The Founders' Documents
(and more)
on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

(Records from the following State Ratifying Conventions have not been preserved: New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Maryland, Georgia, Delaware)

(Records from the following State Ratifying Conventions are fragmentary and incomplete: Pennsylvania, South Carolina)

“Mr. Whitehill now rose, and having animadverted upon Doctor Rush’s metaphysical arguments, and regretted that so imperfect a work should have been ascribed to God, he pre­sented several petitions from 750 inhabitants of Cumberland county, praying, for the reasons therein specified, that the proposed constitution should not be adopted without amendments, and, particularly, without a bill of rights. … Mr. WhItehill then read, and offered as the ground of a motion for adjourning to some remote day the consideration of the following articles, which he said, might either be taken, collectively, as a bill of rights, or, separately, as amendments to the general form of govern­ment proposed. …

7. That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and their own state, or the United States, or for the purpose of killing game; and no law shall be passed for disarming the people or any of them, unless for crimes committed, or real danger of public injury from individuals…”.

“Mr. WILSON: This will be a proper time for making an observation or two on what may be called, the preamble to this Constitution. There are two kinds of government -- that where general power is intended to be given to the legislature, and that where the powers are particularly enumerated. In the last case, the implied result is, that nothing more is intended to be given than what is so enumerated, unless it results from the nature of the government itself. …in a government like the proposed one, there can be no necessity for a bill of rights; for, on my principle, the people never part with their power. … Enumerate all the rights of men! I am sure, sir, that no gentleman in the late Convention would have attempted such a thing. … To every suggestion concerning a bill of rights, the citizens of the United States may always say, We reserve the right to do what we please.”

The Address and reasons of dissent of the minority of the convention, of the state of Pennsylvania, to their constituents:

“…we entered on the examination of the proposed system of government, and found it to be such as we could not adopt, without, as we conceived, surrendering up your dearest rights. We offered our

objections to the convention, and opposed those parts of the plan, which, in our opinion, would be injurious to you, in the best manner we were able; and closed our arguments, by offering the following propositions to the convention.

Seventh: That the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and their own state, or the United States, or for the purpose of killing game, and no law shall be passed for disarming the people or any of them, unless for crimes committed, or real danger of public injury from individuals…”.

After reading these propositions, we declared our willingness to agree to the plan, provided it was so amended as to meet those propositions, or something similar to them.”

“The Honorable Mr. SEDGWICK went into a general answer to the objections which had been stated against the powers to be granted to Congress by this section … He asked, if gentlemen could think it possible that the legislature of the United States would raise an army unnecessarily, which, in a short time, would be under the control of other persons; for, if it was not to be under their control, what object could they have in raising it? It was, he said, a chimerical idea to suppose that a country like this could ever be enslaved. How is an army for that purpose to be obtained from the freemen of the United States? They certainly, he said, know to what object it is to be applied. Is it possible, he asked, that an army could be raised for the purpose of enslaving themselves and their brethren? Or, if raised, whether they could subdue a nation of freemen, who know how to prize liberty, and who have arms in their hands?”

“The said Constitution [shall] be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.” – Samuel Adams

“Hon. JAMES LINCOLN, of Ninety-six, declared, that if ever any person rose in a public assembly with diffidence, he then did; if ever any person felt himself deeply interested in what he thought a good cause, and at the same time lamented the want of abilities to support it, it was he. … He would be glad to know why, in this Constitution, there is a total silence with regard to the liberty of the press. Was it forgotten? Impossible! Then it must have been purposely omitted; and with what design, good or bad, he left the World to judge. The liberty of the press was the tyrant’s scourge--it was the true friend and firmest supporter of civil liberty; therefore why pass it by in silence?

Gen. CHARLES COTESWORTH PINCKNEY answered Mr. Lincoln on his objections. … With regard to the liberty of the press, the discussion of that matter was not forgotten by the members of the Convention. It was fully debated, and the impropriety of saying any thing about it in the Constitution clearly evinced. The general government has no powers but what are expressly granted to it; it therefore has no power to take away the liberty of the press. … For the same reason, we had no bill of rights inserted in our Constitution; for, as we might perhaps have omitted the enumeration of some of our rights, it might hereafter be said we had delegated to the general government a power to take away such of our rights as we had not enumerated: but by delegating express powers, we certainly reserve to ourselves every power and right not mentioned in the Constitution.”

“Resolved, That a committee be appointed to take into consideration, and report to this house on Monday morning next, a draught of such and alterations as may be thought necessary, in the proposed amendments Constitution for the United States, to be recommended to the consideration of the people of this state, if approved of by this Convention. … And then it was resolved, “That the amendments proposed to the Constitution by the delegate from Hartford county should be referred to the above committee. The committee thus appointed, the Convention adjourned to give them time to prepare their propositions; and they proceeded, with every appearance of unanimity, to execute the trust reposed in them. The following amendments to the proposed Constitution. … 13. That the militia shall not be subject to martial law, except in time of war, invasion, or rebellion. This provision to restrain the powers of Congress over the militia, although by no means so ample as that provided by Magna Charta, and the other great fundamental and constitutional laws of Great Britain, (it being contrary to Magna Charts to punish a freeman by martial law, in time of peace, and murder to execute him,) yet it may prove an inestimable check; for all other provisions in favor of the rights of men would be vain and nugatory, if the power of subjecting all men, able to bear arms, to martial law at any moment should remain vested in Congress.

