REALLY? MSNOW Guest Suggests the Second Amendment Was About ‘Slave Patrols’ (VIDEO)

tirwin1 · Saturday at 7:41 AM

Silly me. I thought the second amendment was created to create a genocide of native Americans. Is there anything the second amendment can't do?

/sarcasm

Saltwater60 · Saturday at 11:08 AM

It’s people that are killing people. People have been killing people before guns were ever invented. Get rid of people and they won’t be killing others. Just saying.
Then you look at what was going on during the writing of the constitution and there were many skirmishes over states rights. So the constitution makes sense to me.

Zerex · Saturday at 11:42 AM

The Federalist papers do not mention slave patrols in any way.

The Federalist paper, about the proposed 2nd amendment, was mostly about Militias, not about controlling slaves, women, Indians, Brits, Spaniards, criminals or the insane...........none of whom constituted "the people".

A Militia, necessary for the security of a free state......"the people", did not include any of the above referenced, disqualified humans.

The 2nd does NOT start with or say, ......... "the universal natural right of men to be armed"............... not at all........................it begins with A Militia, not men or mankind.

WHY? By intentional design, by the most educated and powerful of the nations founders.

After a decade of the violent Articles of Confederation, the citizenry voted to limit the power of men and force them into a codified Federal govenment.....powers not reserved to the Feds are granted to the states, and anything not reserved to the Feds or States are reserved to "the people."

NO other amendment in the BOR is controversial at al.....just the intentionally written 2nd, that preserved both the Fed and State govenments right to at times control arms, .by defining "the People" who might own guns.

Zerex · Saturday at 12:01 PM

After the Dred Scott Decision in 1854, slaves were considered property, and escaped slave patrols even in NYS were not uncommon, recovering escaped property.

The Jerry Rescue statue in Syracuse was about breaking "jerry"
a slave out of the down tonw lockup, to prevent him from being sent south.

Saltwater60 · Saturday at 1:40 PM

Zerex said:
The Federalist papers do not mention slave patrols in any way.

The Federalist paper, about the proposed 2nd amendment, was mostly about Militias, not about controlling slaves, women, Indians, Brits, Spaniards, criminals or the insane...........none of whom constituted "the people".

A Militia, necessary for the security of a free state......"the people", did not include any of the above referenced, disqualified humans.

The 2nd does NOT start with or say, ......... "the universal natural right of men to be armed"............... not at all........................it begins with A Militia, not men or mankind.

WHY? By intentional design, by the most educated and powerful of the nations founders.

After a decade of the violent Articles of Confederation, the citizenry voted to limit the power of men and force them into a codified Federal govenment.....powers not reserved to the Feds are granted to the states, and anything not reserved to the Feds or States are reserved to "the people."

NO other amendment in the BOR is controversial at al.....just the intentionally written 2nd, that preserved both the Fed and State govenments right to at times control arms, .by defining "the People" who might own guns.

So who was the militia then? It was your average everyday town folk like you and I.

Zerex · Sunday at 11:09 AM

Excepting the aforenamed "non people".

A Militia was not a draft; the Whiskey Rebellion in Pittsburgh-- the "militia" fought Pres Washington over the Fed Gov't whiskey tax.

Wisdom in 1790 is still fought today, but 250 years of history and Judicial decisions and laws indicate that my description above is correct, and the 2nd does NOT start............."the right of the People to be armed is uncontrovertible..............." No it does not.

No where near that, despite what 2026 reasoning tries to imply today.

We are the freest people on the planet and we can own guns.

tirwin1 · Sunday at 11:47 AM

Zerex said:
The Federalist papers do not mention slave patrols in any way.

The Federalist paper, about the proposed 2nd amendment, was mostly about Militias, not about controlling slaves, women, Indians, Brits, Spaniards, criminals or the insane...........none of whom constituted "the people".

A Militia, necessary for the security of a free state......"the people", did not include any of the above referenced, disqualified humans.

The 2nd does NOT start with or say, ......... "the universal natural right of men to be armed"............... not at all........................it begins with A Militia, not men or mankind.

WHY? By intentional design, by the most educated and powerful of the nations founders.

After a decade of the violent Articles of Confederation, the citizenry voted to limit the power of men and force them into a codified Federal govenment.....powers not reserved to the Feds are granted to the states, and anything not reserved to the Feds or States are reserved to "the people."

NO other amendment in the BOR is controversial at al.....just the intentionally written 2nd, that preserved both the Fed and State govenments right to at times control arms, .by defining "the People" who might own guns.

There you go reading the texts again. The actual words don't matter its all the underlying, unwritten subtext that matters. And only left wing professors are mentally equipped to interpret the real meaning behind the writings of those racist, sexist, homophobic and transphobic founders. The genius of current progressives is they know the founders were transphobic even though this didn't exist back then.

/sarcasm

spat · Sunday at 7:50 PM

Zerex said:
Excepting the aforenamed "non people".

A Militia was not a draft; the Whiskey Rebellion in Pittsburgh-- the "militia" fought Pres Washington over the Fed Gov't whiskey tax.

Wisdom in 1790 is still fought today, but 250 years of history and Judicial decisions and laws indicate that my description above is correct, and the 2nd does NOT start............."the right of the People to be armed is uncontrovertible..............." No it does not.

