# Interesting facts about our (USA's) gun culture **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 21, 2000, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825 "2000-10-21T22:45:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/earl_snake-hips_tucker/32/3269_2.png) [@Earl\_Snake-Hips\_Tucker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Earl_Snake-Hips_Tucker)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2000, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/1 "2000-10-21T22:45:58Z")
(Firm Second Amendment supporter here) I read this review of a book ( **Arming America** by Michael Bellesiles) in a local newspaper. I have not actually read this book myself: (reviewer’s words) “Hardly anyone had a gun because they were too expensive and didn’t work. It was much easier and less time-consuming to chop off a chicken’s head for dinner than to try to shoot almost anything in the woods.” “There were few guns manufactured in America for anyone, even the militia, and few men knew how to shoot them. Since almost no one owned guns, there were few opportunities for practice. . . The result was a militia that was pretty much a joke.” “America’s gun culture is an invented tradition. . . developed in a single generation, among those who experienced the onset of the Civil War and that disaster itself.” (William W. Starr in “The State” newspaper. 9/24/2000) There are enough threads already on the gun debate, and I don’t follow them, so if any of this points have been mentioned, I apologize. I am merely presenting these _historical_ points for debate (if any), not whether we should be for or against gun control/licensing/confiscation/etc _now_. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2000, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/2 "2000-10-21T22:56:39Z")
What the hell is an “invented tradition”? All traditions must start somewhere. If the U.S. “invented the tradition” around the time of the Civil War, that still counts in my book. Does it exist now? Well yes. Then it IS a tradition. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2000, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/3 "2000-10-21T23:09:28Z")
Mjollnir quoted a review of _Arming America_ as saying: > [@](#): > > "Hardly anyone had a gun […] There were few guns manufactured in America for anyone, even the militia, and few men knew how to shoot them. Since almost no one owned guns, there were few opportunities for practice. . . That’s odd. According to the _Militia Watchdog_’s History of the Militia FAQ, at [http://www.militia-watchdog.org/faq3.htm](http://www.militia-watchdog.org/faq3.htm), most States at the time the Constitution was ratified had “compulsory militia” service, wherein every able-bodied adult male was required to show up to musters at least a few times a year – and at most of these musters, in order for the State to save money, the militiamen were required to bring their own firearms. ---
**Author:** ![Freedom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Freedom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freedom)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2000, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/4 "2000-10-21T23:23:47Z")
This is not the first I have seen this guy’s book mentioned. I have seen it around enough to know that his conclusions do not seem to be accepted without question by all historians. This is a new angle to attack the “original intent” of the 2nd Amendment. I have not done enough research on it one way or the other to have a defensible opinion about it’s validity. I do know that his theory (it is a theory) is controversial. ---
**Author:** ![Freedom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Freedom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freedom)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2000, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/5 "2000-10-21T23:35:43Z")
I’m getting lazy in my old age. I should have done a little research before my last post. Right after I posted, I felt soooo guilty that I rushed off to see what I could find. [Another POV](http://www.alamanceind.com/newfol~2/nation_33.html) > [@](#): > > “So I ended up going through 11,500 probate records that recorded everything those people owned when they died. I wasn’t seeing guns. I became obsessed with this idea–where are the guns? They’re all supposed to have guns!” > -Michael Bellesiles, Sept. 27, 1999 Emory Report > [@](#): > > But does “historian” Michael Bellesiles’ methodology even make > sense? Does his claim that probate inventories prove what > Americans owned - or more importantly, didn’t own - before the > Civil War actually make sense? > > …snip… > > But apply Bellesiles’ methodology to the Xanthos estate. > While the probate inventory in the Xanthos estate doesn’t list any > firearms, it doesn’t list a television, a camera, a typewriter, a > desktop or laptop computer, a camcorder, a stereo, a clock, a > watch, or even an AM radio either. Would Bellesiles seriously > contend that Xanthos died not owning any of these items in 1991 - > when Xanthos died a very rich man? …snip IIRC the premise in the book was that since firearms were not listed in people’s wills, then there were not many firearms. ---
