Is Garry McCarthy Right About Gun Laws Being Racist?

[virginia mountainman]

Interesting read, thought I would share!

Since the days of slavery blacks in one way or another have been the subjects of restrictive gun laws. Both enslaved and free blacks were prohibited from possessing firearms, except under very restrictive conditions. Gun restrictions for blacks gained traction after Nat Turner’s Rebellion in 1831, a revolt that caused the south to become increasingly irrational in its fears. Even after slavery various black codes adopted throughout the country required blacks to obtain a license before carrying or possessing firearms.

Historically blacks have been one of the major vocal oppositions to gun control, including the Deacons for Defense and Justice as well as the Black Panthers, who infamously marched on the California capitol to protest the Mulford Act of 1967, a bill inspired by the Panthers Police Patrols that prohibited the public carrying of loaded firearms. Even Clarence Thomas, writing in response to a recent Supreme Court decision to expend gun control, cited his opposition to gun restrictions, suggesting that “…when the Ku Klux Klan and other white supremacist groups proliferated, the use of firearms for self-defense was often the only way black citizens could protect themselves against mob violence.” It may seem like ancient history now but remember that after Obama was elected there was a reported run on gun and ammo supply shops, and just last year some members of the Tea Party staged several armed demonstrations around the capital as a “symbol” of their freedom.

Garry is right, Gun Control is very racist, just not in the way he thinks...

http://atlantapost.com/2011/06/29/is-garry-mccarthy-right-when-he-claims-that-gun-laws-are-racist/

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[spin]

2. There is a long history of racism in the gun control movement ..

and it's well documented.

GUN CONTROL AND RACISM
Stefan B. Tahmassebi*

***snip***

I. GUN CONTROL MEASURES HAVE BEEN AND ARE USED TO DISARM AND OPPRESS BLACKS AND OTHER MINORITIES

The historical purpose of gun control laws in America has been one of discrimination and disenfranchisement of blacks, immigrants, and other minorities. American gun control laws have been enacted to disarm and facilitate repressive actions against union organizers, workers, the foreign-born and racial minorities.<2> Bans on particular types of firearms and firearms registration schemes have been enacted in many American jurisdictions for the alleged purpose of controlling crime. Often, however, the purpose or actual effect of such laws or regulations was to disarm and exert better control over the above-noted groups.<3> As Justice Buford of the Florida Supreme Court noted in his concurring opinion narrowly construing a Florida gun control statute:

I know something of the history of this legislation. The original Act of 1893 was passed when there was a great influx of negro laborers in this State drawn here for the purpose of working in turpentine and lumber camps. The same condition existed when the Act was amended in 1901 and the Act was passed for the purpose of disarming the negro laborers . . . . The statute was never intended to be applied to the white population and in practice has never been so applied. . . .here has never been, within my knowledge, any effort to enforce the provisions of this statute as to white people, because it has been generally conceded to be in contravention of the Constitution and non-enforceable if contested.<4>

Implicit in the message of such a law was the perceived threat that armed Negroes would pose to the white community. As applied, therefore, the statute sent a clear message: only whites could be trusted with guns, while Negroes could not.
http://www.lizmichael.com/tahmasse.htm

It was easy for the Klan to harass minorities as long as they were unarmed.

Second Amendment Freedoms Aided the Civil Rights Movement
2/6/2007Ken Blackwell


***snip***

In his 2004 book, The Deacons for Defense: Armed Resistance and the Civil Rights Movement, Tulane University history professor Lance Hill tells their story. Hill writes of how a group of southern working class black men advanced civil rights through direct action to protect members of local communities against harassment at schools and polling places, and to thwart the terror inflicted by the Ku Klux Klan. He argues that without the Deacon’s activities the civil rights movement may have come to a crashing halt.

The spring and summer of 1964 were landmark periods for civil rights. In growing numbers, Southerners marched against segregation. The battle over race lit Louisiana aflame. In response to civil rights activism, the Klan wreaked havoc on black neighborhoods, but soon found itself face-to-face with the Deacons.

