General Discussion

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)

13. Bogus' theory has been savaged by respected historians for the partisan crap it is.

Sun Aug 11, 2013, 12:05 AM

Aug 2013

The quickest refutation? Why did the northern states codify their own version of the second amendment in their respective constitutions, if the federal version was a 'gimme' to the south?

e.g.-

The present-day Pennsylvania Constitution, using language adopted in 1790, declares: "The right of the citizens to bear arms in defence of themselves and the State shall not be questioned."

Vermont: Adopted in 1777, the Vermont Constitution closely tracks the Pennsylvania Constitution. It states "That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State.."

eta: Those two above? ^^ Northern states that wrote that before the federal version passed in 1792.

Connecticut: Every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state (1818)

Massachusetts: The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence. (1780)

Maine: Every citizen has a right to keep and bear arms for the common defence; and this right shall never be questioned. (1820)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

106 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Thom Hartman: The 2nd Amendment was ratified to help preserve slavery. [View all] pnwmom Aug 2013 OP

I'd be uncomfortable saying there's one single reason for any part of the Constitution and BoR Recursion Aug 2013 #1

I'm not buying it. NYC_SKP Aug 2013 #2

Here is the original, thoroughly researched article from the UC Davis law review article. pnwmom Aug 2013 #3

I never meant to imply that the Bogus article didn't exist. NYC_SKP Aug 2013 #4

Yeah, Thom regularly makes silly statements about the constitution / law.. X_Digger Aug 2013 #5

Well, I was taught in school that judicial review was codified by Marbury vs. Madison... antigone382 Aug 2013 #55

First use in a SCOTUS case, yes. Thom believes it was created from whole cloth then. X_Digger Aug 2013 #58

Before you decide to be embarrassed for Mr. Hartmann, maybe you should read pnwmom Aug 2013 #10

Okay, granted. Another reason for the 2nd was so as not to abridge the Right to shoot Indians. leveymg Aug 2013 #7

Right. It's not an either-or issue. nt pnwmom Aug 2013 #11

Hey, our side gave away lots of little benefits from the Affordable Care Act in order to win votes calimary Aug 2013 #59

Fascinating. Just Saying Aug 2013 #6

Be on the lookout for confirmation bias. Igel Aug 2013 #8

Why does it even matter why the amendment was ratified other than historical curiosity? branford Aug 2013 #9

Why does it matter? It matters if you think it was enacted to fight tyranny -- pnwmom Aug 2013 #12

Haven't we been fighting that somewhat mythical external enemy to preserve the power of the planter leveymg Aug 2013 #15

The slave insurrection theory of the Second Amendment is an extreme fringe view. branford Aug 2013 #16

I don't totally oppose the right to keep and bear arms. pnwmom Aug 2013 #22

It's not an either / or proposition. branford Aug 2013 #26

No one questions that guns and gun ownership can't be regulated. hack89 Aug 2013 #29

I don't think I have to tell you... NYC_SKP Aug 2013 #14

I don't want to do away with the 2nd Amendment. pnwmom Aug 2013 #24

Again, who is saying that gun Jenoch Aug 2013 #77

That's basically the NRA's position. n/t pnwmom Aug 2013 #78

You HAVE to provide a link. Jenoch Aug 2013 #79

The ad hominem attacks are a 'tell': you are "embarassed" and X Digger calls Hartman "silly" live love laugh Aug 2013 #96

Poverty and hopelessness are the root of Detroit's problems. NYC_SKP Aug 2013 #98

LOL. Member since: Wed Jul 24, 2013. Favorite group: Gun Control & RKBA. DanTex Aug 2013 #30

Except virtually every one of my posts is in General Discussion on a variety of topics. branford Aug 2013 #34

As you can see, the subject of guns tends to attract self-appointed political officers. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2013 #49

If you've actually been reading for a while, then you are surely aware of the huge number of gun DanTex Aug 2013 #62

You are free to assume the worst motives from those with whom you disagree on this issue, branford Aug 2013 #67

Inevitable is a pretty strong word. DanTex Aug 2013 #69

Conservatives like me? Wow. branford Aug 2013 #72

Most of the Democratic party? LOL. DanTex Aug 2013 #75

I'm not "caving" to the GOP on guns, I agree with them on this issue as do many other Democrats. branford Aug 2013 #80

Depends what you mean by "many". DanTex Aug 2013 #81

Guns are somewhat unique politically. branford Aug 2013 #83

I don't see much evidence for that. DanTex Aug 2013 #86

My views on guns are largely irrelevant here in Manhattan. branford Aug 2013 #90

Bogus' theory has been savaged by respected historians for the partisan crap it is. X_Digger Aug 2013 #13

That's a pretty devastating debunking of the OP (nt) Nye Bevan Aug 2013 #17

Agreed. The assertion related in the OP is revisionist horseshit. (nt) Lizzie Poppet Aug 2013 #18

By "respected Historians" ThoughtCriminal Aug 2013 #19

Do you have a link to the work of these "respected historians"? pnwmom Aug 2013 #21

