Landed on our site looking for 9mm bulk ammo online?
You can thank the Founders that we can sell it to you, domestically.
As you know, it all goes back to the second amendment to the United States Constitution. Actually, it goes back a bit further.
Let’s take a closer look.
Introducing the Anti-Federalists
You’ve heard of the federalists, right?
We all have. This was the name for a group of political adherents who, in the 1780s, supported the ratification of the Constitution as a replacement for the government established for the Articles of Confederation.
Most of us learned about this in public school. The three most prominent federalists were John Jay, James Madison, and Alexander Hamilton. These three penned the collection of arguments known collectively as The Federalist Papers which argued in favor of the new system of government that would be established by the Constitution.
What has been largely overlooked, however, is the countercurrent - that is, that of the anti-federalists.
There was a strong opposition to the federalist movement arising chiefly from concerns that the Constitution would establish a new system of government in which the central, federal, body was too powerful, and worst of all, that the Constitution had not established a codified groundwork for the protection of the most fundamental human rights.
The Colonial Precedent for the Second Amendment As a Codified Guarantee
The truth is, that the Founders recognized the fundamental human right to keep and bear arms was nothing new.
In fact, one need only look to the 1689 Bill of Rights, created by an Act of Parliament, that established and recognized what the English subjects considered to be the most essential rights.
Among these rights was the following:
“...That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law;”
So you see, the concept of armament as a civil right far preceded the colonists and their grievances against the crown, even as codified law.
Consider also this: that among the Mayflower’s stores were many matchlock and flintlock arms.
You’ve heard of the expression, “guns and butter” as a way to categorize mercantile goods?
Butter in this instance is a metaphor for luxury goods that are nice to have but not essential. The reference to “guns” is hardly a metaphor at all. It is an overt declaration of the gun as an irreplaceable and vital tool for survival.
It is a tool not only for defense but also for provision, and in both cases is critical to self preservation. Few other tools grant the bearer the ability to thwart active attempts against life and limb, as well as the ability to harvest from the bounty of creation life-giving fodder.
The settlers aboard the Mayflower knew it. The English Parliamentarians knew it. And the American colonists knew it.
Most importantly, and most directly, the colonists - the Founders, and the framers of the Constitution, specifically - knew that without civilian armament, the American Revolution itself would have been a flash in the pan.
This is no exaggeration. Though it may not have been put expediently into action, the Crown had designs on disarming the civilian populace of the colonies as early as 1777. In one prominent publication, titled “Considerations on the Great Question What Is to Be Done with America,” author William Knox argued that “the arms of all the people should be taken away” and that all ordnance should be “removed into the King’s stores.”
That the Founders were aware that widespread armament was and is the last and final answer to active force and oppression is not to be doubted.
This is why we as Americans have come to appreciate the expression, “The second protects the first.”
Not to suggest that the other rights in the Bill of Rights are in any way inferior to the second - but that the second is their safeguard.
Back to the Anti-Federalists
With historical precedent for, and necessity of, an armed populace as a defense against tyranny, it was naturally one of the most central rights with which the framers of the Constitution were concerned.
Specifically, it was a sticking point for the anti-federalists, who would not, in a word, lend their support for the ratification of the Constitution as it stood without some sort of concession.
That the new document did not contain specific provisions for the protection of individual liberties was only one of their gripes with the proposal. Among the others were that a federal court system would rise to control the states and that congress would not be granted balanced representation in the interest of all the states’ people.
Nonetheless, the lack of a bill of rights guaranteeing individual liberties was one of the most salient issues that anti-federalists took with the Constitution.
Consenting to pressure incurred by the anti-federalists, noted federalist James Madison drafted a series of 12 amendments to the Constitution, of which 10 were ratified in 1791. These included provisions for what the anti-federalists argued were the most essential of rights, including the rights to speak, publish, assemble, petition for redress, worship, bear arms, and be tried by a jury of peers when charged, prior to sentencing, among many others.
All in all, the concerns of the anti-federalists were not successful in preventing the adoption of the new system of government, but they were successful in writing into it the most fundamental of all human rights, which today we cherish as the Bill of Rights - and in which is codified the individual’s sacred right to keep and bear arms.
The Bill of Rights and 9mm Bulk Ammo
Now that the dust has settled, you can see more clearly the link between the anti-federalists and the second amendment. Were it not for their opposition to the Constitution as originally drafted, we would have no Bill of Rights, and therefore, the right to keep and bear arms would not be recognized in this land.
So when you do splurge on that 9mm bulk ammo deal, show a little bit of appreciation for Patrick Henry. Were it not for him and his anti-federalist fellows, you probably wouldn’t be in the same situation.