The key question is not whether some legislation was enacted, but whether it was accepted without protest. The Sedition Act (and Alien Act) were intensely opposed, so much so that the party that enacted them was thrown out of office in the Election of 1800. If they had attempted to impose any regulation of firearms not designed to enhance the effectiveness of militia, one suspects the reaction would have been even stronger. As Clayton Cramer has pointed out, there were such restrictions on sale of firearms to Indians, which could be considered violative, but the Indians were not considered to be members of the community, but hostile foreigners.
It does seem, however, that inventories of personal weapons were less common during the Revolution, when there was a danger of the inventory listings being captured by the enemy, than before or after, when the enemy was not mixed with the patriots to the same extent. This would be an interesting line of investigation.
Robert Woolley wrote:
It seems to me that the pertinent question for your inquiry shouldn't be what regulations were actually enacted, but what regulations people of that era would have believed to be constitutional, had they had reason to consider them.
Congress passed the Sedition Act 7 years after ratification of a constitutional amendment that said "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech."
---------------------------------------------------------------- Our efforts depend on donations from people like you. Directions for donors are at http://www.constitution.org/whatucando.htm Constitution Society 7793 Burnet Road #37, Austin, TX 78757 512/374-9585 www.constitution.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------------------------------------------------------------
