# The Founding Fathers and open carry **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 5, 2017, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584 "2017-09-05T19:22:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2017, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/1 "2017-09-05T19:22:36Z")
While (most of) the Founding Fathers were big on the idea of natural rights ala’ John Locke, they seemed to take a pretty strong level of government and law for granted. The preface to the Constitution specially includes “ensure domestic tranquility” as one of its goals, and the founders were apparently as concerned about demagoguery as they were about top-down tyranny. So how did they reconcile this with keeping and bearing arms? The collective theory that the people were only to bear arms while mustered under a government officer’s authority seems pretty well refuted by now. And at least one chestnut quoted by the control control crowd- 18th-century Boston’s ban on keeping loaded guns within city limits- appears to be taking a fire safety ordinance out of context. So were the Founders really ok with someone walking down the street with a loaded musket slung at their back and three or four pistols tucked into a sash? Or were they less liberal in actual practice, when it was a case of N.I.M.B.Y.? ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2017, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/2 "2017-09-05T19:29:59Z")
Oh, and yes I’m aware that towns in the Old West sometimes had city ordinances banning firearms; but could we limit this to precedents contemporary to the signers of the Bill of Rights please? ---
**Author:** ![Evan\_Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b487fb/32.png) [@Evan\_Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evan_Drake)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2017, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/3 "2017-09-05T19:43:54Z")
I think concealed carry was quite difficult in those days. “_Somewhere about my person is hidden a blunderbuss: find it he who dares !_” ---
**Author:** ![OldGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/3bc359/32.png) [@OldGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2017, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/4 "2017-09-05T20:05:27Z")
> [@Evan\_Drake](#): > > I think concealed carry was quite difficult in those days. > “_Somewhere about my person is hidden a blunderbuss: find it he who dares !_” While a blunderbuss would have been difficult to conceal, I’d think pistols such as these > **[Flintlock](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flintlock)** > > Flintlock is a general term for any firearm that uses a flint-striking ignition mechanism, the first of which appeared in Western Europe in the early 16th century. The term may also apply to a particular form of the mechanism itself, also known as the true flintlock, that was introduced in the early 17th century, and gradually replaced earlier firearm-ignition technologies, such as the matchlock, the wheellock, and the earlier flintlock mechanisms such as the snaplock and snaphaunce. > The true fl... could easily be concealed under a large coat. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2017, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/5 "2017-09-05T20:30:47Z")
> [@Evan\_Drake](#): > > I think concealed carry was quite difficult in those days. > “_Somewhere about my person is hidden a blunderbuss: find it he who dares !_” There were plenty of flintlock pistols. Consider the ubiquitous Sharpe, for example, which delivered a .55 cal ball to devastating effect. ---
**Author:** ![Evan\_Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/b487fb/32.png) [@Evan\_Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evan_Drake)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2017, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/6 "2017-09-05T20:37:33Z")
By the time you withdrew a 12" pistol from your voluminous coattails and started to load it methinks the jig would be up. They weren’t carried ready-to-fire. ---
**Author:** ![Lubricious\_Integument](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/82dd89/32.png) [@Lubricious\_Integument](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lubricious_Integument)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2017, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/7 "2017-09-05T20:50:39Z")
> [@Evan\_Drake](#): > > I think concealed carry was quite difficult in those days. > “_Somewhere about my person is hidden a blunderbuss: find it he who dares !_” Wi-fi signals were atrocious in those days too. What’s that got to do with open carry? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2017, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/8 "2017-09-05T22:22:06Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > The collective theory that the people were only to bear arms while mustered under a government officer’s authority seems pretty well refuted by now. It is not well refuted at all. The most you can say is Scalia re-wrote the second amendment to say: [del]A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,[/del] [T]he right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. We’re stuck with that for now but it does not make the debate refuted even a little bit. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2017, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/9 "2017-09-05T22:36:20Z")
They may have seen the 2nd amendment as a limitation on the federal government and not local and state governments to enact necessary limitations to ensure public tranquility. Even if that’s not the case they wouldn’t have seen open or concealed carry of single shot flintlocks to be a major problem. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2017, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/10 "2017-09-05T22:36:44Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > It is not well refuted at all. > > The most you can say is Scalia re-wrote the second amendment to say: > > [del]A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,[/del] [T]he right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. > > We’re stuck with that for now but it does not make the debate refuted even a little bit. The collective rights theory has certainly been on the losing side of pretty much every credible poll I’ve ever seen on the issue. I realize unpopularity doesn’t necessarily mean it’s wrong, but let’s just say that it’s a theory that’s struggled to win adherents. [Here is a Gallup poll from before _Heller_](http://www.gallup.com/poll/105721/public-believes-americans-right-own-guns.aspx) > [@](#): > > A solid majority of the U.S. public, 73%, believes the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the rights of Americans to own guns. Twenty percent believe the amendment only guarantees the rights of state militia members to own guns. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2017, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/11 "2017-09-05T22:41:42Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > I > [del]A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,[/del] [T]he right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Nothing has changed. The amendment doesn’t say that the right to bear arms is only intended for militias. The part about militias is gratuitous, the amendment says the right shall not be infringed. I don’t read that as meaning a right without reasonable restriction either. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2017, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/12 "2017-09-06T00:10:54Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > I don’t read that as meaning a right without reasonable restriction either. So what did the people who wrote and ratified the 2nd consider reasonable restrictions at the state level? AIUI, many states had some state equivalent of the 2nd as well. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2017, 12:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/13 "2017-09-06T00:26:45Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > The part about militias is gratuitous, the amendment says the right shall not be infringed. Is there any other part of the Bill of Rights that is gratuitous? ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2017, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/14 "2017-09-06T02:32:30Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > So what did the people who wrote and ratified the 2nd consider reasonable restrictions at the state level? AIUI, many states had some state equivalent of the 2nd as well. I don’t know. I think they’d accept reasonable restrictions on time and place if a person could own and carry arms normally. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2017, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/15 "2017-09-06T02:42:19Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Is there any other part of the Bill of Rights that is gratuitous? I wouldn’t call anything else gratuitous. Does that matter? ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2017, 11:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/16 "2017-09-06T11:05:33Z")
I’ve always thought [Warren Burger’s](https://playingintheworldgame.wordpress.com/2015/10/09/warren-burger-on-the-second-amendment/) take on the Second Amendment to be quite rational and reasonable. > [@](#): > > The Gun Lobby’s interpretation of the Second Amendment is one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the people by special interest groups that I have seen in my lifetime. > > … > > Americans also have a right to defend their homes, and we need not challenge that. Nor does anyone seriously question that the Constitution protects the right of hunters to own and keep sporting guns for hunting game any more than anyone would challenge the right to own and keep fishing rods and other equipment for fishing — or to own automobiles. To “keep and bear arms” for hunting today is essentially a recreational activity and not an imperative of survival, as it was 200 years ago; “Saturday night specials” and machine guns are not recreational weapons and surely are as much in need of regulation as motor vehicles. When Warren wrote that, the collectivist interpretation of the 2nd was mainstream. Since then, Scalia essentially took a black marker and obliterated the first 13 words. ---
**Author:** ![ChickenLegs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecc23a/32.png) [@ChickenLegs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChickenLegs)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2017, 11:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/17 "2017-09-06T11:28:10Z")
To the original question; “So were the Founders really ok with someone walking down the street with a loaded musket slung at their back and three or four pistols tucked into a sash”, Jefferson had this to say: “A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks.” —Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, 1785 ---
**Author:** ![BwanaBob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bwanabob/32/2985_2.png) [@BwanaBob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BwanaBob)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2017, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/18 "2017-09-06T12:14:35Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > I wouldn’t call anything else gratuitous. Does that matter? It doesn’t matter, but it speaks volumes. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2017, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/19 "2017-09-06T12:31:36Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > I’ve always thought [Warren Burger’s](https://playingintheworldgame.wordpress.com/2015/10/09/warren-burger-on-the-second-amendment/) take on the Second Amendment to be quite rational and reasonable. > > When Warren wrote that, the collectivist interpretation of the 2nd was mainstream. Since then, Scalia essentially took a black marker and obliterated the first 13 words. Warren Berger’s comments are drawn from a television interview. Scalia’s actions arise in the context of a Supreme Court decision joined by a majority of the justices, creating a binding precedent. This process doesn’t seem to bother you when that black marker is used to write words in to the Constitution (Roe v Wade) or change them (Texas v Johnson). You don’t object to the idea of a Supreme Court decision making changes – you object to the specific change you think Scalia’s majority actually made. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2017, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584/20 "2017-09-06T14:03:56Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Is there any other part of the Bill of Rights that is gratuitous? I think this is an interesting question, and am curious how gunnists will respond. I just read the Bill of Rights and, indeed, _ **the ambiguous phrase in the Second Amendment does appear to be the only gratuitous phrase in any of the Amendments.** _ If the meaning of this distinction is not clear, the phrase I’ve underlined 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. appears to add no meaning or differentiation to the sentence. Such phrases, if this one is indeed “gratuitous,” are common in fiction but stand out as almost peculiar in legal documents. It’s reminiscent of the “gratuitous” underlined phrase in one of my long-ago posts: Paul Krugman, a Nobel Prize-winning economist, has consistently answered “No” to that [economic] question. That post drew no less than four responses implying that “gratuitous phrases” were illicit, and that this phrase must have been essential to my argument. How about it? Were the Founding Fathers playing with us, inserting a single gratuitous phrase into this renowned document? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-founding-fathers-and-open-carry/795584.md?page=2)