No where near that, despite what 2026 reasoning tries to imply today.

We are the freest people on the planet and we can own guns.

When George Mason was asked who "the militia" was his reply was:

“I ask, Who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.”

Cooolone · Sunday at 8:30 PM

Not sure why anyone pays any credence to these mentally deficient morons who come up with these alternate reality ideas... The Koolaid drinkers will latch on to nonsense like this and regurgitate it as fact.

Grimscale · Monday at 7:07 AM

Cooolone said:
Not sure why anyone pays any credence to these mentally deficient morons who come up with these alternate reality ideas...

you said it yourself, in a round about way.
They latch on to these ridiculous and absurd ideas because it reinforces their own bias and beliefs. The "Koolaid drinkers" effectively "prove" the righteousness of their own fantasy land by spewing out lies that they, and others, can take as "truth".

Zerex · Monday at 11:37 AM

250 years of hisotry precedence, Laws, Acts and Judicial Court decisions confirm my position.

"Unwritten subtext" secret decoder ring membership? Hidden meanings?.............is just like farts...never existed.

The founders feared the people/mobs, and set up an amendment that could control them in the future......very prescient of them.

The Whiskey Rebellion confirmed their wisdom, as did John Brown and the abolitionists.

Keep pissing into the wind saying that no gun control is legal................no country in the world has ever had such a situation and yet we alone can own guns.............. and yet in your own mind, non existent natural laws of man are supreme.

What BS

spat · Monday at 4:56 PM

Zerex said:
250 years of hisotry precedence, Laws, Acts and Judicial Court decisions confirm my position.

"Unwritten subtext" secret decoder ring membership? Hidden meanings?.............is just like farts...never existed.

The founders feared the people/mobs, and set up an amendment that could control them in the future......very prescient of them.

The Whiskey Rebellion confirmed their wisdom, as did John Brown and the abolitionists.

Keep pissing into the wind saying that no gun control is legal................no country in the world has ever had such a situation and yet we alone can own guns.............. and yet in your own mind, non existent natural laws of man are supreme.

What BS

Remind me of what gun control the Whisky Rebellion spawned again ?

Oh, right, none.

The RKBA guarantees the *means* to rebel. The right to actually do it isn't relevant.

If you *actually* rebel, then either you're successful, or you're guilty.

FP1201 · Monday at 6:42 PM

Odd how the only entity that's subject to infringement is the only one prohibited with "shall not be" but I'm too much a simpleton to understand the real meanings.

Zerex · 2026-10-07T11:57:38-0400

The fact is that we live in modern times, and the population today of 350 million plus 20 million illegals, is not the same as 1790's generally peaceful 3.9 million.

In 1940, our population was 140 million, and we still had the GCA of 1934 and the NYS PP system in place by them due to the psychotic criminals in society, and the DICK ACT of 1903, had replaced the Militia Act.

Today the NICS and other restrictions help keep us safe, and "THE PEOPLE" can still own guns.

Just not the non people, disqualified by criminal histories.

Parzival · 2026-10-07T12:07:56-0400

Zerex said:
The fact is that we live in modern times, and the population today of 350 million plus 20 million illegals, is not the same as 1790's generally peaceful 3.9 million.

In 1940, our population was 140 million, and we still had the GCA of 1934 and the NYS PP system in place by them due to the psychotic criminals in society, and the DICK ACT of 1903, had replaced the Militia Act.

Today the NICS and other restrictions help keep us safe, and "THE PEOPLE" can still own guns.

Just not the non people, disqualified by criminal histories.

NICS does nothing to keep criminals from owning guns, they don’t go to gun shops.

FP1201 · 2026-10-07T13:33:27-0400

Parzival said:
NICS does nothing to keep criminals from owning guns, they don’t go to gun shops.

zero wants the pseudo-security of government deciding one is not eligible to procure a firearm from a someone they control (FFL)...the whole premise that's conveniently ignored are the words written to restrict the government and it's agents from deciding who may and may not exercise their Constitutional Rights.
"...The RIGHT ....SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED."

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/infringe

INFRINGED Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com

INFRINGED definition: violated, transgressed, or encroached upon, as a regulation, restriction, or right. See examples of infringed used in a sentence.

www.dictionary.com

I will capitulate there are those that should not be allowed Arms (or Oxygen) which is why we have Laws (many of which are being overturned or challenged as I write) prohibiting certain persons convicted (due process) of crimes from having or acquiring weapons and Punishments for violating those Laws.

Zero wants to invoke the NFA, Sullivan Act, and others as sufficient proof of a subjective need for such, but in the end they have been found unconstitutional at both the State and Federal levels, it's just taken time, money, and people who've had enough of government sticking its dick where clearly it does not belong. (democrat control) Go back and read the History, the Explanations for Legislation, the "Emergency" necessities, and it all comes back to People in authority wanting more control with less fear of push back from the People they foisted the Laws upon under a Flag of "Public Safety" or as the Nazi's said "for YOUR safety".
Can't have it both ways, and we're pretty fucking tired of the duplicity.

REALLY? MSNOW Guest Suggests the Second Amendment Was About ‘Slave Patrols’ (VIDEO)

livingston

20×102mm Vulcan