Date: Mon, 29 May 1995 23:09:11 -0700
From: Jeff Chan <chan>
To: firearms-alert
Subject: INFO: Ken Barnes' RKBA quotes in archive


Ken Barnes has sent me his mass of historical quotes on arms
rights.  The file is about 314K and is in my archive as:

  research/rkba.quotes

The quotes range from antiquity through 1995.  Some excerpts 
are included below.  What is the advantage of his set of quotes
over others?  They've been checked; the uncertain ones are flagged.

Jeff Chan
Internet: chan@shell.portal.com
uucp mail: {apple,claris,pyramid}!shell.portal.com!chan
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
|         We should measure progress not by how many laws         |
|      can be passed but by how little governing people need.     |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
http://www.portal.com/~chan/firearms.faq.html   <- Firearms Info Guide
ftp://ftp.shell.portal.com/pub/chan/ or http://www.portal.com/~chan/ <- Archive
mailto:majordomo@shell.portal.com:  <- firearms, liberty mailing lists
__

[If you can help with researching these quotes or have other
authoritatively researched quotes to add, please contact Ken
Barnes at the address below.  Contact us also if you'd like to
help html-ize this info.      I've joined the separate messages 
he sent into one large file including his note to me.  -- Jeff C.]
__

From: KEBARNES@MSUVX1.MEMPHIS.EDU
Date: Mon, 29 May 1995 22:53:38 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Hi!
To: chan@shell.portal.com

Jeff,

  Well, I've mailed you four huge files which comprise my
recent researches in tracking down RKBA-related quotations.
All totaled, I think there's something like a HALF A MEG
of quotations and/or extended excerpts and/or complete
e-text documents.  I haven't "beautified it" yet, and I
really think that it would be great to build the quotes
into an HTML formatted document of its own, which would
allow the user to flip through the salient RKBA-related
portions, and then click on a quote and see the context
(indeed the full e-text, if it's provided).  As it is
now, the quotes are rather unwieldy unless you just enjoy
reading documentary history (as I have in researching
this).  I also can't find some of the sources, or identify
some of the writers, but I'd love to have a means for
people out there who have other RKBA quote collections
to submit their stuff for additions to the files, or to
help with the research (in terms of getting hold of texts
that I can't access here).

[...]

Ken B.
__

From: KEBARNES@MSUVX1.MEMPHIS.EDU
Date: Mon, 29 May 1995 22:36:50 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [Commonplace Quotations]
To: chan@shell.portal.com


An Arsenal of Commonplace Quotations in context (rev. 5/22/95)
compiled, annotated, and arranged chronologically by Ken Barnes
---------------------------------------------------------------

"A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of 
acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps 
both.  Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to 
be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which 
knowledge gives."
-=(James Madison, letter to W. T. Barry, August 4, 1822)=-


ANTIQUITY

"When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace."
--Luke ch.11 v.21-22 (King James translation, 1611 AD)

"He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one."
--Luke ch.22 v.36 (King James translation, 1611 AD)
<<Jesus speaks to his disciples concerning self-defense.>>

[...]

   "Every Communist must grasp the truth, 'Political power grows out of 
the barrel of a gun.'  Our principle is that the [Communist] Party 
commands the gun and the gun will never be allowed to command the Party."
--Mao Tse-tung (1893-1976), "Problems of War and Strategy," November 6, 
1938, in_Selected Works of Mao Zedong_(1965)

[...]

   "No appearance for appellees.
   In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use 
of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at 
this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or 
efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second 
Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.  
Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part 
of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to 
the common defense. * * *
   The Militia which the States were expected to maintain and train is 
set in contrast with Troops which they were forbidden to keep without the 
consent of Congress.  The sentiment of the time strongly disfavored 
standing armies; the common view was that adequate defense of the country 
and laws could be secured through the Militia --civilians primarily, 
soldiers on occasion.
   The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the 
debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of the Colonies 
and States, and the writings of approved commentators.  These show 
plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of 
acting in concert for the common defense. 'A body of citizens enrolled 
for military discipline.'  And further, that when ordinarily called for 
service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by 
themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."
--U.S. Supreme Court Justice McReynolds, writing in _U.S. v. Miller,_ 
U.S. Reports v.307 p.174, Supreme Court Reporter v.59 p.816, Lawyer's 
Edition v.83 p.1206 (1939)  <<The Court's decision in the _Miller_ case 
is ambiguous, in part because the apellee had died before the case 
reached the Court, and the Court was only presented with the government's 
side of the story.  The Court, thus understandably upheld the National 
Firearms Act of 1934 as constitutional, but not before setting the 
precedent that it is weapons having a "resonable relationship" to a well 
regulated militia which the Second Amendment protects the right of the 
people to keep and bear.  The dicta in the case also indicates that the 
Court recognized this as an individual right.>>

[...]

   "The Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms therefore, is a 
right of the individual citizen to privately possess and carry in a 
peaceful manner firearms and similar arms.  Such an 'individual rights' 
interpretation is in full accord with the history of the right to keep 
and bear arms, as previously discussed.  It is moreover in accord with 
contemporaneous statements and formulations of the right by such founders 
of this nation as Thomas Jefferson and Samuel Adams, and accurately 
reflects the majority of the proposals which led up to the Bill of Rights 
itself.  A number of state constitutions, adopted prior to or 
contemporaneously with the federal Constitution and Bill of rights, 
similarly provided for a right of the people to keep an bear arms.  If in 
fact this language creates a right protecting the states only, there 
might be a reason for it to be inserted in the federal Constitution but 
no reason for it to be inserted in state constitutions.  State bills of 
rights necessarily protect only against action by the state, and by 
definition a state cannot infringe its own rights; to attempt to protect 
a right belonging to a state by inserting it in a limitation of the 
state's own powers would create an absurdity.  The fact that the 
contemporaries of the framers did insert these words into several state 
constitutions would indicate clearly that they viewed the right as 
belonging to the individual citizen, thereby making it a right which 
could be infringed either by state or federal government and which must 
be protected from infringement by both. * * *
   The conclusion is thus inescapable that the history, concept, and 
wording of the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States, 
as well as its interpretation by every major commentator and court in the 
first half-century after its ratification, indicates that what is 
protected is an individual right of a private citizen to own and carry 
firearms in a peaceful manner."
--conclusion, Subcommittee on the Constitution of the Senate Judiciary 
Committee, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), chairman, in the Report of the 
Subcommittee On The Constitution of the Committee On The Judiciary, 
United States Senate, 97th Congress, second session (February, 1982), 
SuDoc# Y4.J 89/2: Ar 5/5

[...]

"The fights I fought... cost a lot --the fight for the assault-weapons 
ban cost 20 members their seats in Congress.  The NRA is the reason the 
Republicans control the House."
--President Bill Clinton, Cleveland Plain-Dealer, January 14, 1995

"If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for 
an_out_right_ban, picking up every one of them... "Mr. and Mrs. America, 
turn 'em all in," I would have done it.  I_could_not do that.  The votes 
weren't here."
--U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), CBS-TV's "60 Minutes," February 
5, 1995 <<Feinstein is speaking about her authorship of the 1994 "assault 
weapons" ban which restricted certain types of military-looking 
semiautomatic rifles and shotguns, but did not confiscate them 
(apparently contrary to her intentions).>>

[...]