Hacker News Reader

Comment by OhMeadhbh | Hacker News Reader

[citation needed]

It's not exactly an unusual claim, and it was very much the loudly espoused position of the Republican Party until, well, last week.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United...

> In Federalist No. 46, Madison wrote how a federal army could be kept in check by the militia, "a standing army ... would be opposed [by] militia." He argued that State governments "would be able to repel the danger" of a federal army, "It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops." He contrasted the federal government of the United States to the European kingdoms, which he described as "afraid to trust the people with arms"...

This was posited as the nice sounding reason for the second amendment, when the more accurate reason was to ensure citizens had guns to drive out the indigenous peoples and steal their lands.

We rather quickly saw the federal government rolling over the people even with weapons in the Whiskey Rebellion.

I don't disagree.

But it's still very funny seeing the Right wrestle with "wait, the other team has guns?!" and "wait, Trump sounds like he wants gun control?!" right now when this claim has been the basis of their argument for decades.

Yeah, it is quite funny.

To be fair, the right struggle with the argument every time it's put to the test.

I recall the 2016 shootings of Dallas Police Officers and the right were apoplectic about the individual

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micah_Xavier_Johnson

They wrestled with it for about 5 minutes, then got the memo, shrugged and resumed to deep-throat the boot.

Don't forget the very profound usefulness of a "well-armed militia" in putting down slave rebellions and catching escaped slaves.

In 46, Madison was discussing foreign danger in response to Hamilton in 29. but... thx for providing a citation. That's a much better response to downvoting.

That… doesn't seem to be accurate?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._46

> This essay examines the relative strength of the state and federal governments under the proposed United States Constitution. It is titled "The Influence of the State and Federal Governments Compared"… he describes at length in this paper a series of hypothetical conflicts between state and federal government. Madison does not expect or hope the constitution to lead to the kind of conflict between state and federal authority described here. Rather, he seeks to rebut the arguments that he anticipates from opponents of the constitution by asserting that their "chimerical" predictions of the federal government crushing state governments are unfounded

Reply on news.ycombinator.com