Infographic: History of Gun Regulation in the United States

***Infographic Provided by Bear Creek Arsenal***

{ 8 comments… add one }
  • Walleye March 20, 2021, 12:49 pm

    You are perfectly correct sir! I still consider them victories because it reversed prohibiton of CCW and open carry in some places. Likewise it showed us what really comprises the SCOTUS.

  • davud March 19, 2021, 4:12 pm

    a chart that includes the more significant state and local gun regulations would add a lot of context. that would make clear the bigotry behind much of the regulation, especially in the reconstruction south and eastern cities during the great waves of immigration, when the intent was to keep guns out of the hands of blacks, irish, poles, jews, italians and other ‘undesirable’ groups. see also california’s mulford act.

  • Jrp March 19, 2021, 1:36 pm

    All of the laws are unconstitutional. They are all infringement’s on the second amendment. Heller and McDonald were a joke. They should of never made it to court and the politicians that blatantly violated citizens 2nd amendment rights should of been impeached immediately and removed from office never to serve again. Go back and read 2A court challenges in the late 1700s to mid to late 1800s. The cases was laughed at by courts. Under our current form of government we have lost a god given right under the constitution. The right to be presumed innocent. Gun control is removing that right and we have to prove innocence to get that right back. The constitution doesn’t give us rights. It tells the newly formed government what our rights are from our creator and they are to protect and defend such rights period. This is what tyranny looks like in one of its many forms and is only down hill from here. It’s nothing more than control. That’s how monarchies stay in power.

  • Stan d. Upnow March 19, 2021, 1:21 pm

    Now you can add(if it becomes law) Senate Bill 736 & H.R. 1808. The so-called “Assault Weapon Ban of 2021.”

  • Kane March 19, 2021, 11:56 am

    At the very least the NFA and subsequent “regulation” should be amended or abolished preserving mainly DD. The bump stocks are a legal shell game that could threaten case law aimed at preserving semi-auto. The 16″ rifle and 18″ shotgun laws should be abolished.

  • Michael Jaral March 19, 2021, 9:35 am

    It appears that most of the gun regulations above seem to be breaking the 2nd amendment. Especially the one banning the one about firearms in Washington DC. Which was amended.

  • Walleye March 19, 2021, 7:57 am

    This is an exceptionally well crafted chart and sums up the loss of our freedoms over 245 years. The only change I’d recommend is adding the 2008 Heller and 2010 McDonald decisions from SCOTUS. They were huge victories.

    • Doc Loch March 20, 2021, 12:48 am

      You need to read those decisions more completely and carefully. They were NOT victories. They made plain that even the most “conservative” justices are either grossly and incompetently ignorant/uneducated, or criminally complicit in tyranny against the law of the constitution. The majority decision for example in Heller v DC (which was included above by the by) stated that the right of the people WAS “subject to reasonable restriction.” While this may sound cool and very logical/intelligent (like the stupid argument that you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater as it isn’t a right included in the freedom of speech) the second amendment holds a key phrase NOT contained in any other amendment. That phrase is: “…shall not be INFRINGED.” The ignorance or criminality comes when said government does not address this phrase, or does not understand it. The meaning of the word “infringed” is that nothing may even come close to touching the borders of it. This means that the SCOTUS is complicit with they tyrant who wants to touch more and more the sacred parts of this most precious right. Shall not be infringed does not agree with reasonable restriction, unless you are stupid or a tyrant. No one, however, can take the right away (it is inalienable). If one is personally capable of exercising the right, it may be exercised regardless of any law, force or entity, the price of doing so is, however,higher. The founding fathers felt that the price/value of these rights was more than the cost/price/value of a human life or even their own lives and blood. We, today, are willing to sell them much more cheaply, because we do not value them. At least some don’t.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend