Supreme Court Affirms Racist Origins of Gun Control

Retired Army Colonel & chairman of the National Black Republican Association (NBRA) Frances Rice provides yet another historical lesson that you won’t find being taught to students or printed in most school textbooks….

Supreme Court Affirms Racist Origins of Gun Control

  By Frances Rice

How ironic that, on the day former exalted cyclop of the Ku Klux Klan Democrat Senator Robert Byrd died, the US Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the gun control laws that are embedded firmly in the Democratic Party’s racist roots.

At the heart of the McDonald v. City of Chicago case that is posted on the US Supreme Count’s Internet site is the Court’s decision that the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution – that was pushed through by Republicans after the Civil War, led by Republican Senator Charles Sumner – is the anchor that binds state and local governments to the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self defense. 

Otis McDonald, one of the plaintiffs, is a black man who just wanted to have the right to protect himself from criminals who terrorized him in his home with frequent break-ins.  The only current black US Supreme Court member, Justice Clarence Thomas who was appointed by Republican President George H. W. Bush, courageously delved into the racist origins of gun control laws to demonstrate that such laws have no place in a nation of free people.  The liberal justices on the Court, including Justice Sonia Sotomayor who was appointed last year by Democrat President Barack Obama, voted against the black plaintiff and his fellow Chicago residents.

The McDonald case provides a bird eye’s view of the history of Democratic Party racism.  Referenced in the Court’s opinion is the 1856 Republican Party Platform that includes language about the “right of the people to keep and bear arms.”  A key source used by the Court is the book “Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution 1863-1877” by Dr. Eric Foner whose biography can be found on the Internet. 

Forner’s book reveals how, before the Civil War ended, Southern States enacted “Slave Codes” that prohibited slaves from owning firearms.  After Republican President Abraham Lincoln issued the 1863 Emancipation Proclamation that freed slaves in the rebelling States, and after Republicans pushed through the Thirteenth Amendment freeing all the remaining slaves, Democrats in the South persisted in keeping the newly freed slaves from owning the means to protect themselves – guns. 

The Supreme Court in the McDonald decision wrote about how, after the Civil War, the Southern States started passing laws, called “Black Codes”, to systematically disarm blacks, specifically the over 180,000 blacks who returned to the States of the old Confederacy after serving in the Union Army.  In response to the “Black Codes,” the Republican-controlled Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1866.  But the Democrats would not be deterred.  Very soon after the 1866 law was enacted, Alabama, followed by other Southern States, again passed “Black Codes” that made it illegal for blacks to own firearms. 

Cited by the Court in the McDonald case, as an example of such a discriminatory code, is the Mississippi law that stated:  “no freedman, free negro or mulatto, not in the military service of the United States government, and not licensed so to do by the board of police of his or her county, shall keep or carry fire-arms of any kind, or any ammunition, dirk or bowie knife.”  In one Southern town, according to the Supreme Court, the marshal confiscated the weapons of the returning black Union soldiers and, at every opportunity, promptly shot black people. 

The Court’s McDonald decision records that: “Throughout the South, armed parties, often consisting of ex-Confederate soldiers serving in the state militias, forcibly took firearms from newly freed slaves”.  In his book about Reconstruction, Dr. Foner revealed that in 1866, the Ku Klux Klan was started as a Tennessee social club.  The Klan then became a military force serving the interests of the Democratic Party and spread into other Southern States, launching a “reign of terror” against Republican leaders, black and white.  The Klan would “order the colored men to give up their arms; saying that everybody would be Kukluxed in whose house fire-arms were found”. 

In the McDonald decision, the Court pointed out how the Republican-controlled Congress, while debating the Fourteenth Amendment, referred to the right to keep and bear arms as a fundamental right deserving of protection.  Republican Senator Samuel Pomeroy described three “indispensable” “safeguards of liberty under our form of Government”, one of which was the right to keep and bear arms.  Pomeroy said: “Every man . . . should have the right to bear arms for the defense of himself and family and his homestead.  And if the cabin door of the freedman is broken open and the intruder enters for purposes as vile as were known to slavery, then should a well-loaded musket be in the hand of the occupant to send the polluted wretch to another world, where his wretchedness will forever remain complete”. 

Pomeroy’s words reflect exactly the sentiment expressed by Otis McDonald when he and his fellow Chicagoans filed a law suit against the Democrat-controlled City of Chicago that had confiscated their weapons, leaving them to the mercy of intruders who had broken open his door and entered his home for vile purposes.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in courts, current events, gun rights, news, race. Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Supreme Court Affirms Racist Origins of Gun Control

  1. mzkatie says:

    Great post, Hacksaw! Although I should have probably been able to guess, I didn’t know that there were bans on black people owning guns in the Civil War era. Or maybe I did, but had forgotten. Thanks for the reminder.

    My dad & I were just having this conversation about Chicago. Two weeks ago there was an article about Chicago .. 52 people shot, 7 people dead in just that weekend.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/21/chicago-violence-at-least_n_619259.html

    The following weekend? 29 people shot, 3 dead.

    “When the Supreme Court ruled Monday, they did take these violent weekends into account. From the Supreme Court decision: Chicago Police Department statistics, we are told, reveal that the City’s handgun murder rate has actually increased since the ban was enacted and that Chicago residents now face one of the highest murder rates in the country and rates of other violent crimes that exceed the average in comparable cities.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/28/chicago-gun-ban-axed-afte_n_627773.html

    Truuue storyyy. Obviously gun bans aren’t the answer. I think that the founders of this country knew that. How quickly we forget.

  2. polarbear20 says:

    DING DING DING!!!

    *cheers and applause*

    You’re the 100th post on the new Cleveland Foxers website!!

  3. polarbear20 says:

    What’s with this right wing obsession with Martin Luther King lately? I heard the other day Oh Glennyboy wants to have some kind of thing on the Lincoln Memorial, on the same day Dr. King did. I don’t get it at all: Dr. King was about unity and peace, Beckerhead is about hatred, division and intolerance. Basically Glenn Beck wants to desecrate the legacy of Dr. King, just like your photo above does.

  4. Princess says:

    Dr. King was about unity and peace. you can thank your selective liberal public education for that little tidbit. evidently you know NOTHING about Dr King. he was ALSO all about PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY and ABIDING BY THE LAW. (among other things)
    Beckerhead is about hatred, division and intolerance. there you go again, first slandering someone you don’t even KNOW. and also, until you have watched his show, listened to his radio show & read (now that’s a stretch, i know) his books you have NO FRIGGIN clue what GLENN BECK is REALLY all about.
    all you KNOW is what george soros, huffingtongag, dailykos, oblermann, bill maher & the “messiah” tell you to KNOW.
    think for YOURSELF there PB………………

  5. therealgirlscout says:

    “There you go again slandering someone you don’t even KNOW.”
    Wait a minute. You mean like you always do to Obama?

  6. Princess says:

    yep, you’re right there girly……………but if you can’t “take it” don’t dish it out (that’s for you PB)

    • polarbear20 says:

      Oh don’t worry, I can “take it”. I’ve “taken it” quite a bit, so now I love dishing it out!! 😀

  7. Princess says:

    i know PB, that’s one of the reasons i like you………..you take it & dish it LMAO without any of that wah wah wah…….crap LOL

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s