ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Gun Control and the Old West

Updated on December 4, 2014
Dodge City
Dodge City | Source
Dalton Gang
Dalton Gang | Source
Dodge City police comission
Dodge City police comission | Source
Krupp Arms factory, WWI
Krupp Arms factory, WWI | Source
Tombstone, 1891
Tombstone, 1891 | Source

Did the gun settle the west?

Most claim it was the gun that settled the “Wild West”, so here’s some interesting reading to that point...

From the Daily Kos;

“Not according to Katherine Benton-Cohen, history professor at Georgetown University.

In an article she posted in Politico immediately after the Gabrielle Giffords' shooting in Tucson in January, 2011, she argues that many people have the lesson of Tombstone all wrong, that Tombstone was NOT a place of carefree gun usage and wild shootouts (except for the obvious one):

"The irony ... is that Tombstone lawmakers in the 1880s did more to combat gun violence than the Arizona government does today.
For all the talk of the “Wild West,” the policymakers of 1880 Tombstone—and many other Western towns—were ardent supporters of gun control. When people now compare things to the “shootout at the OK Corral,” they mean vigilante violence by gunfire. But this is exactly what the Tombstone town council had been trying to avoid.
In late 1880, as regional violence ratcheted up, Tombstone strengthened its existing ban on concealed weapons to outlaw the carrying of any deadly weapons within the town limits. The Earps (who were Republicans) and Doc Holliday maintained that they were acting as law officers—not citizen vigilantes—when they shot their opponents. That is to say, they were sworn officers whose jobs included enforcement of Tombstone’s gun laws. Yet this is all based on a widely shared misunderstanding of the Wild West. Frontier towns -- places like Tombstone, Deadwood, and Dodge -- actually had the most restrictive gun control laws in the nation.
In fact, many of those same cities have far less burdensome gun control today then they did back in the 1800s.
Guns were obviously widespread on the frontier. Out in the untamed wilderness, you needed a gun to be safe from bandits, natives, and wildlife. In the cities and towns of the West, however, the law often prohibited people from toting their guns around. A visitor arriving in Wichita, Kansas in 1873, the heart of the Wild West era, would have seen signs declaring, "Leave Your Revolvers At Police Headquarters, and Get a Check."
A check? That's right. When you entered a frontier town, you were legally required to leave your guns at the stables on the outskirts of town or drop them off with the sheriff, who would give you a token in exchange. You checked your guns then like you'd check your overcoat today at a Boston restaurant in winter. Visitors were welcome, but their guns were not."

So, Katherine Benton-Cohen makes a good point, but one could take it further…

Basically, in most frontier towns, the only folks allowed to carry outside of the home were the lawmen and shopkeepers. The movies always show different, and there were a few "lawless" towns (those with no gun control) but they were "settled" or perished, as most citizens didn't think guns belonged in a "modern" society, which every new town wanted to prove they were "modern" for the day. Hollywood and reality are two different things. Hard work, the military and cheap labor won the west, in spite of the outlaws that were by no means the heroes they are portrayed to be. They were simply lazy low-life rapists, thieves and killers and had nothing to do with any positive part of settling the west. The point is, why romanticize an era of violence and the violent, when it was the "peacemakers" that practiced gun control and thus "settled" the west? The reality is that it goes nowhere toward the point of the argument that guns settled the west. It was implementing law that settled the west. As far as I can tell, the law still has guns, and still has their hands full with dealing with lazy low-life rapists, thieves and murderers with guns.

As far as claiming crime rates were lower in the “wild west”, they are always lower in smaller communities where everybody knows everybody and higher in the cities. Crime rates were very high, as they always are, when America was more of a 2-class society. We are returning to that with the blue-collar trades worker being priced back into poverty from the short-lived middle-class. Crime itself has changed; drug offenses especially and the crime around that has driven overall crime "rates" up. But violent rape, murder, theft and robbery were as prevalent then as they are now, if not more so, considering unreported crimes against Indians and crimes blamed on Indians that didn't factor into the "crime rates, as Indians weren't originally treated as citizens but as enemy combatants.

