New Doubts About Gun Historian

The Boston Globe ^ | 9/11/01 | David Mehegan

[Gothmog]

When Emory University historian Michael A. Bellesiles published his sweeping historical study of guns in Colonial America last fall, the reaction was electric.

His thesis that guns were relatively rare in Colonial households, and that the American ''gun culture'' didn't take hold until long after the Founding Fathers drafted the Second Amendment's ''right to bear arms,'' was immediately hailed by gun control advocates and by a host of historians impressed by his bold rewriting of conventional wisdom.

[Gothmog]

Surprising to find this in the Globe. It will be interesting to see what Lindgren has to say. If Bellesiles is proved wrong, does he have to give back all the $$$ and awards, ha ha ha.

[xm177e2]

In telephone and e-mail interviews, Bellesiles stands by his research. ''I spent 10 years of my life traveling around to archives myself, without research assistance. I know how much work I put into it, and I stand by it.''

Good, I want to see Captain Beseilles go down with the good ship USS ILIEDABOUTGUNSTOGETLIBERALSTOLIKEME.

[Condit's a Democrat]

Funny, I heard somebody yacking on about this guy's research on NPR a couple of weeks ago (insert typical, whiny, snotty, always-on-the-edge-of-nervous-breakdown NPR "commentator" voice here). I remember thinking the research sounded bogus, but I couldn't have foreseen that my gut reaction would be proven correct so thoroughly and so soon. Nice post!

[xm177e2]

Thank you for posting this.

If Bellesiles is proved wrong, does he have to give back all the $$$ and awards, ha ha ha.

And all of the gun control advocates who stood behind him will have to admit they were wrong, or at least SHUT UP about how the early colonial folk weren't really gun owners but were actually very nice people.

[Gothmog]

Except he can not "prove" it because his records were lost in a flood. And subsequent review of his records show that his research was seriously flawed. This guy probably figured that if he cited enough records no one would go back and check them all. Wrong!

[Gothmog]

If Lindgren is right, will they award him the "Bancroft?" And celebrate his work? I doubt it.

[Condit's a Democrat]

Another triumph of liberal "scholarship." Oh, dear.

[Condit's a Democrat]

When asked about the discrepancies, Bellesiles said he was mystified, ''I don't know. I am very upset about that. It's a mystery to me. I might have looked at a different record book. It's an egregious error on my part.''

This is in answer to the very liberal Globe. Bellesiles is toast.

[logos]

The book also omits something that has been true of fathers, sons and guns since all three existed ... by far the most guns are given directly by fathers to their sons long before probate is ever an issue, and the guns wouldn't be included in estate inventories in the first place.

In other words, even if this historian's facts were straight (and apparently they aren't), they would be wrong.

[Psalm 73]

This is great. When that book first came out, one of the vocal office liberals gave me a synopsis to read, then went off on an anti-RKBA dissertation using Belisiles research as his cornerstone.
Got to copy this article and send it to him.
Of course, like most readers of the NYTs, his motto is "all the news that fits".
If it does'nt help thier agenda - they just ignore it. How convenient.

[Gothmog]

Yeah, I remember seeing that criticism of his research on FreeRepublic, but it is hard to prove since there is no record of transactions that were not recorded. Doing similar research and proving that his initial research was seriously flawed is very significant.

A good start to my day. As Condit's a Democrat said -- he' toast! Ha ha ha.

[Gothmog]

You'll have to let us know the office libs' response. Payback is a bitch, ha ha ha. I know a few libs myself that will soon be reviewing this article.

[watcher1]

bump

[Dubh_Ghlase]

Exactly my thought. I have seen this happen for 3 generations.
The guns of the father is divided among the sons as a lasting
rememberance and heirloom. I still have a couple from my father,
and they sure didn't appear on any probate list!

This guys a lying whiny liberal gun-grabber, no doubt about it...

[Jaxter]

You're exactly right. The only way any of these guns would have been in an estate auction is if there were no male heirs.

[ZULU]

Any idiot who publishes a book intimating that gun ownership was not part and parcel of early American history and culture deserves to be totally ignored by any intelligent historian. This is historical revisionism at its apogee.

This crackpots research has been well debunked by the NRA.

It is merely a pathetic liberal response to the well-researched and documented work "More Guns - Less Crime."

Once again the liberal establishment demonstrates its superior skill in propagandizing and lack of concern with facts.

[ZULU]

>Indeed, he wrote, one reason the Revolutionary War went on as long as it did may have been that the weapons available to the colonists were so scarce and in such poor repair. ''Probably the major reason,'' he argues in the book, ''why the American Revolution lasted eight years, longer than any war in American history before Vietnam, was that when that brave patriot reached above the mantel, he pulled down a rusty, decaying, unusable musket (not a rifle), or found no gun there at all<

The reason he "pulled down a musket (not a rifle)" was becasue most people used muskets - both for hunting and for fighting - on both sides. The rifle was a creature of the American frontier whose importance escalated a American history progressed. Any school kid knows that. What a jerk.

[Gothmog]

Oh, I knew he was a crackpot when I heard about the book and I read some of the threads by Freepers debunking it. All good work. Anyone with a brain knew this guy was wrong.

I am just happy that he is being debunked even more and that it is getting front-page coverage. More ammunition for us.

[steve-b]

Lindgren also says that when he contacted Bellesiles, trying to get him to produce the details of his research, Bellesiles was unable to do so.

The dog ate his evidence.