**Author:** ![el\_mono](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ea666f/32.png) [@el\_mono](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/el_mono)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2000, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/6 "2000-10-22T00:10:16Z")
Shooting from the hip here. (Pun intended) My problem with the movement to change the second amendment to the U.S. Constitution is simply this: Which one do they want to fiddle with next? Frankly I find this question to be frightening. Obviously once there is a precident for “amending” (as opposed to abolishing) one of the original ten, we will see movements to cherry-pick the others to better serve the needs of federal government in their mission to usurp more and more of our constitutionally protected rights. Is it time for a new revoloution? Hope this isn’t hijacking your thread, Mjollnir. It certainly isn’t intended as such. Just my two cents worth. ---
**Author:** ![SPOOFE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@SPOOFE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SPOOFE)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2000, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/7 "2000-10-22T02:09:49Z")
I really don’t like the reasoning that Bellesiles presents (i.e.- few guns = few people knew how to use them). It suggests that some sort of “osmosis” went on with regards to gun usage… you had to be around them all the time in order for their “death-making nature” to seep into your bones. He also seems to suggest that low manufacturing rate = low number of guns, ignoring that single firearm, with decent upkeep, cleaning, maintenance, etc. can easily last a century. In any case, whether the “gun tradition” is 140 or 220 years old doesn’t matter… the ownership of such is still Constitutionally AND naturally protected, and there were many writings of the Founding Fathers stating clearly why they believed as such. I classify Mr. Bellesiles’ rubbish in with Creationism theories and Scientology beliefs. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2000, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/8 "2000-10-22T03:06:31Z")
[Here’s one take on Bellesile’s “work”.](http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=518) While I can’t vouch for Mr. Stromberg’s credentials his “historical” fatcs at least coincide with some of the stuff I’ve read. Unlike Mr. Bellesiles. His stuff sounds like it just got off the ship from Mars. _ **ExTank** “Mostly Harmless :p”_ ---
**Author:** ![Freedom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Freedom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freedom)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2000, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/9 "2000-10-22T03:41:41Z")
Thanks for the link Ex-Tank. I’m sure not everyone is as big a fan of this topic as some of us, so here are a few selected quotes from that link. I found the article to be a long, but good read. > [@](#): > > For all we know, he may write volume III, proving that only one percent of Americans ever owned a printing press, that early Americans didn’t hold their pens right, that they couldn’t spell, and that American speech has always been about stupid and unimportant things. American speakers and writers have always been racists, xenophobes, and haters. Certified Great Men may need to regulate speech-- and even “infringe” it-- given the awful results of free speech to date. > [@](#): > > Having set out to blow a big hole in the Bill of Rights, Bellesiles has missed his target. This is awkward after several hundred pages ridiculing Americans’ bad shooting and sneers about guns handed down from father to son in touching “ceremonies of manhood” (p.110). But then this book is really about public policy and the class hatred felt by many intellectuals for a broad section of the American people. > [@](#): > > There may be a few other such points. The ones I have listed seem problematic enough. The late Murray Rothbard wrote four volumes on the colonial and revolutionary periods. He noted all those instances so lovingly presented by Bellesiles, wherein militia men failed to show, failed to show enthusiasm, fought poorly, and so forth. For Bellesiles, this proves that they were racist bozos needing to be shaped up by Great Men. Rothbard, knowing political and ideological conflict when he saw it, credited the people with being smart enough to see through wars and campaigns designed to empower and enrich Great Men at the expense–in blood and treasure–of the people. > > Bellesiles says time and time again that colonial leaders “had to” resort to conscripting militia men. This generally failed. Later in the book he notes more than once that volunteer militia companies were better motivated and better equipped than their counterparts in the dwindling conscript units. This is all a great puzzle for him. > > Perhaps people didn’t like being conscripted; maybe they had other things to do–farming, perhaps. But before this possible explanation can catch Bellesiles’s eye, he’s off demonizing the guns themselves again, followed closely by the Satanic Mason-Dixons. > [@](#): > > Bellesiles’s abolition of politics leads him to overlook a number of questions: republic vs. empire, liberty vs. power, decentralization vs. centralization. They must be unimportant, except insofar as guns were involved. The small matter of empire may be the most startling omission. > [@](#): > > Keen to leave his opponents no hope at all, Bellesiles has packed his labyrinthine book with every maneuver and strawman of which he could think. The biggest straw man is the claim that the right to keep and bear arms vitally depends on our believing that early Americans were violent, cantankerous, highly armed, and ready to explode into bloodshed at the drop of a discouraging word. This is the great myth, which the poor, doltish public believes and which the sinister NRA exploits. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2000, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/10 "2000-10-22T16:35:10Z")
