Straight Shot: Guns in America [Rebroadcast]
Infantryman training in Ft Knox, Kentucky, 1942. US Office of War Information.
In the aftermath of the shootings in Newtown, Connecticut, Americans of all political stripes are wrestling with one big question: who should, and shouldn’t, have access to guns? So in this hour of BackStory, that’s the question we’ll be pushing back through the centuries.
On this episode, the History Guys look at the changing ways Americans have regulated gun ownership, and at what those weapons have meant to different segments of society. They consider the importance of the militia to the drafting of the Second Amendment, and explore the central role of the state in arming citizens. They also pay a visit to a 21st century version of the armories of the past: a gun show.
Guests Include:
- Kevin Sweeney, Amherst College, on the role of the state in arming early Americans.
- Adam Winkler, University of California, Los Angeles, on gun control in the Wild West and the Black Panthers’ embrace of the Second Amendment.
- Laura Browder, University of Richmond, on why the image of the gun-toting frontier woman continues to resonate.
Show Segments:
Listen to individual segments from the episode.
Further Exploration:
Resources galore! Peruse a list of outside sources compiled by the BackStory team to provide a more complete picture of the history of gun ownership in America, and consult a bibliography of works used in the making of this episode.
Even Further:
Read the listener discussion that helped shape this show.
Hey so while I am not agreeing in anyway with what occurred in the historical past that I am about to reference. However during the broadcast there was a caller who mentioned was there a time in history where citizen guns may have been used to ward off the big bad government. Well as far as I know this is the closest thing to it, the only time in American History where a legally elected government was overthrown, Wilmington NC in 1898.
http://www.1898wilmington.com/hayden.shtml
Not exactly what the caller was referencing, but its the closest I can come up with.
QuoteGentlemen
This was a pretty disappointing episode. When a caller asked for even one example of a time that a firearm was used to control abuses of the state, you found it impossible in three centuries to locate even one. This despite the fact that you had spoken already to Adam Winkler concerning the Bobby Seal Panther Patrols and the demonstration in the California legislature. What was the armed Panther doing on the street if not trying to eliminate abuses by the LA police that were occurring during that time?
Surely the Deacons for Defense and their armed association with the Southern Christian Leadership Conference cannot have escaped your notice. Martin Luther King and the “non-violent” protests against an imoral governmental structure was more often than not accompnaied by an armed contingent.
During and after reconstruction when the KKK riders turned up at black farms, it was frequently the case that local law enforcement was under some of the hoods. At the very least it could be assumed that the deputies would not show up if/when they were called. I believe John Lott documents this pretty effectively.
The southern democrat gun control initiatives after the civil war specifically aimed themselves at limiting firearms only for black freedmen. Could that have been an attempt by the government to limit the ability of a particular catagory of individual to protect himself from dangers the government either endorsed or itself comitted?
Finally, the statement that “we are the government” or “the government is us” or some such is simply irrelevant as well as incorrect. The purpose of the amendment is the occasion on which that is not the case, as it was for blacks for much of our history. This goes into the same trash bin with the frequent use of “trope” and the identification of “xenophobia” as the cause of women having an interest in firearms. The rhetorical device doesn’t disarm the fact that women are more likely to have to protect themselves from opponents who are larger and stronger. How is that to be done? Callers on this issue as well as the hosts seem to feel an obligation to preceed the arguments above with “of course I dont believe it” or “this is a frequent argument” followed by a lot of “absolutely.”
I feel badly that my first/only comment on your program is a negative one. I have come to expect good things from your program. Certainly if an example exists within your own broadcast you shouldn’t fail to bring it up when asked if even one event exists in three hundred years.
I look forward to your next offering.
QuoteTo further respond to the caller’s question about examples of firearms being used to control government, I would urge the panelists and listeners to google, “Battle of Athens”.
Examples do exist of exactly the type of abuse that the 2nd Amendment was designed to prevent. It is disappointing that the panelists did not take the time to research their topic more thoroughly.