There is a disconnect that exists now with our past, especially the couple decades portrayed as the “cowboy days”...trail drives were necessary only for a short while with the advent of the trans-continental railroad and all its growing branches reaching the cattle where they are raised. From the official "opening" of the west to farming, ranching, industry and settlement to its actual settling - with cities, counties and statehood- was only a few decades. Oklahoma City’s population went from zero to over ten thousand in a week. Guthrie did it in a day. Growing pains and corruption were rampant until law and compliance were made necessary. The pony express was around for a mere 18 months before it was made obsolete, yet, by Hollywood’s output on the subject, you’d think the horse-powered mail service was around for a century. Millions flooded into what was just recently a natural world full of resources and occupied only by mostly defenseless endemic peoples that had no clue of the coming storm that was to change their way of life forever....for those few who survived. The gun was simply a tool to provide food and protection in a world without a cop or a Von's grocery store. Its use otherwise has been for recreation, war, crime or law enforcement.

My stance on gun control and the Constitution is actually more "old west" than most; "Keep 'em in the country and leave 'em at the city limits". Constitutionally, I am with the framers of the document, specifically Jefferson when he stated that "We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." This, among many quotes of the day by him and other framers, was in direct reference to the need for amending the constitution as societal changes warranted. To still live by the original intent of the 2nd would require now the citizenry have full access to nuclear weapons, F-35s, aircraft carriers, tanks and cruise missiles.... It's a pointless argument to cite the 2nd today (for all other than those who just love a good old red-faced yelling match) because it's been made merit-less against societal change from day one by those who wrote it in the first place.

Don't get me wrong, I love a good old gun. New ones too. Rifles, assault weapons, shotguns and especially a well-tooled and fitted handgun. Give me a Dan Wesson model 65 357 or an old 1851 Navy Colt working replica any day. But I live in the city now, I don't hunt and protection isn't a need. I don't live a life that requires one, and to be honest, if someone is going to get you, odds of your gun being of help are slim to none. This is already a part of a crooks’ contingency plan and I'd rather not get shot myself. Truth is billions are made every year propping up wars by the same folks that want you to put one of their sporting or home-protection firearms in your home. Gun control, to them, is much more than the paltry 1.5 million NRA members or any Constitution of any nation...Gun control means the beginning of the end of them being able to sell a citizenry on fear so they can make a lot of money off of ammunition and arms from 3rd world countries that ultimately require military intervention, thus requiring more bullets and arms be sold to our own military. The military, nor the terrorists, nor any faction out there fighting, make their own weapons. Gun control will eventually show the futility of armed fear-fueled conflict and a multi-trillion-dollar industry is at stake. That's why the NRA, with an enrollment equal to less than one-half of one percent of the US population, has such a strong and very well-funded misinformation policy and lobby.

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Daniel S Powell profile imageAUTHOR

      Daniel S Powell 

      3 years ago

      Much better this time. Yet, my page is not riddled with factual errors. Again, in any case of self defense by a legal gun owner, of which there are many, nobody can argue the merit of a responsible citizen having a sensible weapon. As you should know, the instances of such citizen being prepared and not being overcome are indeed slim. To none. Over 80% of all gun deaths are those who own guns themselves and over 60% of all gun deaths are suicide. I don't stand hard on either side of gun control, though I do think some is necessary. My past is irrelevant to an overall debate, though I do have some insight, and whoever your "sources" are have misled you if you even know a little about me as you "hinted". It's ok, it's a debate. The framers knew of a smooth-bore musket, do you think, as a citizenry, we should be limited to that? If not, then how do you defend yourself from the tyranny of government without equal weaponry? Sure, it's conjecture, enjoy it for what it is...but, in no way did most, or many, citizens run around in town strapped with arms in the late 1800's, nor did towns allow, in general, the carrying of weapons, concealed or on display, as portrayed in the movies. NRA membership must be up sharply from 2012...I regret not providing the current number. Truth is, many buy a 1 year membership and then don't re-up once they get a sticker for their truck. I had one or two. But, 5 million is still only 1.5%...not nearly enough to carry the power they do, thus, again, my point. Military contractors include small arms manufacturers. Who makes those weapons for every military in the world? Do you know? I'd like to. Please, can you tell me the names of those companies providing light arms to the armies of the world?

