Gayle King: Writers of 2nd Amendment ‘Were Talking about Muskets’

[mystery-ak]

Gayle King: Writers of 2nd Amendment ‘Were Talking about Muskets’

Ian Hanchett 25 May 2022

On Wednesday’s broadcast of “CBS Mornings,” co-host Gayle King said that when the founders wrote the 2nd Amendment, “they were talking about muskets. I do not think if they were here today that they were thinking that people, kids, would have these assault rifles.”

After Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-TX), who represents Uvalde, stated that he is willing to debate policy at another time, but not today, King responded, “I hear you loud and clear, and I certainly don’t want to debate this. And I, too, am thinking about the survivors and the victims. But this is the issue. This keeps happening, and we keep skirting around it and we keep saying, somebody do something, and nobody does anything. And we keep hearing it’s the Second Amendment rights, the right to bear arms. And I keep thinking, when the founding fathers wrote that, they were talking about muskets. I do not think if they were here today that they were thinking that people, kids, would have these assault rifles. So, if not now to debate it, if not — not debate, discuss it, I just want to know…you’re in a position of power. You’re in a position of power to change things. And if we can’t talk about it and we can’t make changes, when can we talk about it? To me, this is a perfect day to talk about it.”

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2022/05/25/gayle-king-writers-of-2nd-amendment-were-talking-about-muskets/

[Kamaji]

The modern-day weapons used in these shootings have been around for decades and decades, and gun ownership has dropped over those same decades, but school shootings only really became a "thing" in the 1980s or so.  Why is that?  The weapons didn't change; so what did?

[mountaineer]

The writers of the First Amendment were talking only about quill pens, too, Gayle - right?

[The_Reader_David]

Muskets, rifles, pistols, cannon, swords, bayonets,... they were talking about all then available weaponry of war.  And, yes, private citizens owned cannon back in those days -- how else would you outfit a privateer if you were granted letters of marque and reprisal?  The cannon on the town square wasn't a disabled artillery piece from some ancient time, but the local militia's artillery piece, probably bought with private subscription, rather than with tax moneys.

[Cyber Liberty]

The writers of the First Amendment were talking only about quill pens, too, Gayle - right?

Or Guttenberg Presses.

[Kamaji]

And the authors of the Fourth Amendment certainly weren't talking about telephones or computers, right?

[Smokin Joe]

You can't tell me Washington (George, that is) would not have been thrilled to have even a couple of Maxim Machine guns and a wagonload of ammo to face the British. Sickened by the carnage, perhaps, but militarily thrilled.

Just because arms are better does not mean they should be excluded.

[Hoodat]

The writers of the First Amendment were talking only about quill pens, too, Gayle - right?

Spot on.

[Hoodat]

Gayle King: Writers of 2nd Amendment ‘Were Talking about Muskets’

Civilians didn't own muskets.  They were cheap military weapons designed for line warfare.  Civilians owned rifles.

[AARguy]

Muskets are a type of rifle that were around long before modern weapons. A musket was a state-of-the art "rifle" in its day. Actually, the word "rifle" refers to grooves in the barrel of a rifle and the way a bullet is set to spinning as it travels down a "rifled" barrel. That whole technology did not exist in the era of the American revolution. It came much later.

[mountaineer]

Ned Ryun wrote this after the Parkland shooting in 2018:

The Second Amendment is a human right — ignorance toward it is troubling
by Ned Ryun, opinion contributor - 02/25/18 1:30 PM ET
 The Hill

In the wake of the Parkland, Fla., shooting some people are pushing their hopes for gun control, even gun confiscation, while others are virtue signaling and offering no real solutions for actually dealing with school safety, such as raising the age to 21 to purchase a rifle when in fact the average age of a mass shooter in America is 35 years old.

If we really care about school safety, there are some viable solutions. Schools can be made “harder” targets, and with four of my own children in public school, that is my priority. We can protect our children while not infringing on basic constitutional rights.

We need to repeal the 1990 Gun-Free School Zone Act and stop advertising to madmen with guns that almost everyone on school grounds is unarmed.

The act, a brainchild of the Left and passed with the support of milquetoast Republicans in 1990, was a dangerous act of virtue signaling that actually made our schools some of the softest targets in the country.  ...

The ignorance on display regarding the Second Amendment and its history is troubling and is due to the fact that no one really teaches about our rights ensconced in our Constitution.

They weren’t pulled from thin air but from the idea of natural law and the concept of human rights endowed by a Creator.  ...

We were created to be free, yet with our deeply imperfect human nature there is a need for government — “If all men were angels, no government would be necessary.” As we’re no angels, we’ve a need for government to insure God-given rights and have none of them taken away. 

Yet let’s never assume that government is essentially good. It is a necessary evil in an imperfect world. It is naive to trust the explosive mix of imperfect human nature combined with the awesome power of the state. And let’s be honest — as the government failed those children in Parkland so many times, why on earth would we engender more trust in government? It should do precisely the opposite.  ...

Entire article at The Hill

[Free Vulcan]

Gee Gayle, bring up ratty, old, debunked retread arguments much?

[DefiantMassRINO]

The Founders were talking about an armed, vigilant citizenry and armed, vigilant state militias to check and balance Federal power.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

"well regulated Militia" is a term open to interpretation.

The choice of "State" versus "nation, country, or government" is also interesting.

On that train of thought ... the States preserve the right to maintain militias ... which necessitates that people keep and bear arms.

Preserving indivudual rights to bear arms also preserved the States ability to maintain militias to check and balance Federal power.

They knew if the Federal Government disarmed the citizenry, it was also disarming the States, which would leave no check or balance against Federal tyrrany.

