So the Conservative Tribute started circling this one Facebook (http://goo.gl/sDLpBS) and their site (http://goo.gl/JhbzgO). They also freak out about a video stating that the Black Panthers are marching with AR-15s to take on the police (http://goo.gl/5D933p). You can see the video yourself (http://goo.gl/O28RTr).
While they're certainly yelling "justice for <insert recently killed black person>" they're not talking about killing police or anything.
The Conservative Tribute states, "These violent thugs must be stopped." Hilariously, this is taking place in the SAME PLACE that Open Carry Texas garnered national attention last May after pictures from its "open-carry walks" went viral. Groups of white guys totting AK-47s into Chipotle, Target, and Starbucks. But hey.. they were just expressing their Second Amendment rights.
The following is not mine, but from the Voice of Reason on FB: "So when Teahadist traitors were literally aiming guns at law enforcement officers we were all supposed to agree with you idiots that that sort of thing was an example of patriotism and that all those toothless hillbillies were brave men standing up to an out of control tyrannical government but now that people darker than Marco Rubio are talking the same talk about standing up to a government that they see as not having their best interests at heart it's a problem?
Your "article" quotes Darren X as saying “The complete agenda involves going into our communities and educating our people on federal, state and local gun laws" and then goes on to whine about how alarming it is to see the Huey P. Newton Gun Club (the black alternative to the NRA – gotta love it!) openly carry guns "to an alarming effect." Guess what: You built this.
You people think it's OK to arm yourself to fight the tyranny of an oppressive government unless you're black? You people are now coming to the defense of law enforcement now that black people are using your playbook? You people wanted Americans to have access to guns to fight for their rights but only if their skin was lighter than J-Lo? What part of "shall not be infringed" do you morons not understand?
I look forward to seeing news reports of Darren X and the Huey P. Newton Gun Club marching into every lily white neighborhood in Dumbfuckistan until you realize what a monster you built and force the government that you want to protect you from the scary black people to sign a Mumford Act for the 21st Century. Until then I'll be kicking back and enjoying the schadenfreude."
There is such racial divide now that Open Carry Texas went to do a march through Fifth Ward and the community there stopped them. According to Open Carry they wanted to stand with them in a pro-open carry manner, but the community wanted nothing to do with them. http://goo.gl/x8CAY5
I'm certainly not for the notion of everyone carrying firearms. But division coupled with firearms is a recipe for disaster IMO.
h/t: My bud Andy on FB for the original share.
The hypocrisy never ends.
+Paul Spoerry actually the very first gun control law in the US happened as a way to oppress black liberties. I know the details are on Wikipedia but here's a scan from a newspaper.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2202&dat=19670503&id=ClcmAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ZP8FAAAAIBAJ&pg=1072,5010951
I don't have a problem with a Black Man with a gun,as long as I'm not the target.
The constitution not only allows but specifically protects your right to organize into a group and be armed. The fact anybody has a problem with this shows they own racial bias and ignorance of the constitution.
Most ironically, the type of person who wants to prosecute somebody for defending their God given right to self protection and preventing crime are also the type of people who scream the loudest when cops abuse their powers (iow they want only state sanctioned gun ownership, even though stats & recent events have proven said people are some of the worst offenders of power).
You do all realise that the 1968 GCA was passed, largely because of Black Panther (and other groups) activities during the civil rights era?
It's all bullshit. A black person has just as much right (and I might even argue, MORE of a right, given the way things have worked out) to arm themselves than anybody else in this country.
You will note I posted the same story…in support of their right to carry. I did so several weeks ago.
Most conservatives agreed with me.
Conservatives do not back Open Carry Texas anyway. And the black panthers had a $200 Hipoint not an AR-15 – no self respecting gun owner would make that mistake, so I think your story here is BS.
I read the comments on facebook. Lotta hate going on over there.
With all do respect, it has nothing to do with race. when a violent gang Is walking through neighborhoods with assault rifles threatening police, something should be done !
Did they do something violent? I didn't read that part.
sir, if the kkk was to march "peacefully" with assault rifles throughout neighborhoods that would not be remotely okay! therefore if the black panthers does it, then there is no difference. also, both gangs have a pretty bad history full of hate and violence
"while threatening police" while armed.
Mutually assured destruction ring a bell here?
Hymm the video didn't show them threatening police or even doing anything violent. They did say Black Power. Where are the sources of the hate speech and threats to cops? Was the conservative tribune there? I am only curious. This happened a while back. I didn't see any follow up of violence occurring after that. I am not sure if they had a permit to gather. They could have been breaking the law there.
+Matthew Shuey "BREAKING: The New Black Panthers have mobilized, carrying rifles and "marching" to "protect" certain neighborhoods while threatening police."
I am looking for the threats on this video and post. It mentions threats to police during the march but it doesn't say what they said. Is there any other coverage on this. I want to know how they threatened the police during this march. Was there anybody covering this story on the ground? Is this A.P.?
+Matthew Shuey As far as I recall, there were NO threats.
+Matthew Shuey the threat is the action of the march. To intervene in police matters in matters of criminal offenses.
Yes there are bad apples in the police force. There are bad apples in everything and there will be ones in this march.
The march is one of a fight against an oppressive government when their examples are that of bad apples and not government oppression.
So now police have to be wary of their decisions by giving into mob mentality when in pursuit in protection of the laws the same mobs tax money pays them to pursue.
Thanks +Pradheep Shanker. I thought I was losing my mind for a moment. I kept looking but couldn't find anything.
+Matthew Shuey I will have to find the link (this was a few weeks ago) but basically the Black Panthers followed the law, went around with other 'neighborhood watch' types; and even the police said they behaved respectfully.
I am not sure what the problem is then.
Yes I would like to see that. Thanks!