Following a KKK night ride in Jonesboro, the Deacons approached the police chief who had led the parade and informed him that they were armed and unafraid of self-defense. The Klan never rode through Jonesboro again. Local cross burnings ceased when warning shots were fired as a Klansmen’s torch met a cross planted in front of a black minister’s home. The initial desegregation of Jonesboro High School was threatened by firemen who aimed hoses at black students attempting to enter the building. When four Deacons arrived and loaded their shotguns, the firemen left and the students entered unscathed. It was this series of efforts by the Deacons that caused the Klan to leave Jonesboro for good.
http://townhall.com/columnists/kenblackwell/2007/02/06/second_amendment_freedoms_aided_the_civil_rights_movement

Deacons for Defense

[HankyDubs]

13. There is also a history of racism in the pro-gun movement

and its MUCH more recent:

"Have you ever heard of the Patriot's Prayer? This is The Ku Klux Klan's version: Give me the sense to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the weapon to make the difference. Never surrender your firearms. Without the Second Amendment, we would not have the First Amendment."

http://liberator.net/articles/KKKJeffBerry.html

And each time this disgusting charge is made, I make sure to tell all the gungeon to:

READ MY SIG

Then call MLK a racist for supporting control, or call MLK III a racist, or call Bobby Rush a racist. Call them all racist while you take the same gun position as the KKK.

BTW, Nice job citing an article written by a republiklan in Townhall.com. Maybe you were afraid of having too much credibility?

[Straw Man]

34. Guilt by association. It's a fallacy, Hankey.

There is also a history of racism in the pro-gun movement

Perhaps you meant to say "a pro-gun history in the racist movement." The KKK is not a gun rights organization, much as you'd like to portray it as one.

Was Robert Hicks a racist? After all, he took the "KKK position" too:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/25/us/25hicks.html

And no, people who favor gun control aren't therefore racists -- that's an equally ridiculous guilt-by-association. But the roots of gun control in America are decidedly racist and anti-immigrant. Maybe you want to maintain that "it's all different now," and it might be, but only to the extent that classism has largely replaced racism and nativism as the driving force: "Let's deal with urban crime by banning guns -- who gives a crap what the rednecks think. They're all Republicans and Klansmen anyway."

Are you sure you want to use Bobby Rush as one of your paragons of non-violence? After all, he was for armed resistance before he was against it.

[HankyDubs]

42. the modern gun rights movement is extremely racist

see Nugent, Ted. Not every individual is overtly or covertly racist, but the strength of the movement is absolutely connected to white suburban fear.

Perhaps you meant to say "a pro-gun history in the racist movement."

You have a point here. I'm going to mull it over.

Are you sure you want to use Bobby Rush as one of your paragons of non-violence?

I don't remember referring to him as such. I'm referring to him as a control advocate who was a member of the black panther party, referenced in the OP article. In fact I would point out (and maybe he would share this opinion or maybe not) that the use of guns by the Party led directly to the state-sanctioned murder of prominent leaders of the party. When some BPP members used their guns to extort local businesses, they destroyed the credibility of the organization. As much as I admire Fred Hampton, Huey Newton and Mr. Rush, using guns and resorting to violence backfired for the BPP. People without guns made more progress.

[Straw Man]

55. And you're basing this all on Ted Nugent?

Pretty broad brush, there.

When some BPP members used their guns to extort local businesses, they destroyed the credibility of the organization.

The key word there is extortion, not guns. They began to prey upon the people they were ostensibly protecting. With or without guns, that destroyed their credibility.

As much as I admire Fred Hampton, Huey Newton and Mr. Rush, using guns and resorting to violence backfired for the BPP. People without guns made more progress.

I submit to you that it did not backfire for the movement as a whole. Reform is driven by the fear of revolution.

[HankyDubs]

67. Ted Nugent represents many people

head on over to free republic and see how many gun rights owners are fanatically devoted to Mr. Nugent. I'd say that percentage is pretty damned high.

The key word there is extortion, not guns

I can't believe you are actually arguing this point. I don't really care how you want to spin it. Embracing guns did lead directly to the murder of Fred Hampton, the imprisonment of Huey Newton etc etc etc.

I submit to you that it did not backfire for the movement as a whole. Reform is driven by the fear of revolution.

It is unfortunate that you cannot conceive of revolution without gun violence. It is hard to figure whether the BPP was substantially beneficial to the civil rights struggle, but it isn't hard to figure that the individuals lives were taken or ruined because they resorted to violence.

