New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-05-26
CARRYING WEAPONS.

There could be no more proper conf
ment upon our proposition that society
will have exactly such an administration
of the laws as its own standard of order
demands, than the general complaint
against wearing deadly weapons. We
may safely conjecture that somewhat the
anne proportion Of people wear arms in
New Orleans that do not wear arms in
Boston. We can not explain why this is
so, save that it is here the custom of the
country to wear arms. But why this is
the case we can not answer. Perhaps
the failure of the jury system to punish
for the ofense of killing, as alleged by the
leading press Of our city. may dispose men
the more to carry their own protection
with them. The Picayune commenting
upon the evils Of the practice, attributes
it greatly ''to the weakness of our local
government, and the ineficiency of our
laws to protect the lives of citizens"
We suppose no police, whether under
the control of the city authorities or not,
could be relied on to arrest this practice.
1t would amount to opening every mans
vest and inspecting his pistol pocket, and
this attempt would furnish the silent tes-
timony Of many dead policemen to prove
that the practice had not been and could
not be arrested.
Indeed, we had one notable Case in
which an attemp. to prevent the use OF
weapons came very near discriminating
the police. 1t consisted in the effort to
capture the weapons subsequently used
in the affair of the fourteenth of Septem-
ber, 1874. Every one must remem-
Der that the attempt of the police to
protect the lives of the people by the
seizure of these weapons was re-
sisted, on the cons titutional guarantee
that ''the right of the people to keep and
to bear arms shall not be infringed.
We always accorded the fullest enjoy
went of this right. 1t would be, in our
opinion, only when the preparation of
arms was an act of overt instruction
that any government would have the
right or responsibility to intervene to
prevent the abuse of the constitutional
right of the people.
There was o.ice fashion, common to
all civilized people, to wear a sword at
the side. Street trays were then of COM
mon occurrence, and duels took place by
the thousand. The royal courts were the
frequent scenes of these conflicts, and
the clash of RAJ iers invaded the hearing
of the monarch himself The wearing
of these weapons was, perhaps, rem
dered proper by the insecurity Of
life and property. 1t was the fault of the
government that this was the case. Yet
the government was sometimes compelled
to forbid the wearing Of weapons within
the purlieus of the court. The evil of
wearing arms can alone be corrected, like |
any other social abuse, by social con-
demnation. Temperance societies may
restrict the abuse of strong drink. Anti |
gaming associations may protect men
from the devices of bunko, and calico |
dresses abate the cost Of fashionable ap-
parel. 1t is through public opinion alone
that the laws can be enforced, and while |
the courts and the Council will no doubt |
do their duty to prevent or punish the |
practice of wearing arms, they may be
greatly aided by a general disarmament |
among those who carry revolvers, bowie |
or gimlet knives.
There can be no doubt that the uni
versal practice of discussing personal |
questions in drinking saloons, incident
ally furnish a dangerous stimulant to acts
Of violence. Society will find in all the |
inf1uen ces adverted to causes more or less
potent to produce the fatal collisions
constantly occurring, and it will be by
reforming all these tendencies that So
ciety can alone correct the dangerous
practice of wearing concealed weapons