Mr. Clayton Cramer, M.A. of History, has a similar take as Prof. Stromberg. He’s fairly damning (but always polite) in his review of Bellesile’s work. It can be found here in the article [_Arming America:_ A “Novel” Rewrite of American History](http://www.cnn.com/virtual/editions/europe/2000/roof/change.pop/frameset.exclude.html) Of course, as it’s posted at the NRA’s ILA website, it’s all a pack of lies perpetrated on the unsuspecting American public and gullible gun owners by the “evil gun lobby”. :rolleyes: _ **ExTank** “Mostly Harmless :p”_ ---
**Author:** ![stofsky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dfb087/32.png) [@stofsky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stofsky)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2000, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/11 "2000-10-24T14:22:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mjollnir \* > \*\*( > (William W. Starr in “The State” newspaper. 9/24/2000) > > \*\* Not the best source for a review–there’s a better one in the NYT review a couple or three weeks ago. But really, did you expect the gun supporters to listen to reason and research when simple grammar doesn’t work as an argument (the well-regulated militia part)? [off-topic] Maybe we should see if we can get a Midlands, SC dopefest going? You’re the only other one from Cola I’ve seen so far. [/off-topic] ---
**Author:** ![Freedom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Freedom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freedom)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2000, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/12 "2000-10-24T15:13:12Z")
> [@](#): > > . But really, did you expect the gun supporters to listen to reason and research when simple grammar doesn’t work as an argument (the well-regulated militia part)? Here we had a nice quiet thread going, staying away from previously re-hashed violatile topics, and then you had to go and light a match. \*\*Amendment II 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. \*\* Could you please show me how simple grammar works as an arguement against the individual right to own firearms. I would also be interested in hearing your take on why the word **People** means something different in the 2nd Amendment than it does in the 1st,4th, 5th, 9th and 10th amendments. ---
**Author:** ![Freedom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Freedom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freedom)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2000, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/13 "2000-10-24T15:19:24Z")
> [@](#): > > . But really, did you expect the gun supporters to listen to reason and research when simple grammar doesn’t work as an argument (the well-regulated militia part)? Here we had a nice quiet thread going, staying away from previously re-hashed violatile topics, and then you had to go and light a match. \*\*Amendment II 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. \*\* Could you please show me how simple grammar works as an arguement against the individual right to own firearms. I would also be interested in hearing your take on why the word **People** means something different in the 2nd Amendment than it does in the 1st,4th, 5th, 9th and 10th amendments. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2000, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/14 "2000-10-24T15:21:27Z")
ExTank wrote: > [@](#): > > [Here’s one take on Bellesile’s “work”.](http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?control=518) Too bad this article is at the Ludwig von Mises Institute website, alongside such gems as “Repeal the 17th Amendment” and “Government generated statistics are a Communist plot perpetrated by Al Gore.” (Okay, I’m exaggerating on the title of that last article. But only slightly.) ---
**Author:** ![TomH](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/90db22/32.png) [@TomH](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TomH)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2000, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/15 "2000-10-24T15:35:04Z")
> [@](#): > > What the hell is an “invented tradition”? All traditions must start somewhere. An invented tradition is something that is widely believed to be, or deliberately represented as being, older and more firmly-established than it really is. A good example is the Scottish kilt, invented by an Englishman in the 18th Century. Another example is much of the ceremony associated with the British monarchy, much of which is believed to be “ancient” but is in fact not much more than 100 years old. It’s not clear what it means in the context of American “gun culture” (whatever _that_ means), but I suspect it means something like: Most people think the right to bear arms was a product of the Revolutionary War but in fact real importance has only been attached to it since the Civil War. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2000, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/16 "2000-10-24T15:35:21Z")