[Hoodat]

Actually, the word "rifle" refers to grooves in the barrel of a rifle and the way a bullet is set to spinning as it travels down a "rifled" barrel. That whole technology did not exist in the era of the American revolution.

Yes, it did.  Grooved long rifles were developed by American colonists in the early 18th Century.

[Hoodat]

"well regulated Militia" is a term open to interpretation.

"The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" is not open to interpretation.  It is unambiguous and explicit.

[AARguy]

Leonardo DaVinci invented a flying machine but man did not actually fly until long after. Rifled weapons are similar. They weren't used much until after the Revolution.

[Smokin Joe]

Muskets are a type of rifle that were around long before modern weapons. A musket was a state-of-the art "rifle" in its day. Actually, the word "rifle" refers to grooves in the barrel of a rifle and the way a bullet is set to spinning as it travels down a "rifled" barrel. That whole technology did not exist in the era of the American revolution. It came much later.

Sorry, but WRONG. https://www.militaryfactory.com/smallarms/detail.php?smallarms_id=363
Rifled firearms were made in America from the 1730s and were known for being significantly more accurate than the smoothbore muskets.


The standard issue military muskets of the European armies were designed for use as an area weapon, to be employed by massed troops on the open battlefield. They were not the best hunting arms, and rifles were developed here for greater accuracy. That innovation not only made hunting more likely to succeed, but in warfare, employed specifically against officers by sharpshooters (something unheard of in Europe) had the power to turn the tide of battle. The colonists had learned the skulking way of war from the Indians and employed it against the British. Sniping was born here.

[Hoodat]

The battle of Kings Mountain was fought almost exclusively with long rifles -  Kentucky rifles on the American side, and Ferguson rifles (the first breech loaded) on the British side.  Kings Mountain was a decisive American victory won by a bunch of Scottish mountain men living in the Appalachians.  Here is what British Col. George Hanger of Tarleton's cavalry had to say about the American rifles:

I never in my life saw better rifles (or men who shot better) than those made in America; they are chiefly made in Lancaster, and two or three neighboring towns in that vicinity, in Pennsylvania. The barrels weigh about six pounds two or three ounces, and carry a ball no larger than thirty-six to the pound; at least I never saw one of the larger caliber, and I have seen many hundreds and hundreds. I am not going to relate anything respecting the American war; but to mention one instance, as a proof of most excellent skill of an American rifleman. If any man shew me an instance of better shooting, I will stand corrected.  .  .  .

https://web.archive.org/web/20070703033439/http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/popular/12/ps12-2.htm

Long rifles would also prove their worth during the Battle of Chalmette during the War of 1812.  With muskets still in wide use, the American lines repelled an assault of Highlanders launched against a group of Tennessee militia who brought their own rifles to the battle.

[sneakypete]

I would LOVE to hear someone ask that dingbat on live tv to describe a musket.

[sneakypete]

The modern-day weapons used in these shootings have been around for decades and decades, and gun ownership has dropped over those same decades, but school shootings only really became a "thing" in the 1980s or so.  Why is that?  The weapons didn't change; so what did?

Nobody used to make excuses for murderers,or to lay blame on a bad job on the tools used by the mechanic or carpenter.

In all of history,there has never been even ONE case of a firearm or any other weapon leaving home on it's own to go harm or kill anyone.

BTW,I  hate to write this because I KNOW somebody is going to be screaming "racist!" at me,but to the best of MY memory,nobody ever started blaming the guns until most of the senseless murders started being committed by minorities,primarily blacks.

[sneakypete]

Muskets, rifles, pistols, cannon, swords, bayonets,... they were talking about all then available weaponry of war.  And, yes, private citizens owned cannon back in those days 

@The_Reader_David

Hell,you can own them now if you have the money and fill out the permits. Steven Speilberg even owns at least TWO Soviet Missile Launder trucks,complete with the missiles.

I remember this well because when they reached the port on the left coast and US Customs agents went on board the cargo ship to inspect the load,they discovered an actual multiple warhead nuke missile inside one of them.

PLEASE NOTE. I am not suggesting in ANY way that Spielberg intentionally bought a nuke. I have zero doubt that with his money and influence he could easily buy one if he wanted,but he is NOT stupid enough to buy one and have it shipped with the launcher.

Hell,there are some countries that don't have as much money as he has.

When I went to the local sheriff to get a permit to carry a concealed weapon,he told his secretary to go ahead and give (sell me) any permit for anything I wanted,including machine guns.

There MAY be something I want LESS than a freaking machine gun,but I have a hard time figuring out what it would be,unless it was something as useless and a Dim wife. Even then she would be preferable to an inaccurate firearm. I could always rent her out to drunks and make a little money.

MY preference has always been about accuracy above all. Give me something that will shoot one small 3 to 5 shot hole in a bullseye at 100 yards,and I will get as giddy as a schoolgirl.

 

[sneakypete]

Or Guttenberg Presses.

@Cyber Liberty

Probably THE most dangerous mechanical devices ever invented,if you are a government.

[sneakypete]

Civilians didn't own muskets.  They were cheap military weapons designed for line warfare.  Civilians owned rifles.

@Hoodat

EXCELLENT point,and one I keep overlooking myself. The rifled barrel "squirrel rifles" of the colonists is what scared the HELL out of the Red Coats. Just a few riflemen playing "shoot and scoot" slightly ahead of the British advances could and would raise havoc.

[sneakypete]

Gee Gayle, bring up ratty, old, debunked retread arguments much?

@Free Vulcan

Well,speaking of "ratty,old,retreads"........

[Cyber Liberty]

@Cyber Liberty

Probably THE most dangerous mechanical devices ever invented,if you are a government.

That's why the Press is considered the second greatest invention in history, right behind the Wheel.

https://www.factretriever.com/top-ten-inventions