Yeah same here +Pradheep Shanker! If you have followup I'd love to see it. I didn't run across that when I was looking this up.
+Thomas Milne The "threatening police" was a post made by the Conservative Tribute on their Facebook page. They did not in fact do that at all. The evidence they posted to support it was the video I linked to (in the post) and as +Matthew Shuey keeps pointing out, they didn't threaten anyone. They also did not interfere with police matters and last I checked, unless a specific permit is required and you don't get it (and this is usually dictated by the size being organized), you can peacefully march anytime you want.
+Shawn W Dunn Black people have MORE rights to carry guns? Please cite your source.
+Kenneth M There were multiple types of firearms in the linked video. shrug Then again I'm not a gun owner so I wouldn't know which was which.
Love it!
+Thomas Milne
You realize that MAD only works when both sides hold life in high value. When one of those sides has zero respect for the sanctity of life, that side has no qualms about 'pushing the button'.
You have to support the right to arm and protect oneself no matter who carries the gun (as long as it is a legally owned weapon). I would hope that no one cries racism if they are subjected to the same level of scrutiny and harassment that the open carry proponents have been, in the numerous videos we see here on YouTube. I would also hope that law enforcement do not feel restrained in that capacity for fear of being labeled racist.
+Shawn W Dunn
They have just as much right as anyone. There is no arguing that statement. However to say that any one group has more of a right based on their race, is a racist statement. I hope you can see that.
+West Kagle You apparently have reading comprehension issues.
+Shawn W Dunn
ok…….I see we're just an adult with the mind of a child. At least I know what I'm dealing with. ¬_¬
+West Kagle It would be pointless for me to engage in a discussion with you, as you've already decided that I'm a racist. I'm not, and you deliberately misread my statement to arrive at that conclusion.
+Shawn W Dunn I'm still waiting for you to back up your statement that black people have MORE rights to carry guns? Please cite your source.
That's a new one. I would definitely would like to see the source.
What in the fuck. I made no such assertation, you bloody troglodytes. I said "and I might even argue, MORE of a right, given the way things have worked out"
It was an intellectual musing. A thought exercise, and a discussion that could be had.
In no way, shape, or form, was it presented as a fact, or any other sort of policy statement.
Sweet fucking crispy walnuts it's jackwads like you two fuckheads that make me hate social media.
Well +Shawn W Dunn then make your argument as you stated above "and I might even argue, MORE of a right". I would love to hear how and why African Americans have more of a right to carry firearms than Whites, Asians, Latinos and others.
+Shawn W Dunn
You can't postulate a prevailing national racist atmosphere black people have to deal with, buy making a racist statement saying that they have more right than any other group. It's like the saying, 'all animals are created equal…….but some are more equal than others'.
+West Kagle he never said that
You are breaking a complete sentence to proliferate an out of context argument.
The thought experiment is valid as the constitutional issue responded to is directed at said people and not white people which gives credence to the originating thought experiment.
+Thomas Milne
So it was a racist statement. 😉
+West Kagle please oh please tell me how you came to that conclusion because if you do it will also place it on the original writer we are all here to discuss.
+Thomas Milne
He said that one race of people has more of a right to open carry firearms. In my experience dealing with racism-on-the-brain liberals, merely insinuating that one race has any predominance in any aspect of reality, is racist. He did more than insinuate, he outright said that black people had more of a right. Therefore……a racist statement.
We could go further down the liberal logic path, and say that only a racist person would say such a racist statement, so he must be a racist. Now I figure that all self-respecting liberals will want to ostracize him, label him for life, and ruin any chance of him having any kind of career in any field (except maybe in the custodial arts).
+West Kagle asked an answered
The context is the right to arm when oppressed by your government body.
Is any other race being treated like the writer puts forth?
You are taking a portion of a statement and giving it life.
There is zero credence for it.
Please stop with the logical fallacy's.
+Thomas Milne
So then if I say that based on recent trends, blacks are more likely to be the race committing crimes, that wouldn't be racist, right, because it's based on what we have seen in the media.
You still don't see that by grouping any segment of the population together based on race, and then treating them different, is the definition of racism. Saying that any race has primacy over any other, is to treat that group different (in this case, giving special consideration instead of denying it), and falls into the category of racism. Much like Affirmative Action is a form of 'good intentioned' racism. However good or bad, racism is racism.
Unless you're talking about the fact that the only race that can be racist is white people. Then I totally see where you're coming from………but not really. ¬_¬
+West Kagle No.
The topic at hand(again) is the view of political opression and the need or desire to use a given rights to all to defend.
So as the comment pretains to the writers writings that a thought experiement about the needs to defend civil rights where prevelant. We see a need for a defence from the oppressed.
If keep attempting to disect comments to push a racist agenda. You will find it. Just not where you are looking.
+Thomas Milne
He didn't just say that all people have the right to carry a gun, he also said the one group has even more of a claim to that right based on their race.
I would have hoped by now (through my use of ridiculous logic), that I was pointing this out to show how stupid it is when folks cry racism at the simplest and most innocent of comments. It's not so fun when the argument and accusations are turned around and the 'morally superior' are staring down the barrel of this ludicrous McCarthyesque type weapon called the racist labeling gun.
+West Kagle there is no need for ridiculous logic as that is a logical fallacy.
He did not say it was based on race. As I have said over and over and over(this is the last time) you have to have context with quotes and more so with broken quotes.
It was based on events that the writer published.
And.
And to top it off.
He said "might".
Keep on with your racist fire starting.
+Thomas Milne
OK……now you're just being foolish. Even when I said that my argument was petty, that I was trying to make a point and that I am in agreement with you, you still feel the need to argue against it (even though there is no opposing side). I think that's quite enough of that.