DU Historians please help me out

[malaise]

How did local, state and the Federal government deal with controlling guns in the wild west? I sure watched lots of movies where guns weren't allowed in towns. Are gun laws today are more lax than they were back then?

Is there a good book I can read?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

1. I think I found the problem here --

I sure watched lots of movies...

The most famous case was in Tombstone but there was not a general prohibition on owning guns, just wearing them through town. Nor was this a widespread practice in other jurisdictions. The ordinance was never tested in the courts and please keep in mind they also had an anti-Chinese league so maybe they are not the best icon for "We did it in the past so we can do it again now" arguments.

[Rose Siding]

4. Maybe it wasn't tested in courts because people saw it as a reasonable way to be safer.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

6. Perhaps, but they also thought exercising overt racism against the Chinese also kept them safer.

People think many things.

[Rose Siding]

8. That's not the kind of logic I'd hang my hat on

Ted Bundy wore pants. He was also a serial killer.

Still, doesn't mean the pants thing was a bad idea.

Can't wait for a purist to come up with all the solutions.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

9. There is no connection to Bundy wearing pants and his crimes.

However, the topic of these last several days has included whether or not POC are subject to race-based discrimination.

Yet, because of the acts of Micah Johnson that discussion has been derailed and many vices are attempting to shift the narrative to talks about guns.

Alton Sterling was carrying a gun. However, it appears he was not reaching for the gun but he was also illegally in possession of a gun because he is a convicted felon.

Philando Castile was carrying a gun. He was legally entitled to do so. He was shot by a Hispanic officer who contends Mr. Castile was reaching for the gun.

Eric Garner was unarmed. He was choked to death even though all the evidence shows he made no effort to resist his arrest.

Michael Brown was shot and the DOJ's report confirms the officer's account that Mr. Brown was facing the officer, perhaps even charging the officer, and was not surrendering.

So far, the only connection between any of these incidents is the fact gun control advocates want to use them to deny people their rights.

[Rose Siding]

29. All of which has exactly nothing to do with a town having sensible gun laws applied to everyone

[Nuclear Unicorn]

30. What gun law would have stopped any of the killings by or of the police?

[Squinch]

26. I just got a mental image of a lot of heavily armed, pants-less men running around

practicing their "militia" moves.

Great post.

[oneshooter]

33. In all cattle towns there was a railroad line thru the town.

One side was the "good" side of town, where people lived, worked, and lived. Firearms could, and were carried here.

On the other side was the cattle yards, saloons and brothels, the "wrong side of the tracks". This is were the guns were turned in to the local Constabulary, to be picked up when the drovers left town to return to the ranches.

[rug]

2. Santorum claimed everyone in the West had guns. Three Pinocchios.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2014/04/29/rick-santorums-misguided-view-of-gun-control-in-the-wild-west/



http://www.wideopenspaces.com/10-misconceptions-guns-wild-west-pics/

[malaise]

7. Thanks rug

[panader0]

11. Well, open carry is legal in Tombstone these days.

There was an incident some months ago where one of the actors, known as
Tombstone Vigilantes, left a live round in his pistol and accidently shot a
fellow actor. The shows were cancelled for a while. But anyone can carry in
Tombstone these days. Some of the bars prohibit firearms. I live about 25 miles away.

[malaise]

12. Stay safe

[Mendocino]

3. Adam Winkler UCLA law prof

wrote Gunfight:The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America.

[malaise]

5. Thanks Mendocino

[treestar]

17. Thanks, I'm going to check that out

[jmg257]

10. "Wild West" not so wild...and it seems the govt had little to do with that...

The Culture of Violence in the American West: Myth versus Reality
By Thomas J. DiLorenzo
This article appeared in the Fall 2010 issue of The Independent Review

Contrary to popular perception, the Old West was much more peaceful than American cities are today. The real culture of violence on the frontier during the latter half of the nineteenth century sprang from the U.S. government’s policies toward the Plains Indians.
...
In contrast, an alternative literature based on actual history concludes that the civil society of the American West in the nineteenth century was not very violent. Eugene Hollon writes that the western frontier “was a far more civilized, more peaceful and safer place than American society today” (1974, x). Terry Anderson and P. J. Hill affirm that although “[t]he West . . . is perceived as a place of great chaos, with little respect for property or life,” their research “indicates that this was not the case; property rights were protected and civil order prevailed. Private agencies provided the necessary basis for an orderly society in which property was protected and conflicts were resolved” (1979, 10)."

http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?a=803

[malaise]

13. Thanks

I'm trying to figure out how it has reached here

[jmg257]

15. Understood. Worth giving some thought to! nt

[Ilsa]

27. "Private agencies pridded the ...

necessary basis for an orderly society in which property was protected and conflicts were resolved” (1979, 10).

So people had to individually pay for protection, vs having a commons?

[Kaleva]

14. When I was young, it was ok to take guns to school during bird and deer season.

Long guns were common but the only family that I knew who had a handgun was friend whose father was a WWII vet and he had a German Luger.

