The Firing Line Forums - View Single Post - origin of the "right to keep and bear arms"

agricola · August 20, 2002, 11:48 PM

hey,

whilst looking at another article here it seemed to me that it would be a nice old jaunt through history if we were to look back on the (your terms) RKBA and how its developed into the second amendment that you all know and love.

to start the ball rolling, imho the right is a modern (1600's) corruption of old english (and european) ordinances that the subjects of the Crown must bear arms to serve in the King's forces according to their circumstances. this is based upon the lists of legislation culminating in the statute of winchester in 1285, which utilized the old obligation of freemen to bear arms (John France Warfare and History), the ancient trinoda necessitas (obligation to serve in the levy or fyrd). this ebbed and flowed until the English Civil War in which hardline protestantism and puritanism clashed with (real or imagined) catholic revolution with the crown and the republicans on either side of a divide.
With the history of the Civil Wars (explained here ) Parliament decided that the only guarantee that they as "protestants" had from Crown (or, more accurately, catholic) oppression was to arm themselves. They also, notably, did restrict the wording so that Parliament and not the Crown could establish "rights" as it saw fit and proper for society. To quote Malcolm:

The language of the English right to have arms, as already noted, was open to interpretation, but its intent became crystal clear in the years following its enactment. Although the Game Act of 1671 had not been specifically mentioned during Convention debates all new game acts dropped guns from the list prohibited devices. And despite the reference to weapons suitable to one's condition and as allowed by law in practice the right of all Protestants to have weapons was confirmed. As London's chief legal adviser explained to the mayor and council in 1780' "The right of his majesty's Protestant subjects, to have arms for their own defence, and to use them for lawful purposes, is most clear and undeniable.[23]

(emphasis mine)

Thus in the English experience the "right" springs from the short period of revolution and counter-revolution. This was then transmitted to you as the lessons of the (then) most recent revolution against tyranny available, and incorporated accordingly.

August 20, 2002, 11:48 PM	#1
agricola Senior Member Join Date: April 1, 2002 Location: cymru Posts: 940	origin of the "right to keep and bear arms" hey, whilst looking at another article here it seemed to me that it would be a nice old jaunt through history if we were to look back on the (your terms) RKBA and how its developed into the second amendment that you all know and love. to start the ball rolling, imho the right is a modern (1600's) corruption of old english (and european) ordinances that the subjects of the Crown must bear arms to serve in the King's forces according to their circumstances. this is based upon the lists of legislation culminating in the statute of winchester in 1285, which utilized the old obligation of freemen to bear arms (John France Warfare and History), the ancient trinoda necessitas (obligation to serve in the levy or fyrd). this ebbed and flowed until the English Civil War in which hardline protestantism and puritanism clashed with (real or imagined) catholic revolution with the crown and the republicans on either side of a divide. With the history of the Civil Wars (explained here ) Parliament decided that the only guarantee that they as "protestants" had from Crown (or, more accurately, catholic) oppression was to arm themselves. They also, notably, did restrict the wording so that Parliament and not the Crown could establish "rights" as it saw fit and proper for society. To quote Malcolm: The language of the English right to have arms, as already noted, was open to interpretation, but its intent became crystal clear in the years following its enactment. Although the Game Act of 1671 had not been specifically mentioned during Convention debates all new game acts dropped guns from the list prohibited devices. And despite the reference to weapons suitable to one's condition and as allowed by law in practice the right of all Protestants to have weapons was confirmed. As London's chief legal adviser explained to the mayor and council in 1780' "The right of his majesty's Protestant subjects, to have arms for their own defence, and to use them for lawful purposes, is most clear and undeniable.[23] (emphasis mine) Thus in the English experience the "right" springs from the short period of revolution and counter-revolution. This was then transmitted to you as the lessons of the (then) most recent revolution against tyranny available, and incorporated accordingly. __________________ pete wylie: " I've never had a fight in me life. But after 40 years of living as a half-decent human being I gained a criminal record for doing my Joe Pesci thing. But it was Joe Pesci played by Michael Crawford."