Dred Scott Decision

[Subdeacon Joe]

While the decision itself, upholding the chattel status of Mr. Scott, was unfortunate, I find it interesting that the SCOUTS recognized in it the universal right to keep and bear arms as protected by the 2nd Amendment:

 

"Scott v. Sanford decision: " It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went. And all of this would be done in the face of the subject race of the same color, both free and slaves, and inevitably producing discontent and insubordination among them, and endangering the peace and safety of the State."

 

 

[Blackwater 53393]

Interesting point, SDJ!!

 

This item should be included somehow in all subsequent case law used in our efforts to reacquire our Constitutional rights!!

[Subdeacon Joe]

3 hours ago, Blackwater 53393 said:

Interesting point, SDJ!!

 

This item should be included somehow in all subsequent case law used in our efforts to reacquire our Constitutional rights!!

 

The only problem is that it is from Scott v. Sanford, which would then give the antis could latch onto and start screaming that all gun owners are RAAAACist even louder.   

It does show that it was common for people to go about armed as they pleased and that SCOTUS considered it a normal thing.  There was no question that it was an individual right.