Pick up any Sanford Levinson, William Van Alstyne, or Laurence Tribe treatise on the subject. X_Digger Aug 2013 #33

Flawed report ThoughtCriminal Aug 2013 #39

Read it for yourself and decide- X_Digger Aug 2013 #42

Both ThoughtCriminal Aug 2013 #44

Dear, my words are generally my own. I use DU's 'excerpt' to denote a cut and paste. X_Digger Aug 2013 #46

Generally your own ThoughtCriminal Aug 2013 #48

Lol, two sentences about two states (well three _sentences_). X_Digger Aug 2013 #51

"Research methods" ThoughtCriminal Aug 2013 #52

I'm not citing Kopel's opinion, I'm citing Kopel citing *state constitutions* X_Digger Aug 2013 #56

Does Kopel disagree with Bogus on the motivation of slavery? ThoughtCriminal Aug 2013 #64

That was the book, yep. X_Digger Aug 2013 #65

I still don't see why Vermont's state Constitution has to do with Virginia in 1788 ThoughtCriminal Aug 2013 #68

I've always only quoted Kopel for the state constitutions- to say otherwise is disingenuous. X_Digger Aug 2013 #76

Quite different motivations and wording ThoughtCriminal Aug 2013 #85

Semantic self-perturbation. X_Digger Aug 2013 #92

An example of the tyranny that is being sold us under the label of liberty. freshwest Aug 2013 #20

Wow. rrneck Aug 2013 #23

Unless they get stopped and frisked in NYC that is Motown_Johnny Aug 2013 #28

Thanks for the exceptional O.P. n/t Judi Lynn Aug 2013 #25

I've been saying that for years... Motown_Johnny Aug 2013 #27

"There really can't be any doubt." Really? branford Aug 2013 #38

An overstatement.. OK.. but still valid Motown_Johnny Aug 2013 #40

I'm certainly not going to defend slaveholders . . . branford Aug 2013 #47

As a lawyer then, please consider this evidence Motown_Johnny Aug 2013 #57

I am not asking you to agree with me, and do not doubt the sincerity of your beliefs. branford Aug 2013 #63

Lots of stuff in there Motown_Johnny Aug 2013 #94

Cue the gun trolls posting links to articles by Wayne LaPierre "debunking" this... DanTex Aug 2013 #31

When a DUer pointed out above that MA inserted the right to bear arms into its constitution in 1780, Nye Bevan Aug 2013 #32

Well, maybe not. factsarenotfair Aug 2013 #41

Interesting.... thanks. I often learn stuff at DU (nt) Nye Bevan Aug 2013 #43

Who needs Wayne LaPierre when we have the research and writings of Lawrence Tribe? branford Aug 2013 #36

This is an inherently intellectually dishonest argument Taitertots Aug 2013 #35

Thank you for pointing that out. 1-Old-Man Aug 2013 #37

Yeah, but it makes a nice bookend..... Paladin Aug 2013 #45

Gun control sometimes was and is racist- just not always. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2013 #50

That isn't/wasn't how the Gun Enthusiasts present/presented it. Paladin Aug 2013 #97

I am/was sure you do/did friendly_iconoclast Aug 2013 #101

The true meaning of the 2nd amendment will be revealed in 24 business hours. tritsofme Aug 2013 #53

The war on The Second Amendment (among others) continues. Skip Intro Aug 2013 #54

Shhh. Not so loud. NutmegYankee Aug 2013 #61

Ludicrous and irrelevant. nt Demo_Chris Aug 2013 #60

Pure nonsense. former9thward Aug 2013 #66

Madison is a dead old slave owner. What would he know? /sarc branford Aug 2013 #70

Doesn't really matter on the original intent of the amendment. roamer65 Aug 2013 #71

Be very careful what you wish for . . . branford Aug 2013 #74

Partly right...insurrections, invasions, enforcing the laws. jmg257 Aug 2013 #73

Your effort to repeal 2A is futile. GreenStormCloud Aug 2013 #82

In fairness, there's also the more leisurely route of a full Constitutional Convention . . . branford Aug 2013 #84

Sounds fitting. My experience leads me to believe most gun lovers are also bigots, especially Hoyt Aug 2013 #87

This message was self-deleted by its author tumtum Aug 2013 #89

I'd always Understood it as the Original Dads Wolf Frankula Aug 2013 #88

The Founders greatly feared the corrupting power of a strong, unrestrained central government. branford Aug 2013 #91

And even then, only piecemeal.. X_Digger Aug 2013 #93

It Has Been Argued the SCOTUS was in error Wolf Frankula Aug 2013 #104

exactly that's why it's so closely identified w the South and racist groups today. librechik Aug 2013 #95

Or . . . branford Aug 2013 #99

or librechik Aug 2013 #100

Which is precisely my point. branford Aug 2013 #102

And they hate mstinamotorcity2 Aug 2013 #103

I don't like the fact that the second amendment appears via Thom Hartman to preserve slave militia midnight Aug 2013 #105

That is discouraging, but I guess not too surprising. n/t pnwmom Aug 2013 #106