GUN HISTORY
Gunowners and gun-control advocates talk past each other all the time. Why the divide? History.
When the first settlers came to the American shores, they brought their European habits. What was the state of weapon ownership in Europe in the 1500s and later? Feudal Lords held sway over the population while in fealty to the King. When war erupted, the Lords raised the armies and also provided their weapons. So weapons, especially early firearms, were kept in an armory at the Lord's estate until needed. After the war, returning soldiers put the weapons back in the armory before returning to their plots of land.
The colonists to the New World brought that mindset here; in the wilderness, they kept their arms close by for defense from animals and Indians. In the towns and cities, they kept arms in their armories, doling them out as needed for training and emergencies.
Consider Lexington and Concord, the opening battles of the Revolutionary War. The British were marching to seize the armory, to disarm the rebels. Shays' Rebellion was an assault on an armory by citizens with few firearms among them. In the Old West, when drovers came into Dodge City, Marshal Dillon (for a TV example) required them to leave the guns in his office until they moved on, lest they shoot up the town. Disarm the citizenry and you'll have more peace and tranquillity.
Think of the many innocents slain in South-side Chicago when gunfire erupts between gangs. To a modern city dweller, a firearm is something that can pierce the walls between apartments or enter their home from outside. A shopkeeper firing at a robber can strike customers outside his store or in an adjacent store. There is no protection in gun use, just the opposite; unlike all other common weapons, it can penetrate the already narrow divide that normally keeps you safe from those who would cause harm.
The rural citizen sees just the opposite side of firearm ownership. Police are many minutes away, so you need self-defense. A random shot from inside or usually even outside your home probably won't strike your neighbors; the closest neighbors are likely many times the distance between even city suburbanites in their subdivisions.
The US was majority rural for most of its history, so the majority of citizens had direct experience with firearms, and many city-dwellers hunted or had experience in the wilderness and territories. But in 1920, that changed. 51% of the population was now urban. Over the next decades, as the urban numbers grew, less and less of the urbanites would be drawn to the rural lifestyles. Fewer and fewer would have direct firearm experience. The differences in calibers and bullet types which can mitigate danger from penetration of walls mean nothing to a people ignorant of firearm basics; such minutia falls on deaf ears.
In 2010, 80.7% of the population was urban.
This is why the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution is so threatened. Urban dwellers and most Police Chiefs see firearms as dangerous to all in range. Rural citizens and many Sheriffs see the utility and necessity of ownership for protection. But in a democracy, if left to simple majority vote, private gun ownership would easily be banned.
Only the Supreme Court, with a majority holding to Original Intent or Strict Constructionist views, keeps the urban majority from disarming the rural minority. With a 4 member Progressive majority now on the Court, should Scalia's seat go to a Progressive, the 2nd Amendment will be slowly, but surely, constricted and finally abolished, not with malicious intent but out of willful ignorance.
Gunowners and gun-control advocates talk past each other all the time. Why the divide? History.
When the first settlers came to the American shores, they brought their European habits. What was the state of weapon ownership in Europe in the 1500s and later? Feudal Lords held sway over the population while in fealty to the King. When war erupted, the Lords raised the armies and also provided their weapons. So weapons, especially early firearms, were kept in an armory at the Lord's estate until needed. After the war, returning soldiers put the weapons back in the armory before returning to their plots of land.
The colonists to the New World brought that mindset here; in the wilderness, they kept their arms close by for defense from animals and Indians. In the towns and cities, they kept arms in their armories, doling them out as needed for training and emergencies.
Consider Lexington and Concord, the opening battles of the Revolutionary War. The British were marching to seize the armory, to disarm the rebels. Shays' Rebellion was an assault on an armory by citizens with few firearms among them. In the Old West, when drovers came into Dodge City, Marshal Dillon (for a TV example) required them to leave the guns in his office until they moved on, lest they shoot up the town. Disarm the citizenry and you'll have more peace and tranquillity.
Think of the many innocents slain in South-side Chicago when gunfire erupts between gangs. To a modern city dweller, a firearm is something that can pierce the walls between apartments or enter their home from outside. A shopkeeper firing at a robber can strike customers outside his store or in an adjacent store. There is no protection in gun use, just the opposite; unlike all other common weapons, it can penetrate the already narrow divide that normally keeps you safe from those who would cause harm.
The rural citizen sees just the opposite side of firearm ownership. Police are many minutes away, so you need self-defense. A random shot from inside or usually even outside your home probably won't strike your neighbors; the closest neighbors are likely many times the distance between even city suburbanites in their subdivisions.
The US was majority rural for most of its history, so the majority of citizens had direct experience with firearms, and many city-dwellers hunted or had experience in the wilderness and territories. But in 1920, that changed. 51% of the population was now urban. Over the next decades, as the urban numbers grew, less and less of the urbanites would be drawn to the rural lifestyles. Fewer and fewer would have direct firearm experience. The differences in calibers and bullet types which can mitigate danger from penetration of walls mean nothing to a people ignorant of firearm basics; such minutia falls on deaf ears.
In 2010, 80.7% of the population was urban.
This is why the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution is so threatened. Urban dwellers and most Police Chiefs see firearms as dangerous to all in range. Rural citizens and many Sheriffs see the utility and necessity of ownership for protection. But in a democracy, if left to simple majority vote, private gun ownership would easily be banned.
Only the Supreme Court, with a majority holding to Original Intent or Strict Constructionist views, keeps the urban majority from disarming the rural minority. With a 4 member Progressive majority now on the Court, should Scalia's seat go to a Progressive, the 2nd Amendment will be slowly, but surely, constricted and finally abolished, not with malicious intent but out of willful ignorance.