Defensive Carry banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
448 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
If I understand history correctly, it's ironic that one of the most famous shootouts in the Wild West, the OK Corral, began when law enforcement (Wyatt Earp and friends) tried to enforce what would be (post-Heller) an unconstitutional firearm ban in Tombstone AZ. The "good guys" were actually enforcing an illegal law! That would make the Cowboys (Clantons), in this shootout, victims (though they certainly weren't "innocent"). History paints a strange hue over the facts sometimes.

Any other episodes like this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,837 Posts
Heller reinforced the right to own guns, not to carry them in any particular place either open or concealed. The Tombstone law wasn't against owning guns, rather against carrying them around town.

Sorry, that law would still fly today.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
448 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Since I think the law required everyone to leave their firearms at the sheriff's office, which was in town, anyone who tried to comply with that would have to break the law to bring guns INTO town to the office. And what about anyone who was simply passing through town? What we would today consider transit exceptions. Since there weren't any volume of lawyers in that day, the law was pretty much whatever suited the lawmen. Had the Supreme Court even weighed in on ANY 2A cases then? If not, it seems like ANY law that kept anyone from BEARING arms (not just owning) was unconstitutional. Unless of course you were a freed slave or Mexican or Indian.

Granted, the Earps and Clantons were really looking for any excuse to butt heads. Whether anything was legal or not was probably irrelevant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
473 Posts
Doesnt the phrase "Right to Bear Arms" mean the samething as the Right to Carry Arms ?? Essentially thats what it should mean, to bear something would mean to have it on you, no ???:scratchchin:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,227 Posts
I have always thought that to be ironic. I also think it is ironic how the folks in eastern US were infatuated with shootouts in the "Wild West" when in reality during the same time frame there were way more shootouts in the east.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,458 Posts
I have always thought that to be ironic. I also think it is ironic how the folks in eastern US were infatuated with shootouts in the "Wild West" when in reality during the same time frame there were way more shootouts in the east.
I'm pretty sure there always have been and probably always will be more shootings in the east than out west. Especially if they keep trying to ban guns. Although California might give them a run for their money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
182 Posts
Arizona wasn't a state untill 1912. One could argue that the constitution didn't apply.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
420 Posts
It's my understanding that there wasn't anything close to a "good guy" in that whole feud. It's also well known that Earp was a brilliant manipulator of his media image, and that much of what is "known" about him has a tenuous at best connection to the truth.

This topic also reminds me that I "need" to buy a coach gun. Some guns make sense, some are just too cool to not have.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
473 Posts
This topic also reminds me that I "need" to buy a coach gun. Some guns make sense, some are just too cool to not have.
+2 on that !! I would love to have one myself. I think Uberti came out with a nice coachgun replica, though i cant remember for sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Heller reinforced the right to own guns, not to carry them in any particular place either open or concealed. The Tombstone law wasn't against owning guns, rather against carrying them around town.

Sorry, that law would still fly today.
You're right, but its because the Clantons and their 'help' were known criminals, and today would be unable to legally possess weapons anyway. The "Wild West" equivalent of LAPD having a shootout with illegally armed gang-bangers, while trying to disarm them peacefully.

Nonetheless, when I read the majority opinion on the Heller case, it was quite clearly stated more than once that the Right to Keep and Bear Arms meant the right to carry a weapon for protection.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
473 Posts
Probably why its legal to OC in most states, even though nowadays society has been brain-washed to be afraid of the gun.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
10,182 Posts
I remember talking to my grandfather about shoot outs.... since he lived then. He said most people had no use for handguns, only rifles. Those that did own handguns usually owned only single shots. In Wichita, he only saw "one" (the area all the bars, etc of the time were and where Wyatt Earp patrolled) , 2 guys got arguing and went outside to shoot it out.... both had single shots. He showed me exactly where this occurred. They began shooting at each other and that went on for about 1 1/2 hrs with them ducking behind horse troughs, etc. until one of them finally wounded the other in the arm. Fight over.

Ironically, I did some research and found an article in the newspaper of those times and it described it just about like he did (but with names and more info), and at the same location he pointed out to me.

When in Tombstone at the museum they had a gun marked as Wyatt Earp's at the time of the OK Corral. My grandfather asked for the curator and told him that gun wasn't even made until about 5 yrs after the OK corral. They looked it up in a large book of guns and found out he was right. It couldn't have been Wyatt Earp's at the time of the OK corral.

Most lawmen at those times, played both sides of the law.

In some places, some of them still do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
272 Posts
This topic also reminds me that I "need" to buy a coach gun. Some guns make sense, some are just too cool to not have.
Man, I have totally got to agree. I dont NEED a coach gun, I just really want one! Its the same reason I want a AK. Dont need it, have no real use for it, I just want one.

ALex!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,837 Posts
Nonetheless, when I read the majority opinion on the Heller case, it was quite clearly stated more than once that the Right to Keep and Bear Arms meant the right to carry a weapon for protection.
Well, the Heller decision was only about D.C.'s laws against having guns in the home, so the decision really only specifically acknowledged a right to have guns in the home for defense in federal territory.

It will be all the follow-on suits using Heller as a precedent that get that decision fleshed out. And I can't wait until Maryland's "may issue" law falls by the wayside as a violation of equal protection (once we get incorporation, of course...).
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top