a way for the slaves to be freed and perform military service. A note in history reveals that Great Britain, represented by Lord Dunsmore, offered freedom to any slave who would join the British and help them defeat the colonists before the start of the Revolutionary War.

The south was completely aware that the north sought an end to slavery. They were fearful that their slaves would be absorbed into the federal militia. When James Madison was encouraged by Jefferson to pen several amendments to the Constitution, his first draft of the second amendment read: “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: But no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person.”

But southern slave owners, wishing to preserve their slave patrols, forced a revision of the amendment. It would read: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

What would be the interpretation now of the second amendment “rights” of the pro-gun, anti women and children groups be if a dysfunctional Supreme Court had not defined gun manufacturers as “persons”?

James Turnage
Columnist-The Guardian Express

8 Responses to "Second Constitutional Amendment, Slavery and the NRA"

  1. Greg   April 22, 2014 at 11:51 am

    Having read quite a few of the quotes from the founding fathers that were statements on what the were wanting to protect really have to wonder how you got the second admendment was about slaves? Try doing a little real reasearch at a library and not reading the pulp fiction the brady bunch puts out.

    Reply
  2. HazBrowncoat   March 15, 2013 at 9:35 am

    James, I would be interested in reading some of your sources. This is the first I’ve heard of these ideas, and I can’t find them anywhere else.

    I have an open mind and wouldn’t be surprised if some of what you’ve said is true. Would you care to back up your claims by citing your research sources (with page #s, etc.).

    Reply
  3. duckyack   January 23, 2013 at 11:29 am

    I was just going to ask–where are the source citation? Flapdoodle (poppycock, hogwash, or baloney) like the article, is never cited appropriately because there is no real support for the claims made. Have you ever wondered what is in it for the individual who attempts to argue a point with nonexistent support? Is it a paying job, a favor to the Left, or is it possible that that individual truly believes what he says?

    Reply
  4. John   January 22, 2013 at 10:21 am

    It is all besides the point. The right to self defense with arms is not granted by the constitution, it is a God given right. The constitution protects that right from government infringement.

    Reply
    • Deano   January 24, 2013 at 4:59 am

      Huh? Where in the Constitution is it written that self defense is a God-given right that the Constitution has been written to defend. The Constitution is a statement of *legal* rights, not God-given rights. The Constitution is intended as a *legal* document, not a religious one. It establishes legal rights based on the will of the People, not the will of God. It begins “We, the People” not “God ordained..”

      Reply
    • Adam Armstrong   January 25, 2013 at 3:31 pm

      [citation needed]

      Reply
  5. Irene   January 20, 2013 at 6:44 pm

    Yet Eric does not say what the MISINFORMATION is exactly? Why is that, I wonder?

    Reply
  6. Eric   January 19, 2013 at 6:42 pm

    Wow! What a spout of misinformation!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.