Government & Constitution

Negroes and the Gun: A G&P conversation with the author

Negroes and the Gun: A G&P conversation with the author

A professor of law and author of “Negroes And The Gun” told Guns & Patriots his newly released book describes the mostly undocumented historical account of blacks bearing arms.

“I grew up in rural West Virginia.  Everybody I knew had guns,” said Nicholas J. Johnson a professor of law at Fordham University, a Jesuit college located in New York City.  In a score of scholarly articles Johnson has been covering the Second Amendment topic for the past 20 years.

“The book is an extension of my scholarships,” said the Harvard Law School graduate.

Historically blacks were targeted for gun control, he said. “It is explicit as early as 1680 in Colonial America.”

Similar targeted gun control was implemented in post-Civil War Black Codes, which contributed to the passage of the 14th Amendment, he said.

“Much of the conversation surrounding the passage of the 14th Amendment went to the problem of southern state governments who, in an essential act of war, were explicitly attempting to disarm freedmen.”  A freedman was a former slave who was legally released by emancipation or by owner.

Southern states enacted gun control statutes in the post-Civil War period that were de-facto racially motivated, said Johnson. “In the beginning of the 20th century discriminatory provisions were in effect in a variety of places.”

The people who fought against discriminatory practices are American heroes, said the writer for The Volokh Conspiracy a division of The Washington Post.

“Two U.S. Supreme Court cases that recently affirmed our right to keep and bear arms were led by black plaintiffs: Shelly Parker and Otis McDonald,” he said.  “Lots of people thought Parker and McDonald were dupes or fools. It turns out they were an extension of a long tradition of a sober, mature community having access to firearms.”

The book shows that up until the 1970s the image of gun ownership in the black community is more consistent with reality than what is in the popular news today, he said.

During the 1970s there was a new black political group gaining power in the urban context, said Johnson.“Lots of black politicians latched-on to the idea of supply side gun control as an answer to the crime and turmoil in environments that were taken over with gun violence; one can understand how they might have embraced those themes.”

But the promise that gun bans were the answer did not materialize, he said.

In places such as Washington and Chicago, where groups attempted to control supply, the guns did not disappear as expected, the guns were redistributed, he said. “Now the worst people in the community are armed and the best people in the community or not; they are afraid and under siege.”

The empirical work shows that communities end-up with an armed micro-culture which is typically a very small number of young men who are terrorizing communities, he said. Part of this suggests that supply controls were an experiment that did not pan-out.”

Ultimately we must recognize that supply control measures did not work, said Johnson, who is also co-author of “Firearms Law and the Second Amendment,” published in 2012. “In the U.S.A. today there are about 300 million guns.”

After the Heller decision overturned D.C.’s handgun ban a scholarly article suggested that targeted gun control be part of the modern civil rights movement, he said. “They were working to create carve-outs under Heller so that at least in certain black communities’ gun prohibition could be upheld as an exceptional necessity.”

Johnson said it is discriminatory that an acknowledged prerogative of citizenship is denied to the black community.  “The idea that certain communities are just too dangerous and these folks are not prepared for freedom is problematic.”

In relation to gun homicides, the data is fairly clear that the people who murder are extremely aberrant people, he said.

“The stereotype of someone who was otherwise showing no signals of any violent incidences sort-of ‘flying off the handle’ and becoming a murderer are repeated so often in the media people think it is a common thing, when it is actually an aberrant circumstance.”

False stereotypes cause a cultural divide between urban and rural dwellers, said Johnson.

City dwellers have a predisposition against gun rights, while in rural communities their image is much different, he said.  “It is culturally my experience that there are lots of good, honest, sober, mature gun owners.”

In rural America people see guns as tools to be used as a protective measure, whereas in urban areas people are quick to abandon their gun rights and instead – at their own risk – rely on the state’s protection, he said.

“The idea that a government actor is going to swoop-in and solve problems is a little more foreign to rural gun owners than in an urban context.”

Despite the strong evidence that suggest that armed, adult members of the community have the effect of providing an important disincentive to violent crimes, Blacks are still denied the ability to defend themselves, said Johnson.

