Tag: slaves

The first American gun control law: the Second Amendment

Posted on by kathiemm

Second AmendmentThe arms manufacturers and the NRA lobbyists have it all backwards. The Second Amendment was not created to guarantee an individual right to bear and use arms for whatever purposes desired. Instead, the Amendment can be considered the nation’s first national gun control law, designed to keep arms out of the hands of insurrectionists.

The Second Amendment’s national gun control effort was preceded by state gun control laws. For example, in the 1750s, Georgia statutes required slave patrol militias to make monthly searches of “all Negro Houses for offensive Weapons and Ammunition,” that is, to keep guns out of the hands of slaves.

Although James Madison’s original wording of the Second Amendment stressed the importance of “a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country,” the word “country” was replaced by “state,” in order to win the approval of Virginia and other slave-owning states for the new Constitution.

In its final wording–“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”)–the Second Amendment:

  • Granted the federal government the right to use armed militias to protect the security of the new nation, and
  • Left untouched the state right to use militias to prevent slaves from obtaining and using weapons.

To learn more, read this article or watch this powerful interview with Thom Hartman.

For more than 100 years, the judgments of state and federal courts as well as the United States Supreme Court held sway: the Second Amendment did not guarantee an individual’s right to buy and use guns outside the context of a state-controlled militia.

Then as recently as 1977, at a meeting of the National Rifle Association, a concerted effort was undertaken by ultraconservatives to sell the country on a reframed version of the Second Amendment establishing those rights.

The arms industry has now gained control over enough of the government to usurp arms control, undermining the democratic processes by which ordinary citizens seek to reinstate reasonable restrictions on weapons sales.

So ask yourself, do you want arms manufacturers rewriting our history and our Constitution, especially when their lobbying has contributed to the U.S. having the world’s highest gun fatality rate?

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology

African models for nonviolent resolution

Posted on by kathiemm

Third in a series by guest author Mbaezue Emmanuel Chukwuemeka

Indigenous African dispute resolution mechanisms, introduced in my previous post, include efforts to utilize elders in resolving disputes peacefully. In Rwanda, where the Gacaca system predominated in efforts to resolve issues relating to the 1994 Rwandan Genocide, the traditional role of elders known as Iyangamugayo was emphasized.

The Iyangamugayo were men possessing great wisdom, altruism, and political and economic influence. They encouraged dialogue rather than violence among disputants. The Gacaca system, which was the only justice system in Rwanda before the days of colonialism, ensured distributive justice in society, without necessarily employing the use of violence.

Somalia, regarded by many today as one of the most dangerous places on earth, once employed a system known as Xeer Somaali for nonviolent means for resolving disputes.

Using customary laws, the Somalis, like the Rwandans, had elders (the Guurti or Ergada) who presided over the peaceful resolution of disputes among clans. This system worked particularly well during the days of the Islamic Council Union (ICU), where the role of clan elders was combined with Islamic principles to achieve stability and peace. The system eventually crumbled when Ethiopian forces overthrew the Islamic Council Union (ICU). However, some individuals still believe that the days of the ICU were the most peaceful ones Somalia has ever witnessed.

From all indications, Africa’s role models or programs for the non-violent resolution of disputes remain her precolonial indigenous dispute resolution mechanisms. I am not saying that all African cultural practices before the coming of Western civilization were good. There were some terrible cultural practices like the killing of twins, human sacrifices, and female circumcision.

The role of modernization

Nevertheless, I do suggest that using violence to resolve disputes and pursue goals in Africa actually started with “modernization.” It was “modernization” that first saw the exchange of slaves for gunpowder in colonial Africa. It was “modernization” that made possible the first-ever introduction of Africans to the weapons of the modern-day battlefield including weapons of mass destruction (Hiroshima and Nagasaki).

It was also modernization, under the guise of today’s capitalism, that overthrew the African socialist system that guaranteed the equitable distribution of resources, introducing instead a system that thrives on the exploitation of one class by another, a situation that ultimately leads to a violent confrontation.

Mbaezue Emmanuel Chukwuemeka has a Master of Science in Conflict Management and Peace Studies from University of Jos, Jos, Plateau State. He is a member of the Institute of Chartered Mediators and Conciliators, and works as a paralegal counsel at the Legal Aid Council for the Federal Ministry of Justice in Nigeria.

In honor of President Lincoln: Moving towards freedom

Posted on by kathiemm

[Note from Kathie Malley-Morrison: Today we welcome the first of several contributions by our guest contributor Majed Ashy. Dr. Ashy is an assistant professor of psychology at Merrimack College and a research fellow in psychiatry at McLean Hospital/Harvard Medical School. He was born in Lebanon and is a Saudi Arabian. He earned his B.A, M.A, and Ph.D. in psychology from Boston University. His research in psychoneuroimmunology and political psychology focuses on childhood experience of adversity and its psychobiological consequences. He authored the Saudi Arabia chapter in State Violence and the Right to Peace: An International Survey of the Views of Ordinary People Greenwood Publishing Group / Praeger series. He is contributing several chapters to two volumes to be published by Springer Publishing Co.: Handbook on War, Torture, and Terrorism, and Handbook on Protest, Peace, Reconciliation, Apology, and Forgiveness.]

By Majed Ashy, Guest Author

Two arguments are presented repeatedly in discussions of the evolution of democracy in the Middle East: “Arabs are not ready for democracy,” and “If Arabs get more democratic rights, then some Islamic extremists will come to power and that is a threat to the whole world.”

Army trucks surrounding Tahrir Square, Cairo
Army trucks surrounding Tahrir Square, Cairo (Photo by Ramy Raoof; licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic; from Wikimedia Commons)

I heard similar alarmist arguments against women’s suffrage, African American civil rights movements, and Black liberation in South Africa. President Lincoln, whose birthday is this week, did not accept the arguments against freeing the slaves in America, but millions of people still lack freedom.

With advancements in communication technologies, Internet resources, social networks, media, satellite TV stations, and international travel, the evolution in individual empowerment and the rise of social collective awareness are natural consequences. Masses of people are rejecting as self serving and racist the “old” narratives about the necessity of oppression.

One of the problems faced in the Middle East is the communication gap between governments and the general populations. Many Middle Eastern governments are still using a “language” that does not speak to people who are educated, aware, and able to see through the narratives of oppression. The image of men on camels and horses in Tahrir square in Cairo beating protesters summarize this divide.

We have in the Middle East youth who represent the future, are linked through the Internet to people all over the world, watch satellite TV stations from almost every country, and call for human rights. On the other side we have people who come from the ancient past and deal with their problems by riding camels and beating people up.

The current conflict in the Middle East is about narratives. One narrative that has not been given a chance yet is that the Middle East can evolve into a responsible democracy that takes into account human rights, international law, and democracy. All lovers of freedom and democracy should respect and help sustain this effort.

Majed Ashy