3 ms·

Those are the same militias which are protected in the second amendment. Their original purpose was "killing indians". False. The original purpose, predating e

Those are the same militias which are protected in the second amendment. Their original purpose was "killing indians". False. The original purpose, predating even the government and the constitution, was to fight off armed oppression in the form of Hessian mercenaries and British soldiers. It's also interesting to see the hidden connections between America's passion for home ownership, its obsession with guns, and its racism. Gun Control was partly started by racist southern politicians who were horrified by the thought that black citizens would have the right to own firearms. https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/10/gun-control-racist-present-171006135904199.html https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/10/gun-contr...

zapita 9y ago
> False. The original purpose, predating even the government and the constitution, was to fight off armed oppression in the form of Hessian mercenaries and British soldiers. You do realize that colonial militias existed for over a century before the war for independence with the British Empire? What "armed oppression" were they fighting exactly?
- aaron-lebo 9y ago
  You do realize that multiple native groups obtained their land through war and what at times could be called extermination? The Comanche are but one example. There are very few groups in history that ended up where they were peacefully. That's unfortunate, but depicting the European settlers as land-hungry thieving murderers should take into account that's what everyone did. Here's an account of the Fort Parker massacre, which wasn't uncommon on the frontier: Benjamin Parker was killed, and before the fort's gates could be closed, the raiders rushed inside. Silas Parker, who was outside with his brother, was killed before he was able to get back inside the gate. Samuel Frost and his son Robert were killed inside the gate, as they attempted to flee. John Parker's genitals were cut off and he was then scalped. His wife came out of the woods when she saw his torture and was captured.[5] Lucy Parker and her youngest two children were initially captured but were rescued by Luther Plummer as he ran up to the fort from the fields. Her two oldest children, however, along with Luther's wife (Rachel) and son, and Elizabeth Kellogg were successfully kidnapped. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Parker_massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Parker_massacre Did those settlers deserve that? You can argue it, but this is a complex topic. Maybe some of those militias existed for good reasons, like if they didn't, people would get murdered by raiding parties, as they have in every locale in history.
  - lazyasciiart 9y ago
    I think I got whiplash from that topic change you did there.
    - aaron-lebo 9y ago
      You mind explaining?
      - lazyasciiart 9y ago
        You: militias were originally to fight off Hessian and British soldiers of oppression Other poster: no, they were started well before that You: Have you HEARD how savage those Indians were though??!?!
        aaron-lebo 9y ago
        The other poster said that militas were made to "kill Indians". I'm saying that it is very likely were designed to defend against them. Do we deny that many of these societies were militaristic tribes? Do we deny history? Besides the fact that the colonial militias had military use because Britain wasn't the only imperial power in the region. Washington, for example, led a Virginia militia against the French way before the Revolutionary War. Is that really that off topic?
        lazyasciiart 9y ago
        Tell me more about the Hessian soldiers you were talking about.
  - zapita 9y ago
    Is there a point that you're trying to make? As a reminder you're responding to a message about the historical connection between gun ownership, home ownership and racism in the USA. I don't see anything in your message that's relevant to that, except maybe to confirm that colonial militias were created to "kill indians", and that the settlers were squatting on indigenous land.
- stcredzero 9y ago
  You do realize that colonial militias existed for over a century before the war for independence with the British Empire? Remember that you are the one who framed the discussion into the 2nd amendment context in the first place. The reason why the 2nd amendment is there is primarily to properly adjust the balance of power between the governed and the government, as is the rest of the Bill of Rights.
  - zapita 9y ago
    > The reason why the 2nd amendment is there is primarily to properly adjust the balance of power between the governed and the government, as is the rest of the Bill of Rights. That's probably true. Also very abstract, and not in contradiction with anything I said. What's the point you're trying to make exactly?
watwut 9y ago
> Gun Control was partly started by racist southern politicians who were horrified by the thought that black citizens would have the right to own firearms. Then again guns were needed to catch escaped slaves and to keep control over large black population ... and south pre-civil war had manly man dueling culture ... it was complicated and very situational when guns were good and when they were bad.

zapita 9y ago

> False. The original purpose, predating even the government and the constitution, was to fight off armed oppression in the form of Hessian mercenaries and British soldiers. You do realize that colonial militias existed for over a century before the war for independence with the British Empire? What "armed oppression" were they fighting exactly?

aaron-lebo 9y ago
You do realize that multiple native groups obtained their land through war and what at times could be called extermination? The Comanche are but one example. There are very few groups in history that ended up where they were peacefully. That's unfortunate, but depicting the European settlers as land-hungry thieving murderers should take into account that's what everyone did. Here's an account of the Fort Parker massacre, which wasn't uncommon on the frontier: Benjamin Parker was killed, and before the fort's gates could be closed, the raiders rushed inside. Silas Parker, who was outside with his brother, was killed before he was able to get back inside the gate. Samuel Frost and his son Robert were killed inside the gate, as they attempted to flee. John Parker's genitals were cut off and he was then scalped. His wife came out of the woods when she saw his torture and was captured.[5] Lucy Parker and her youngest two children were initially captured but were rescued by Luther Plummer as he ran up to the fort from the fields. Her two oldest children, however, along with Luther's wife (Rachel) and son, and Elizabeth Kellogg were successfully kidnapped. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Parker_massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Parker_massacre Did those settlers deserve that? You can argue it, but this is a complex topic. Maybe some of those militias existed for good reasons, like if they didn't, people would get murdered by raiding parties, as they have in every locale in history.
- lazyasciiart 9y ago
  I think I got whiplash from that topic change you did there.
  - aaron-lebo 9y ago
    You mind explaining?
    - lazyasciiart 9y ago
      You: militias were originally to fight off Hessian and British soldiers of oppression Other poster: no, they were started well before that You: Have you HEARD how savage those Indians were though??!?!
      - aaron-lebo 9y ago
        The other poster said that militas were made to "kill Indians". I'm saying that it is very likely were designed to defend against them. Do we deny that many of these societies were militaristic tribes? Do we deny history? Besides the fact that the colonial militias had military use because Britain wasn't the only imperial power in the region. Washington, for example, led a Virginia militia against the French way before the Revolutionary War. Is that really that off topic?
        lazyasciiart 9y ago
        Tell me more about the Hessian soldiers you were talking about.
- zapita 9y ago
  Is there a point that you're trying to make? As a reminder you're responding to a message about the historical connection between gun ownership, home ownership and racism in the USA. I don't see anything in your message that's relevant to that, except maybe to confirm that colonial militias were created to "kill indians", and that the settlers were squatting on indigenous land.
stcredzero 9y ago
You do realize that colonial militias existed for over a century before the war for independence with the British Empire? Remember that you are the one who framed the discussion into the 2nd amendment context in the first place. The reason why the 2nd amendment is there is primarily to properly adjust the balance of power between the governed and the government, as is the rest of the Bill of Rights.
- zapita 9y ago
  > The reason why the 2nd amendment is there is primarily to properly adjust the balance of power between the governed and the government, as is the rest of the Bill of Rights. That's probably true. Also very abstract, and not in contradiction with anything I said. What's the point you're trying to make exactly?

watwut 9y ago

> Gun Control was partly started by racist southern politicians who were horrified by the thought that black citizens would have the right to own firearms. Then again guns were needed to catch escaped slaves and to keep control over large black population ... and south pre-civil war had manly man dueling culture ... it was complicated and very situational when guns were good and when they were bad.