How would you like to have a rebellion named after you?

There has been much debate over the 2^nd amendment and the associated issue of gun control.  It is a very complicated subject and both sides have ample supporting evidence for their polar positions.

One of the rationales for those opposed to gun control is the issue of guns and implied right to overthrow a tyrannical government. I am going to focus on that aspect in this blog.

Interestingly a civilian rebellion was a contributing factor to the strengthening of the role of the Federal Government during the formation of our country.

Before Twitter you had to physically attack your opponent

One such attempted overthrow was the Shay’s Rebellion in 1786. It was an armed uprising that took place in central and western Massachusetts.  If the founding fathers were all in favor of encouraging the citizenry to rebel whenever they felt the government was veering towards tyranny they surely would not have squashed the uprising. The rebellion was named after Daniel Shays, a veteran of the American Revolutionary War and one of the rebel leaders.   The rebellion was rooted in financial difficulties brought about by a post-Revolutionary war economic depression, a credit squeeze caused by a lack of hard currency, and fiscally harsh government policies instituted to solve the state's debt problems. Interestingly, a “militia” raised as a private army by the government to defeat the rebels.

The rebellion was seen a sign of weakness of the fledgling federal government which operated under the Articles of Confederation. The Articles established the United States of America as a confederation of sovereign states and served as its first constitution. Using logic commonly used today - it was the constitution before there was a U.S.Constitution.  The Articles framework was considered a weak government by many nationalists (Federalists).  It is believed that the Shay’s rebellion played a role in convincing anti-federalists to support the ratification of the U.S. Constitution.  The Constitution provided for a strong Federal government.

Now we all know what is contained in the Second Amendment.

“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.".

A little longer than the modified statement we more often hear.  The truncated version of the slogan is used by the NRA and is carved over the door of their main headquarters.

“The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed.”
  
The NRA modified the original slogan not only be leaving out a key part of the amendment (A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state) but they capitalized letters adding emphasis where there was none. The phrase and intent of the missing section of the 2nd amendment is fodder for another blog. Let's just continue with armed revolutions against the federal government.

For those who believe that the founding fathers wanted to make sure that the populace had the legal footing to overthrow government through violent means might be interested to see how that was generally greeted.

Interestingly most people who led rebellions against the federal government generally ended up in prison or put to death.  If they were really lucky the rebellions were named after them.

Old time political cartoons rock!

The Dorr Rebellion was a brief armed insurrection in Rhode Island.  Surprisingly it was led by a man named Thomas Wilson Dorr.  Thomas was agitating for changes to the state's electoral system.  Dorr was found guilty of treason against the state, and was sentenced in 1844 to solitary confinement and hard labor for life.

John Brown was an American abolitionist who wanted to overthrow slavery. During 1856 in Kansas, Brown commanded forces at the Battle of Black Jack and the Battle of Osawatomie. Brown's followers also killed five pro-slavery supporters at Pottawatomie. In 1859, Brown led an unsuccessful raid on the federal armory at Harpers Ferry that ended with his capture. Brown's trial resulted in his conviction and a sentence of death by hanging.  John got a song named after him.

Bacon's Rebellion was an armed rebellion in 1676 by Virginia settlers led by Nathaniel Bacon. The colony's lightly organized frontier political culture combined with accumulating grievances, especially regarding Indian attacks. The rebellion was suppressed by government troops. Ever since men have been in love with Bacon.
  

Now there is a good combination

The Whiskey Rebellion was a tax protest in the United States beginning in 1791. In Western Pennsylvania, protesters used violence and intimidation to prevent federal officials from collecting the tax. President George Washington responded with 13,000 militia provided by the governors of Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. Washington rode at the head of an army to suppress the insurgency. The rebels all went home before the arrival of the army, and there was no confrontation. I am pretty sure there was alot of drinking involved so I am surprised no one got killed.

The Whiskey Rebellion demonstrated that the new national government had the willingness and ability to suppress violent resistance to its laws.
I am not seeing the founding father's wishes for chaos of revolution against a democratic society.

There have been other rebellions that ended up with pretty much the same outcomes; Nat Turner's Rebellion, the Wounded Knee incident, the Pennsylvania Mutiny of 1783 and The Anti-Rent War to name a few.

There was even a was a rebellion against the selective service draft during WWI - the Green Corn Rebellion.  They were so cool they even had a manifesto.

"Now is the time to rebel against this war with Germany, boys. Boys, get together and don't go. Rich man's war. Poor man's fight. The war is over with Germany if you don't go and J.P. Morgan & Co. is lost. Their great speculation is the only cause of the war."

So we have had a couple of rebellions and pretty much people just got hung for their part it in.  Now there was one more rebellion but for the moment the details escape me. Something about the war of Northern Aggression or some silly name like that.....

Yea, I am pretty sure the U.S. Government supports  ballot boxes and not bullets as  the  mechanism of change

It seems that it can not be truly known what the founding fathers intended.  Much has been written on both sides of the debate. The early government had a fear of standing armies.  They considered armies like the British had to be oppressors. Some believe that the 2nd amendment is for the right and establishment of militias (i.e State Police) to be the protective force for the country.

Even f the founding fathers believed in the individual’s rights to bear arms.  Certainly they could not have imagined a world with 30 bullet clips and automated weapons that can make one person a deadly killing machine.  That schools, malls and theaters would become slaughterhouses. Even
Perhaps with a tip of the hat to the founding fathers the resolution can be is that you can have all the muskets you want.

It doesn't seem likely that we will ever find common ground. Personally I believe in citizen’s right to own guns (at least some guns). They should be registered (just like we do for cars) and have to undergo background checks (like we do for certain occupations who have access to potentially dangerous materials). Maybe just to keep it simple you can have all the muskets you want.