Quote“Battle of Athens”
“The Battle of Athens, TN”. The Cantrell family had controlled the economy and politics of McMinn County, Tennessee since the 1930s. Paul Cantrell had been Sheriff from 1936 -1940 and in 1942 was elected to the State Senate. His chief deputy, Paul Mansfield, was subsequently elected to two terms as Sheriff. In 1946 returning WWII veterans put up a popular candidate for Sheriff. On August 1 Sheriff Mansfield and 200 “deputies” stormed the post office polling place to take control of the ballot boxes wounding an objecting observer in the process. The veterans bearing military style weapons, laid siege to the Sheriff’s office demanding return of the ballot boxes for public counting of the votes as prescribed in Tennessee law. After exchange of gun fire and blowing open the locked doors, the veterans secured the ballot boxes thereby protecting the integrity of the election.
QuoteI heard this show as I was driving through West Virginia last night, and in response to the question of whether guns have been used by citizens against governmental authority, I had a couple items pop into my head. Being from Pittsburgh, my first thoughts were the Whiskey Rebellion, and- although not precisely against a government authority- the battle involving the Pinkertons during the Homestead Strike. My particular location at that point also likely primed me to think of the Battle of Blair Mountain and other armed conflicts during the early decades of the labor movement in the coal industry. There appear to be numerous examples of this, so it is a bit disappointing that the hosts could think of none off the the top of their heads, but on the whole, I found the show very informative and enjoyable.
Unfortunately, I only began listening somewhere in the middle, so I can’t tell whether this point was covered, but I generally find that it bears repeating in any case. In the earliest decades of this country’s history, the lack of any substantial standing army not only meant that an armed populace was necessary for national defence, but also that the likelihood of a tyrannical government was very small. More important for justifying the second amendment than the ability to facilitate a rebellion, therefore, was the ability to suppress one. In many parts of the southern states up to the Civil War, slaves substantially outnumbered citizens, and if my past reading is correct, laws were passed in some of these states actually requiring gun ownership in reaction to the possibility- terrifying to citizens at the time- of a mass slave rebellion.
QuoteSeems sad to me that the only comments are regarding the 2nd amendment comments as there was so much more. It seems that and arms race between citizens, against citizens is not the intended result – which is what we get when we match power with power and testosterone. As was mentioned – even in wild “cowboy” country – you didn’t carry your weapons around in urban environments.
I understand that living in the past is important to many people to justify their current actions, but you cannot mix and match (which you almost always have to do), and when it comes to guns it is beyond the apples and oranges comparison – during the revolutionary war a single gun was almost useless – you needed lines of armed – and trained – soldiers to make guns effective, and a single user would possible kill more people with a bayonette than firing the weapon at a max of 4 a minute (much less generally) would make you a target and severely limit your effectiveness – and danger – to others. Today’s weapons as we all know make one man beyond the imagination of any pre wwI veteran – a virtual gattling gun in your had specifically designed to maim and not kill and in my mind has very little need for civilian deployment – sure for “malitias”, but not needed for personal, or “covert” personal use.
QuoteWhen asked about a single time when firearms were used to stave off government you had none? What about the revolutionary war? Which is exactly why there is a second amendment. Having just used firearms to overthrow an unjust government, the need for a right to keep and bear arms was foremost in their minds.
I seem to remember that the native americans used firearms a few times in attempting to preserve their lands and rights against our expansionist goverment which felt it was proper to sign a treaty with the Indians and then unilaterally ignore it when it was interfering with national expansion and settlers and miners desire to aquire those lands under treaty.
Just as important today are the many examples of governments of the world taking firearms from the citizens so that the standing army can easily control them. First you register the arms and tell the citizens that this in no way infringes on their rights. Then you little by little prohibit arms based on their not being proper for citizens. Then you outright seize them because you know who has them. Hitler did just this.
Many military firearms were first firearms in civilian use. The Colt 1911 pistol, carried by our troups for decades, was a civilian pistol. Shotguns used in WWII, Korea and Vietnam were civilian bird guns. The rifles used against the British during the revolutionary war were hunting guns owned by individuals. These did not come into mass production during the revolutionary war due to the time it took to hand make each rifle. This did not stop the governments of all countries from recognizing this hunting firearms as particularly well suited for use by armies.
From the Revolutionary war through the Civil war, citizens could and did own and manufacture any and all weapons that were used by the government. In many cases, canons and other weapons of war were provided to the armies by wealthy civilians.
Quote