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 

      3 years ago from The Midwest

      Dan sez: Oh, I'm not going to debate case by case instances,

      Jack replies: Of course you are not. If you attempt to defend your statement "odds of [her] gun being of help are slim to none" you are going to wind up looking fairly silly. I wouldn’t want to “debate” it either under the circumstances.

      Dan sez: or opinions-as yous is,

      Jack replies: Was it my “opinion” that this lady’s gun was “being of help” or a factual account of the case?

      Dan sez: I have my experience, you have yours.

      Jack replies: And what of the lady’s “experience”?

      Dan sez: What I wrote about were misconceptions concerning gun control and the old west

      Jack replies: And other things too, eh.

      Dan sez: and my interpretation of the Constitution based on the framers intent

      Jack replies: Since no reputable scholar (or even unreputable ones) have claimed or stated that the 2nd Amendment’s “original intent of the 2nd would require now the citizenry have full access to nuclear weapons, F-35s, aircraft carriers, tanks and cruise missiles....” I would say that your “interpretation” of the constitution is pretty much a unique one, out there in left field all by itself. And BTW, there is no law in existence that forbids citizens from having F-35s, aircraft carriers and/or tanks.

      Dan sez: and a synopsis of why the NRA lobby is so strong yet the paying membership is so small comparatively.

      Jack replies: I wasn’t aware that the NRA was a gun manufacture as you seem to claim. But your writing is pretty muddled so I could be wrong.

      Dan sez: I suppose you have an argument for either?

      Jack replies: I am not require to provide an argument. I merely point out where you are in error.

      Dan sez: I have found reason, more than once in my wild and woolly past, to protect myself with a gun.

      Jack replies: I have it on good authority that the truth of that statement is slim to none.

      Dan sez: The need for a gun is sometimes, as if I lived in Somalia I'd have me an Ak, necessitated by the availability of guns in the first place.

      Jack replies: Did Dinah Burns “need a gun”? There answer there is a simple yes or no.

      Dan sez: We still cannot argue with the much lower murder and violent crime stats of other nations with strict gun control.

      Jack replies: Sure we can. You are making the basic elementary mistake of focusing in on just supposed “gun crime” stats and not overall murder and crime stats. The overall rates are very similar. People will find a way to hurt and prey on other people even if they have to use a pointed stick to do so.

      Dan sez: We can, however, jump up every time an instance in a million makes sense for either side.

      Jack replies: The Clinton DOJ estimated in a report that well over 2 million incidents a year where a citizen defended themselves with a firearm.

      Dan sez: As far as factually wrong, the only thing you have cited was someone else's opinion. What is your point?

      Jack replies: factual errors? Your page is riddled with them. The larger number of firearm manufactures in the country have nothing to do with supplying the military with weapons. And you neglected a more-0n-the-point quote from Jeffereson…

      "The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."

      - Thomas Jefferson

      The NRA membership is pushing 5,000,000, not 1.5 million.

    • Daniel S Powell profile imageAUTHOR

      Daniel S Powell 

      3 years ago

      Oh, I'm not going to debate case by case instances, or opinions-as yous is, and I respect that. I have my experience, you have yours. What I wrote about were misconceptions concerning gun control and the old west and my interpretation of the Constitution based on the framers intent and a synopsis of why the NRA lobby is so strong yet the paying membership is so small comparatively. I suppose you have an argument for either? I have found reason, more than once in my wild and woolly past, to protect myself with a gun. The need for a gun is sometimes, as if I lived in Somalia I'd have me an Ak, necessitated by the availability of guns in the first place. We still cannot argue with the much lower murder and violent crime stats of other nations with strict gun control. We can, however, jump up every time an instance in a million makes sense for either side. As far as factually wrong, the only thing you have cited was someone else's opinion. What is your point?

    • Jack Burton profile image

      Jack Burton 

      3 years ago from The Midwest

      Let's ask Dinah Burns if she believes the "odds of [her] gun being of help are slim to none". Or if she should have left her gun outside the city limits.

      http://www.10tv.com/content/stories/2014/08/29/lan...

      There is much factually wrong in the hub, but the bottom line is that the author will never be there to put his body between you and a social deviant who has targeted you for harm. When you come to the understanding that you are the true "first responder" then you will begin to understand the value of being prepared.

    working

    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

    Show Details
    Necessary
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Features
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Marketing
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Statistics
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)