Guns Saved by The Fourteenth Amendment...

[5fish]

Gun Control laws have racist roots...

There were Gun Control laws even back before and after our Civil War. Their main purpose was to not allow freed slaves to own guns before the war and later after the war for the Freedmen not to own guns. One of the main drivers behind the Fourteenth Amendment was to insure that new Freedmen had the right to keep and bear arms.

Stephen Halbrook’s Freedmen, the Fourteenth Amendment, and the Right to Bear Arms, 1866-1876 is a “study [that] traces the adoption of, and investigates the interrelationship between, the Fourteenth Amendment and the civil rights legislation passed during Reconstruction, particularly focusing on the right to keep and bear arms.

The end of the Civil War was not the end of tyranny against the newly freed slaves. Following the Civil War, former slave owners interested in maintaining their position of power worked with southern state and local governments to implement a myriad of gun control laws against the freed slaves. These laws were publicly argued as reasonable measures for safety, but – as documented by Halbrook - were in reality based in the fear of a rebellion and (in some cases) to impose non-institutionalized slavery upon a defenseless population.

The argument goes before the Civil War and the Fourteenth amendment, The Bill of Rights did not apply to state governments only to the federal government. The states could infringe upon a person right to keep and bear arms if it choose too for the Second amendment did not apply to state governments.

Before the Civil War, states could ignore the Bill of Rights, which was understood to apply only to the federal government. The 14th Amendment, ratified after the Union victory, was intended to ensure the federal government could protect individuals from abusive state governments.

Our Fourteenth amendment is in reality the second amendment of our Constitution even more boldly gives our Bill of Rights its teeth...

Our Fourteenth Amendment:
The Fourteenth Amendment (Section 1):
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Here is a link to racist roots of Gun Control...
http://www.davekopel.com/2a/mags/dark-secret-of-jim-crow.html

 

[5fish]

The Great Judge Marshall: Barron v. Baltimore (1833) This case is why we had to have the 14th Amendment...

The Supreme Court, in a decision written by Chief Justice John Marshall, ruled that Barron had no claim against the state under the Bill of Rights because the Bill of Rights does not apply to the states.

In Barron v. Baltimore (1833), the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution's Bill of Rights restricts only the powers of the federal government and not those of the state governments.

The Supreme Court, in a decision written by Chief Justice John Marshall, ruled that Barron had no claim against the state under the Bill of Rights because the Bill of Rights does not apply to the states. The Court asserted that the Constitution was created "by the people of the United States" to apply only to the government that the Constitution had created -- the federal government -- and "not for the government of the individual states."

Barron v. Baltimore's simple rule, that the Bill of Rights applies only to the federal government and not to the states, was, in the words of Chief Justice Marshall, "not of much difficulty" -- self-evident from the structure and literal language of the Constitution.

Here is a complete summary of the case: https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/landmark_barron.html

 

[rittmeister]

baltimore is a city not a state - what don't i understand here?

 

[5fish]

baltimore is a city not a state - what don't i understand here?

A City is in a state and is under state laws... the courts said was the Bill of Rights only pertained to the federal government not state governments so in theory states could pass laws restricting the first amendment until the 14th amendment was pass...

Barron v. Baltimore's simple rule, that the Bill of Rights applies only to the federal government and not to the states, was, in the words of Chief Justice Marshall, "not of much difficulty" -- self-evident from the structure and literal language of the Constitution. However, in spite of the Court's ruling, state courts still interpreted the Bill of Rights as applying to their own governments, viewing them as reflections of the general laws in Anglo-American culture ("the common law"). The Supreme Court's ruling in Barron prevailed in federal courts, however, until passage of the Fourteenth Amendment after the Civil War. Gradually since then, the Supreme Court has interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment, which bans states from depriving citizens of life, liberty, or property without "due process of law," as also incorporating -- or applying -- most of the amendments in the Bill of Rights against the states, including the "takings clause" of the Fifth Amendment. Modern constitutional law prohibits state governments from taking private property without just compensation.

 

[Kirk's Raider's]

A City is in a state and is under state laws... the courts said was the Bill of Rights only pertained to the federal government not state governments so in theory states could pass laws restricting the first amendment until the 14th amendment was pass...

Barron v. Baltimore's simple rule, that the Bill of Rights applies only to the federal government and not to the states, was, in the words of Chief Justice Marshall, "not of much difficulty" -- self-evident from the structure and literal language of the Constitution. However, in spite of the Court's ruling, state courts still interpreted the Bill of Rights as applying to their own governments, viewing them as reflections of the general laws in Anglo-American culture ("the common law"). The Supreme Court's ruling in Barron prevailed in federal courts, however, until passage of the Fourteenth Amendment after the Civil War. Gradually since then, the Supreme Court has interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment, which bans states from depriving citizens of life, liberty, or property without "due process of law," as also incorporating -- or applying -- most of the amendments in the Bill of Rights against the states, including the "takings clause" of the Fifth Amendment. Modern constitutional law prohibits state governments from taking private property without just compensation.

Actually the New York City in the latter part of the Nineteenth Century passed it's own gun control law " The Sullivan Act" it's still on the books today.
Kirk's Raiders

 

[Kirk's Raider's]

baltimore is a city not a state - what don't i understand here?

In some states cities can pass more restrictive gun control laws then the state. New York State being a good example. It's possible to get a CCW in Ny State but not for NYC.
Kirk's Raiders

 

[5fish]

Here is a link to racist roots of Gun Control...
http://www.davekopel.com/2a/mags/dark-secret-of-jim-crow.html

Here is the link to replace the dysfunctional link: above... http://www.davekopel.com/2A/Mags/dark-secret-of-jim-crow.html