“How do you tell people who live in a dangerous environment that they have to rely entirely on the state for personal security even though they know as a matter of physics that there is a window in which the state cannot respond?”

People can make their own decisions about their personal security, he said. “The firearm is an important tool in the process of securing our homes and family.”

Sign Up
  • Pingback: Political Blogs- Conservative and Progressive Blogs side by side

  • shay3780

    “undocumented”? so he is the only one with the “facts”,,,

  • gregio

    How refreshing to hear the simple logic of why there is a second amendment for the security of the family, and from a group that identifies with liberals, wonderful, another area of “common ground” for all. The MSM doesn’t like us finding “common ground”, they will find a way to divide us.

  • bondmen

    Please guard yourself sir from certain retribution from the liberal plantation, they hate being rejected and publicly told it ain’t so. However real Americans greatly appreciate your truth telling!

  • chuckie2u

    I dare say humans of all color and national origin are hardwired toward self preservation. Removing the preferrred defence weapon from the hands of Government controlled serfs is nothing new. In todays world those weapons make a loud bang and their missle travels faster than an arrow or sword.
    I have lived in and around rural folks who were a part of a gun culture all of my life. There were more folks killed by drunk drivers,hammers and knives than by guns.

  • robocop33

    So basically what you are saying is that the problem about firearms possession is between city folks who hate firearms and love Government and country folks who like firearms and are independant and care for themselves. Doesn’t really have anything to do with race after all, just ideology about self support or being a ward of the State!

  • vrahnos

    the way I see it is that gun control tends to backfire.So less of it would be a good thing for the more good people that are armed and know how to use a gun and pratice with it,there wouldn’t be so many problems.Sure violent offenders should not have any guns around them but those who are none violent should be able to have whatever gun they want with out all the hassels.

  • James Maxwell

    Regardless of Race, people have relied upon weapons of various types
    to provide food for their families and defend them from harm, same goes
    for pocket knives and machetes. Every Citizen has the right to own and
    possess these item if the desire providing they have committed not criminal
    acts that would prevent them from them. To deny them is criminal in itself
    and a violation of their 2nd Amendment rights. By the same token if you
    choose not to own them that also is your right as an American Citizen.


    Prior to the Civil War when tempers were flaring, Brown the zealot who lead slaves into rebellion wanted to arm his black contingent with spears because he did not think they could handle a firearm….this was abolitionist thinking at the time according to most history I have read…

  • millerstwo

    Gun control is an affront to our 2nd Amendment right, period. As described in this article, big cities like Chicago where the only the people without guns are the responsible law abiding Citizens who own them legally. Who cares if these honest citizens are black or white they are the one’s who really need them.
    Obama is as hell bent to take our guns as was Hitler in 1938 and by 1945 Hitler had rounded up and exterminated 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves. Russia from 1929-1953, 20 million exterminated. It’s been estimated that over 56 million totally defenseless people have been exterminated due to some form of Government imposed gun control.
    (“World Gun Control History” by Patriot 2000)
    So when the Government makes it sound as if their proposed gun control legislation is in your best interest, think of what Hitler and Stalin said to their sheep right before the slaughter. Obama and his ‘Brown Shirts’ hate the fact that our brilliant forefathers made gun control unconstitutional primarily so ‘we the people’ coukd defend ourselves against want to be tyrants like them !!!!!!

  • ReggieA

    You’re missing some information.

    The guns available at the time were all muzzle-loaders. Loading a muzzle-loading firearm is fairly complicated for the novice user. It would take some training time, which would be unavailable in the heat of battle; even a guerrilla action. There is also the problem of obtaining sufficient ammunition, even after you’ve bought the guns.

    On the other hand, a spear is easy to make (cheap), requires no ammunition, and requires minimal instruction in handling. If one were arming untrained civilians for immediate conflict, a spear would be the more practical weapon.


    Then what was the reason for Brown’s raid on the Springfield Armory? I don’t think it was to obtain spears.


    When Mao didn’t have enough guns for his troops, he armed them with spears. The Japanese trained women, boys, and old men to resist the American invasion with…spears.