[hunter]

16. My great grandmas were wild west.

They didn't tolerate fools with guns and they were the only law that mattered. Fools and their guns were soon parted.

As a child on several occasions I witnessed my mom going full Berserker on fools with guns. (I may be a little PTSD about it.)

My mom's grandma owned the original family homestead. She regarded hunters from the city as a lower life form that endangered her children, cattle, and dogs. She once told me a very un-great-grandmotherly story about a hunter she confronted as he was taking a runny shit. Poor fellow got the hell out of there and drove back home soiling the seat of his fancy truck.

My name is Hunter, and yes, I've hunted animals for dinner, but I still think most people with guns are fools, the police included.

I live in an exceptionally violent U.S. city. It's "Wild West" in a different way. The police are perpetually understaffed and don't respond promptly to calls unless someone is dead, bleeding profusely, or on fire. For most anything else they'll ask you to file a report on their internet site, or if you can't do that, to come down to the station to file your report in person. Visiting the station is a trip. The clerks sit behind bullet proof glass, you sign in, and wait for your name to be called. The people you are waiting with are far more diverse than the "Group W" bench of Alice's Restaurant.

I've confronted people with guns, I've been confronted by people with guns, and I've seen shootings. When my kids were young, and we were living in a rougher neighborhood, we were out playing in the yard one day. I heard an angry confrontation near our house and saw, over the fence, a police officer shoot a man in the chest. I was glad my kids couldn't see over the fence. We followed our usual gunfire drill of retreating to the back bedroom to play on the floor until it was all over. The guy I saw shot that day lived. Our paramedics and emergency rooms are well practiced with gunshot victims. But the same guy was killed a few years later by a rival gang.

I've never been in a situation that might have turned out better had I been carrying a gun. Once the guns come out everything is FUBAR, and outcomes are pretty random and grim no matter who has the guns, "good" guy or bad. I've no desire to participate in that sort of madness.

[beevul]

18. " I still think most people with guns are fools". That explains it.

You have your mind made up, about the better part of 100 millionish people that you've never met, simply because they own a gun.

[hunter]

21. Well, take for example the police...

... you'd think their use of guns would be entirely appropriate, beyond reproach, right?

I think guns are a public health problem, like smoking.

The fewer people smoke, the better.

The fewer people have guns, the better.

Gun fetishes are unhealthy.

[beevul]

22. Good example.

Well, take for example the police... you'd think their use of guns would be entirely appropriate, beyond reproach, right?

Why would I think that, since police themselves have never been beyond reproach?

I think guns are a public health problem, like smoking.

The fewer people smoke, the better.

The fewer people have guns, the better.

I think people with control issues are a bigger public health problem.

Gun fetishes are unhealthy.

Not nearly as unhealthy as control issues.

[hunter]

23. What are you talking about???

Are you afraid my mom's gonna take your guns?

Are you afraid I'm going to take your guns?

I don't even know you.

But yeah, if you have what I consider a "gun fetish," I do think that's unhealthy.

Same as smoking, same as drunk driving, same as a lot of other things that were once socially acceptable but no longer are.

[beevul]

24. Thats right. You don't even know me.

I don't even know you.

Thats right. You don't even know me. Just like you don't even know the 100 millionish people that own guns. That doesn't stop you from having your mind made up that they're 'foolish' though, does it.

But yeah, if you have what I consider a "gun fetish," I do think that's unhealthy.

Since people like you are never real clear on exactly how you define "gun fetish", and we both know that you wont be specific about it now, there doesn't seem much point in addressing it any further.

[hunter]

28. Do you imagine using your guns for self defense or as a means of projecting your authority?

Do you enjoy youtube videos celebrating the same?

Can you imagine yourself shooting a "bad guy?"

What does that "bad guy" living in your head look like?

Do you debate people like me on DU, "defending" your guns from our insults?

Are you a member of the NRA?

Do you talk about guns the way some unappealing men talk about women's breasts?

I could go on if you like...

[beevul]

32. No, I imagine them keeping the coyotes from eating my little furry ones, as they have in the past.

Do you imagine using your guns for self defense or as a means of projecting your authority?

No, I imagine them keeping the coyotes from eating my little furry ones, as they have in the past.

Do you enjoy youtube videos celebrating the same?

No, but I enjoy a good sasquatch sighting video from time to time.

Can you imagine yourself shooting a "bad guy?"

When the bad guy is a coyote, I sure can.

What does that "bad guy" living in your head look like?

I'd ask you the same question, but I already know the answer: Someone that owns guns.

In my world, on the other hand, 'bad guys' are only "bad" based on their behavior rather than their looks.

Do you debate people like me on DU, "defending" your guns from our insults?

No, I debate people like you on DU to try to keep reality afloat amongst a storm of anti-gun lunacy.

Are you a member of the NRA?

Nope, but I was once for a year when I was a kid, being that a years membership came free with the gun safety course I took.

Do you talk about guns the way some unappealing men talk about women's breasts?

No, but now that you mention it, there are a few folks around here who talk about gun owners similar to how you describe.

Maybe you could ask them.

I could go on if you like...

