From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: soc.history,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: [ACLU] A History of the Bill of Rights
Date: 13 Nov 92 17:53:25 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <1992Nov11.211933.2639@pony.Ingres.COM>, garrett@Ingres.COM (It's not what you got, it's what you give) writes:
> In article <1992Nov11.044456.7412@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>, fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary)                     writes...
> >No: In those cases, they are defending a right they are very 
> >happy about, even if they don't like the people exercising it.
> >Actually, I was refering to their position on the Second Amendment:
> >The ACLU position paper on the subject contradicts historical facts
> >and ignores Supreme Court rulings, to conclude that it is ok for
> >them to ignore the subject.
> 
> Unfortunantly, I am unfamiliar with this position paper. Could you supply

ACLU Position #47

      We deplore the ghastly fact that in the life of this nation the use
   of handguns brings death to 60 men, women and children by accident--
   and 200 more by intent--every week.
      We concur with repeated rulings of every court that has ruled on
   the issue--including the U.S. Suprme Court--that the Constitution's
   Second Amendment provision for militia never has meant that all 
   individuals have a right to own all kinds of firearms.
      We urge passage of federal legislation--and meanwhile, in its absence,
   the partial remedy of state law--to prohibit, with few and narrowly drawn
   exceptions, the private ownership and possession of handguns, much the 
   way existing laws prohibit machine guns, grenades and cannons.
      We declare that Americans and their rights to life and liberty will
   face less danger in the presence of such laws and their enforcement
   than in the deadly, daily civilian shooting war around us now.
      The National ACLU gun control policy, adopted in 1967, calls for the
   reistration of firearms and the licensing of owners and dealers.  The 
   Union recommends the adoption of strong federal gun control legislation
   as a "necessary condition o fostering the atmosphere of open and fearless
   debate on which a free society rests."
      Both National ACLU and the Southern California affiliate base their
   policy provisions on long-standing interpretations of the Second Amendment
   by the U.S. Supreme Court, that the individual's right to keep and bear
   arms applies only to the preservation or efficiency of "a well-regulated
   militia".

   (Adopted by Board of Directors in September 1976.  See national ACLU
   plicy #47, "Gun Control".)


> more information? BTW, the only Supreme Court ruling that I am aware
> of on the Second Amendment comes from the 30's (1936?) that says that
> the Second Amendment doesn't protect the citisens right to bear arms 
> (I personally disagree with that). I know that that ruling violates the
> intent of the Second Amendment (based on historical wrightings).   
> > 
> >                                           Frank Crary

In fact, the U.S. v. Miller (1939) decision says nothing of the
sort.  It carefully skirts the issue of whether an individual
right exists or not, probably because there were so many existing
precedents that demonstrate the individual rights nature of the RKBA.

By the way, the ACLU Position Paper is simply and utterly false.
"Of every court" they claim.  My new book (blurb at the bottom of
the posting) quotes from many state supreme courts, and from 
19th century U.S. Supreme Court rulings, that held that the
Second Amendment protected an individual right.  In addition,
there are more than a hundred cases where state supreme courts
have recognized that the very similar language of the state
constitutional RKBA clauses is derived from the Second Amendment,
and does protect an individual right to possess firearms.

For The Defense of Themselves And The State: The Original Intent &
Judicial Interpretation of the Right To Keep And Bear Arms

From the Marketing Hype for the book:

    For The Defense Of Themselves And The State

    The Original Intent & Judicial Interpretation of the Right
    To Keep and Bear Arms

    Beginning with its origins in the turbulence of the English
    Civil War, Cramer traces the development of "the right of
    the people to keep and bear arms" through the Constitutional
    Convention, the ratification debates in the several states
    that followed, and its progress through Congress as a part
    of the Bill of Rights.  _For The Defense Of Themselves And
    The State_ is a comprehensive look at the circumstances and
    concerns that motivated the addition of the Second Amendment
    to the U.S. Constitution.

    But much more than simply another scholarly history of a part
    of the Bill of Rights, Cramer brings together a comprehensive
    collection of case law concerning the Second Amendment, and
    the many analogs to it in the various state constitutions.
    Along the way, he shows many of the debates today are mere
    echoes of debates of the past.  For example, the reaction of
    the frontier Western states to the Bowie knife bear eerie
    similarities to current debates over "Saturday night specials"
    and assault weapons.

    Most disturbingly, Cramer brings to light state supreme
    court decisions that show that many gun control laws were
    frankly stated as instruments of racial and ethnic control
    over blacks, recent immigrants, and labor organizers --
    and when existing precedents proved inconvenient, they were
    misquoted, miscited, and simply ignored by many courts.

    This is a book invaluable to law schools, seeking a critical
    evaluation of how a fundamental right has been interpreted
    by the courts, and by those scholars who seek to understand
    the nature of the social changes that changed Revolutionary
    American into Reactionary America.

    At a moment when street crime is seemingly out of control,
    and more and more cries go up for the confiscation of firearms
    throughout the nation, Cramer's work is a complete and balanced
    survey of how "the right of the people to keep and bear arms"
    has been continually reinterpreted -- and misinterpreted --
    over the last two hundred years.

    "An impressive display of scholarship -- and going to
    sources..." -- Professor Daniel Markwyn, Sonoma State University
    
    "[Cramer's book] provides the kind of scholarly resource that
    educated citizens need to think for themselves, a rich digest
    of primary sources documenting -- in their own words -- the
    views, motives and intentions of the Framers, historic 
    commentators, legislators and judiciary who have debated 
    'the right to keep and bear arms' from the origins of our
    republic." -- Professor Preston K. Covey, Carnegie-Mellon
    University

ISBN 0-89341-723-8 Cloth $37.50
ISBN 0-89341-731-9 Paper $18.50

Hollowbrook Publishing, Durango, Colorado

In addition to being available in book stores, I am taking orders as well.
(An opportunity for me to enhance my income a little, buying at author 
discount, and selling at full retail with the author's autograph).

Hardback $37.50.  Paperback $18.50.  Shipping will be $6 per book.  
California addresses must include local sales tax rate.  (Let me
know what the rate is where you are when you send the funds).

Autograph requests gladly complied with.  Please include street
address, as these will go out UPS.

Please send check and order to:
        
    Clayton E. Cramer
    7198 Camino Colegio
    Rohnert Park, CA 94928

I'm reluctant to guarantee Christmas delivery.

The format is 6" x 8.75".  It is 521 pages, including index.
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
Racism is "class struggle" applied to ethnicity.