ExTank wrote: > [@](#): > > It can be found here in the article [_Arming America:_ A “Novel” Rewrite of American History](http://www.cnn.com/virtual/editions/europe/2000/roof/change.pop/frameset.exclude.html) When I click on this link, all I get is CNN’s “choose your edition” webpage. ---
**Author:** ![stofsky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dfb087/32.png) [@stofsky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stofsky)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2000, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/17 "2000-10-24T15:46:36Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Freedom2 \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > . But really, did you expect the gun supporters to listen to reason and research when simple grammar doesn’t work as an argument (the well-regulated militia part)? > > Here we had a nice quiet thread going, staying away from previously re-hashed violatile topics, and then you had to go and light a match. > > \*\*Amendment II > > 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. \*\* > > Could you please show me how simple grammar works as an arguement against the individual right to own firearms. I would also be interested in hearing your take on why the word **People** means something different in the 2nd Amendment than it does in the 1st,4th, 5th, 9th and 10th amendments. > \*\* Ummmm, which part of “well regulated militia” do you not understand? Reading that as a sentence (not the fragment that begins "the right), it says that gun ownership is a right for a member of “a well regulated militia.” As for “people”, well, remember that the founding fathers didn’t count blacks, women, immigrants, or non-landowners among “people.” It seems that the only pro-gun people who don’t take out the first part of the sentence are those who live in Montana on some compound–but then again, it’s debatable whether they’re “regulated.” Oh, now that I mention that word, here’s another one for the NRA: since when is anonymous, non-licensed, at-will ownership “well regulated”? Don’t start BSing the “we have laws, but they’re not enforced” at me; I’m asking, how are the goals of the gun lobby, the goals I mentioned above, “well regulated”? To reiterate, encapsulate, and boil it all down, my interpretation (decidedly non-legalese but certainly qualified as a reader of sentences, meanings, and subtexts) of 2A is as follows: If you are a member of a **well regulated** militia i.e. the National Guard, or in the time the amendment was written the volunteer and conscripted state militias, you have the right to be armed. In other words, you must be trained and under some sort of military discipline. If you are not part of the militia/NG, for whatever reason, this does not apply to you. “I’m sorry, you’re a crazy person. We won’t let you join the National Guard.” “Screw you then, I still have a gun. And my .22 will keep them there UN black helicopters from taking over the country.” Now do you see where simple grammar comes in? It’s called dependent and independent clauses. BTW, considering the shifts in usage over the last 200-odd years, a modern writing of the amendment would omit the first comma. ---
**Author:** ![MikeG](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mikeg/32/4329_2.png) [@MikeG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MikeG)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2000, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/18 "2000-10-24T16:07:42Z")
\ The National Guard does **not** comprise the “militia”. The militia has been explicitly identified as “the general adult male population” (paraphrased) in U.S.v Miller and other legal rulings. ---
**Author:** ![PeeQueue](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8797f3/32.png) [@PeeQueue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PeeQueue)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2000, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/19 "2000-10-24T16:10:02Z")
A National guard covers that amendment? Why didn’t they just say, “The government will maintain a military.” It would be an extremely pointless amendment if that were the case, for what nation doesn’t? It also goes against the grain of the rest of the amendments in that case, since they mostly deal with people’s rights, not the government’s responsibilities. PeeQueue ---
**Author:** ![stofsky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dfb087/32.png) [@stofsky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stofsky)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2000, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825/20 "2000-10-24T16:20:11Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by PeeQueue \* > \*\*A National guard covers that amendment? Why didn’t they just say, “The government will maintain a military.” It would be an extremely pointless amendment if that were the case, for what nation doesn’t? It also goes against the grain of the rest of the amendments in that case, since they mostly deal with people’s rights, not the government’s responsibilities. > > PeeQueue > \*\* Because, if you’ll read up on it, the founders were against a standing military force. Citizens’ militias were to be used in the place of an army. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/interesting-facts-about-our-usas-gun-culture/37825.md?page=2)