AmmoLand posted an article of mine on Tuesday offering a rebuttal to Neil H. Buchanan, a “professor of law” at The George Washington University who claims:
“[T]he Second Amendment is simply not relevant to the US gun debate. None of the proposals to limit gun purchases, to limit (or even ban) carrying weapons in public, to require background checks, to forbid gun ownership by domestic abusers, to limit magazine capacities, or any other proposal on the horizon even comes close to bumping up against the Second Amendment.”
In exposing all the kinds of misinformation Prof. Buchanan was spewing to a readership that won’t know they’re being had, I missed one important point. Fortunately, there was a knowledgeable reader providing feedback who reminded me of something I should have remembered: The opinion in the Dred Scott case as it relates to the right to bear arms.
The infamous decision that held that “a negro, whose ancestors were imported into [the U.S.], and sold as slaves,” even if freed, could not be an American citizen and thus could not sue in federal court? What, so now “racist gun nuts” are reduced to supporting slavery?
Of course not, and anyone leveling that accusation will be attempting to use it in a lying smear to keep a truth they don’t want people to know about from being shared.
I should have remembered, though, because I referenced the case in a letter I wrote to then-Mayor of Cleveland Michael R. White back in 1999, when challenging his embracing of “gun control” while refusing to acknowledge its racist roots.
by David Codrea