“Mr. LANSING proposed the following, Respecting the organization and arming the militia: Provided, That the militia of any state shall not be marched out of such state without the consent of the executive thereof, nor be continued in service out of the state, without the consent of the legislature thereof, for a longer term than six weeks; and provided, that the power to organize, arm, and discipline the militia, shall not be construed to extend further than to prescribe the mode of arming and disciplining the same.”

“We the delegates of the people of the state of New York, duly elected and met in Convention, having maturely considered the Constitution for the United States of America, agreed to on the seventeenth day of September, in the year one thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven, by the Convention then assembled at Philadelphia, in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and having also seriously and deliberately considered the present situation of the United States, DO declare and make known…

That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well regulated militia, including the body of the people capable of bearing arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state.”

“The Convention having impartially discussed and fully con­sidered the Constitution for the United States of America, re­ported to the Congress by the Convention of Delegates from the United States of America, and submitted to us by a reso­lution of the General Court of said State…DO, in the name and behalf of the people of the State of New-Hampshire, assent to and ratify the said Constitution for the United States of America. And as it is the Opinion of this Convention that certain amendments and al­terations in the said Constitution would remove the fears and quiet the apprehensions of many of the good people of this state, and more effectually guard against an undue administration of the Federal Government, the convention do therefore recommend that following alterations:

12th. Congress shall never disarm any citizen, unless such as are or have been in actual rebellion.”

June 14, 1788: “[W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually, by totally disusing and neglecting the militia.” – George Mason, from debates during the Virginia state ratifying convention, quoted in Elliot’s Debates

June 16, 1788: “I ask, who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor; but they may be confined to the lower and middle classes of the people, granting exclusion to the higher classes of the people. If we should ever see that day, the most ignominious punishments and heavy fines may be expected. Under the present government, all ranks of people are subject to militia duty. Under such a full and equal representation as ours, there can be no ignominious punishment inflicted. But under this national, or rather consolidated government, the case will be different. The representation being so small and inadequate, they will have no fellow-feeling for the people.” – George Mason, from debates during the Virginia state ratifying convention, quoted in Elliot’s Debates

June 27, 1788 – “On Motion, ordered, That a committee be appointed to prepare and report such amendments as by them shall be deemed necessary, to be recommended…”.

“Mr. WYTHE reported, from the committee appointed, such amendments to the proposed Constitution of government for the united States as were by them deemed necessary to be recommended to the consideration of the Congress which shall first assemble under the said Constitution…”.

“17th: That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and therefore ought to be avoided, as far as the circumstances and protection of the community will admit; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.”

“The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them.” -- Zachariah Johnson (Virginia federalist)

“It would be very extraordinary to have a bill of rights, because the powers of Congress are expressly defined; and the very definition of them is as valid and efficacious a check as a bill of rights could be, without the dangerous implication of a bill of rights. The powers of Congress are limited and enumerated. We say we have given them those powers, but we do not say we have given them more. We retain all those rights which we have not given away to the general government. Of what use, therefore, can a bill of rights be in this Constitution, where the people expressly declare how much power they do give, and consequently retain all they do not? It is a declaration of particular powers by the people to their representatives, for particular purposes. It may be considered as a great power of attorney, under which no power can be exercised but what is expressly given. … I acknowledge, however, that the doctrine is right; but if that Constitution is not satisfactory to the people, I would have a bill of rights, or something of that kind, to satisfy them….

Resolved, That a declaration of rights, asserting and securing from encroachment the great principles of civil and religious liberty, and the unalienable rights of the people, together with amendments to the most ambiguous and exceptionable parts of the said Constitution of government, ought to be laid before Congress, and the convention of the states that shall or may be called for the purpose of amending the said Constitution, for their consideration, previous to the ratification of the Constitution aforesaid on the part of the state of North Carolina.

17. That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and therefore ought to be avoided, as far as the circumstances and protection of the community will admit; and that. in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.”

Five of the states that ratified the Constitution also sent demands for a Bill of Rights to Congress, which demands included a right to keep and bear arms. Here, in relevant part, is their text:

New Hampshire: Twelfth: Congress shall never disarm any Citizen unless such as are or have been in Actual Rebellion.

Virginia: . . . Seventeenth, That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well regulated Militia composed of the body of the people trained to arms is the proper, natural and safe defence of a free State. That standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, and therefore ought to be avoided, as far as the circumstances and protection of the Community will admit; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to and governed by the Civil power.

New York: . . . That the People have a right to keep and bear Arms; that a well regulated Militia, including the body of the People capable of bearing Arms, is the proper, natural and safe defence of a free State; That the Militia should not be subject to Martial Law except in time of War, Rebellion or Insurrection. That Standing Armies in time of Peace are dangerous to Liberty, and ought not to be kept up, excess in Cases of necessity; and that at all times, the Military should be under strict Subordination to the civil Power.

North Carolina: Almost identical to Virginia demand, but with “the body of the people, trained to arms” instead of “the body of the people trained to arms.”

Rhode Island: Almost identical to Virginia demand, but with “the body of the people capable of bearing arms” instead of “the body of the people trained to arms,” and with a “militia shall not be subject to martial law” proviso as in New York.

Table of Contents

Massachusetts' attorney Kim Weissman closed his website, Congress Action Newsletter, and has graciously selected TYSK as the repository for his very popular Second Amendment Information. Mr. Weissman and TYSK both hope that you will find what is contained here informative and enlightening and useful in refuting the claims, falsehoods, and distortions offered by those that want to restrict or eliminate the one pillar of the Bill of Rights which protects all others.