interesting modern history of the 2nd

[awshoot]

OK -- be forewarned, this story is presented with an anti-gun regressive perspective on the 2nd Amendment. That said, it has some fascinating interviews:

1. Bobby Seale, co-founder of the black panthers and a discussion of their actions which sparked a great deal of racially motivated gun control.
2. John Aquilino and Joseph Tartaro (early members of the NRA-ILA) who in 1977, coordinated a revolt within the NRA at the 129th annual members meeting, in which they ousted the existing leadership in order to make it a pro-2nd amendment organization rather than little more than a gentleman's hunting club.
3. Clark Neily, Robert Levy, and Alan Gura: attorneys who organized and argued Heller. Dick Heller himself. And some excerpts from the Supreme Court arguments.

While the program itself is slanted, the interviews are done fairly and the pro-gun interviewees are given a fair chance to express their views (although Heller says something that certainly sounds racist, though he denies that intent). I felt they argued more persuasively than those suggest that the right to bear arms is a collective rather than individual right and so even with the slanting, it comes out positive on the 2nd.

The Gun Show

Read More

 

[P7M13]

Thanks for sharing - and excellent listen, very much worth the time.
Heller's comment, "see you on the plantation" did seem racist, if you take it in the context of what the host says. Had we been there, we may have seen something different. Given, he was in front of the Supreme Court building the day of the "Anti-Trump" election protests and they did sound inflamatory (not so much compared to the protesters yelling, "Fvck Trump!" The host called him on his racism, and Heller explained that a government too powerful shackles it's people, they might as well be slaves on the plantation.

 

[Will_White]

Just listened to it couple comments I have about it. The confusion about who the the second amendment applies to and why it was ignored for 200 years. It's simple the entire BoR applies to individual people not a collective group, and the reason it was ignored was because it wasn' t being violated. Also they conveniently don't mention Nunn v. Georgia 1846 that says "The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree"

 

[awshoot]

... they conveniently don't mention Nunn v. Georgia 1846 that says "The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree"

The perspective presented was totally slanted. But the interviews were gold, I especially liked John Aquilino at 35:48 responding to a question about what the militia part means:

"Sean -- I love ya dearly, trust me -- but it's only been in the last what -- 30 years -- that, if you'll pardon the expression, the bullsh__ media has turned the militia into a four letter word. The militia is you and me Sean."