That's nice bunky, but all you have to go on with is your own misplaced hatred, which you are more than welcome to continue to demonstrate.

[hunter]

35. I've got plenty of experience with coyotes. My mom's favorite dog got eaten by one when I was a kid.

We'd lose a few outdoor cats to coyotes too, and they'd occasionally grab a chicken.

My wife and I now live on the edge of the city, a short walk from the strawberry fields, beyond that, cattle ranches. One of the dogs in our current pack (all shelter rescues) has coyote scars she got while living rough. She hates coyotes. The coyotes here, suffering centuries of persecution, are damned near invisible. Our dogs always notice them lurking about before we do.

When my parents owned a small farm it was the moron dog owners, new to their McMansion mini-Ranchettes built on former citrus orchards, their dogs who did more damage to our livestock and poultry than coyotes. Fucking neighbor dogs.

I've never shot a coyote. I've never shot at a coyote. It's futile. Take one down and two sneakier, more invisible, coyotes will replace it.

Better to develop some kind of relationship with neighborhood coyotes.

I'm an organic gardener too.

[malaise]

20. Nice post

Thanks hunter

[Are_grits_groceries]

34. My grandmamas and aunts weren't Wild West,

but they didn't tolerate fools with guns either. If we were handling one, we knew we better do it right too.
A lot of people hunted but most had some sense. They were neighbors and relatives. Nobody wanted to cross my relatives. A lot of people didn't tolerate being lax with guns.
These days people are much more leery. A lot still practice and teach gun safety, but there are more and more who don't. In addition, more fools from the city are out and about. You can wear blaze orange and apparently some think that's a new type of deer.

One night I was at my aunt's and she heard somebody shooting near the house. People knew that she didn't mind hunting but they better let her know and also stay away from the house. She gets her rifle and goes out on the front porch and fires a few rounds high into the woods.
Then she hollered, "You better come out now or I'm gonna aim lower." We heard this voice say, "Don't shoot Aunt Mae." It was one of our cousins who was a fool and still is. He never did that again.

[beevul]

19. Well, we know what they didn't do.

Seeing as there was no ATF, no background check system or background checks, no prohibited persons, criminals who served out their sentence were generally given their guns back when they left jail, etc etc.

[Igel]

25. No, there are a few websites.

The place to look for this answer is in SCOTUS decisions. It's really a simple matter.

In the 1800s and early 1900s there were some decisions that found having local governments ban gun was Constitutional. It was the same Constitution as today, except that it's changed because it's "living." Well, no, that's not it, but that's what some would say.

1A said no state religion, but in the colonies even after the Constitution there were state religions. There were laws based explicitly on religion, that violated due process, that inhibited free speech or freedom of the press. The US Constitution did not apply to states or counties or towns.

After the Civil War amendments were made to the Constitution. One was interpreted increasingly as forcing provisions of the US Constitution down to local governments. This was still working its way through the system into the 1960s. It's the basis for the US Constitutional provision of equal process and due process being applied to, say, voting rights. But this trickling down took many decades, and it trickled down not based on any great principle but court case by court case.

So in the late 1800s the 2A was held to apply to the Federal government. It was not held to apply to state and local governments. The issue was raised in SCOTUS decisions into the 1930s, but in every case the court did not address whether the 2A was an individual or collective right because it didn't need to. The 2A didn't apply to local and state governments, so there was no cause to deal with that issue. When people argue that the courts didn't find that the 2A was an individual right until the 1990s, they're partly right, but they're arguing pretty much from silence. The courts were pretty much mum on the issue because the 2A wasn't held to apply to the level where gun restrictions were imposed. Oddly, most of the other amendments were passed down to lower levels of government, but SCOTUS simply didn't deal with the 2A issue. There was a gap of decades between such decisions because most local governments either enacted limited restrictions or most people considered the restrictions reasonable. Challenging authority for the sake of being an extremist or just challenging authority wasn't the norm, there was no fear that all guns would be banned and no calls to ban all or even just most guns.

The Federal government had no real gun control laws in the wild west. It banned fully automatic weapons many decades ago, in the 20th century, but the courts allowed that such lethal rarities were limited enough and the government's interest in banning them great enough that no Constitutional violation occurred. We infringe on all other liberties using the same kind of metric.


So the laws aren't more lax now, that's precisely backwards. The Constitution was more lax in the 1800s. The Constitution was held to be of more limited application back then. What allowed gun-banning in the "wild west" also allowed sundown laws--the Constitutional 2A and due process provisions were restraints on Federal, not state or local, government. In reining in states from doing things we don't like, we either follow the principle that Constitutional protections apply at all levels and we rein in the states from doing things we might like, or we decide that we'll pick and choose which Constitutional protections we actually want to enforce based entirely upon personal whim and preference.

[malaise]

36. Thanks for a great response

SCOTUS decisions - makes sense

[Recursion]

31. The murder rate in the "wild west" was always significantly lower than the East

It's just one of those things; the quickdraw caught writers' imaginations (hell, it captures mine), but you were safer in Cheyenne in 1880 than you were in Philadelphia.