[Straw Man]

69. Ted Nugent doesn't represent me.

The key word there is extortion, not guns.

I can't believe you are actually arguing this point. I don't really care how you want to spin it. Embracing guns did lead directly to the murder of Fred Hampton, the imprisonment of Huey Newton etc etc etc.

I don't care what you don't believe, and I don't care how you want to spin it. They were a fringe that pushed the limits of the envelope. Their ultimate function in the civil rights struggle was to make the moderates appear to be the preferable alternative. That you fail to understand this reflects on your own political naiveté.

It is hard to figure whether the BPP was substantially beneficial to the civil rights struggle, but it isn't hard to figure that the individuals lives were taken or ruined because they resorted to violence.

Of course they were. And individual lives were also taken or ruined among those that followed the non-violent path. Again, this was regrettable, but in the end it furthered the cause.

[spin]

57. The KKK does not represent the pro-gun movement ...

nor do the various militia movements.

I am definitely a "pro-gun" individual and I believe in the right for ALL honest citizens to own firearms and in fact have often introduced my minority friends to the enjoyment of shooting. I support "shall issue" concealed carry laws which are colorblind.

I'm sure that there are racist gun owners but they are a minority and often members of a fringe group.

Are you aware that Martin Luther King owned firearms?

MLK and His Guns

Adam Winkler

Professor of Law, UCLA
Posted: January 18, 2011 08:25 AM

One issue on everyone's mind this Martin Luther King Jr. day was gun control. King's calls for resolving our differences through peaceful nonviolence are especially poignant after Jared Loughner gunned down six people and wounded several others in Tucson. Amid the clamor for new gun laws, its appropriate to remember King's complicated history with guns.

Most people think King would be the last person to own a gun. Yet in the mid-1950s, as the civil rights movement heated up, King kept firearms for self-protection. In fact, he even applied for a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

A recipient of constant death threats, King had armed supporters take turns guarding his home and family. He had good reason to fear that the Klan in Alabama was targeting him for assassination.

William Worthy, a journalist who covered the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, reported that once, during a visit to King's parsonage, he went to sit down on an armchair in the living room and, to his surprise, almost sat on a loaded gun. Glenn Smiley, an adviser to King, described King's home as "an arsenal."
http://www.google.com/search?q=Martin+Luther+King&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

The article goes on to mention that MLK applied for a concealed weapons permit in Alabama but the local police denied his application as they commonly discriminated against minorities. That's why I favor shall issue concealed carry.

[HankyDubs]

68. racists are not a minority in the pro-gun movement

possibly there are a few anti-racist gungeon members, but the rank and file of the pro-gun movement is extremely white, extremely suburban, extremely male and extremely racist.

[Straw Man]

70. Have a cite for that? Or is it just "common knowledge"?

possibly there are a few anti-racist gungeon members

That's actually pretty amusing. Could you have qualified that any more? Maybe add a "might be" or an "it is rumored that"?

[lawodevolution]

75. Gun control has always been racist and still is. Y'all are still trying to oppress gun ownership in

The inner city. You try to turn it around on us but the problem is you can find people who are labeled racist in any group. Gun control supporters have disproportionatly oppressed gun ownership to minorities while pro gun activists fight disproportionatly for the right of minorities to own guns and be able to defend themselves. I have never had many restrictions on my personal gun ownership but the money I donate tends to increase gun rights in areas that have more minorities such as dc or inner city Chicago. So the pro gun movement is pro civil rights and helps minorities.

[sharesunited]

3. Easy access to guns and ammo is racist. Inner city gun crime proves it.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sharesunited]

8. Easy access everywhere, agreed. And the inner city is paying the ultimate price for it.

[eqfan592]

9. Actually, they are paying the price...

...for years of terrible economic, drug, education and other various urban policies. I know you want to live in a fantasy land where somehow guns are the root cause of the issue, but the reality the rest of us have to face is much different.

[Katya Mullethov]

10. So what's wrong with them ?

That they cant have guns like the outer city dwellers ?

[slackmaster]

5. A peak into Section 12020 of the California Penal Code provides a little insight

This law dates back to the late 19th century:

12020. (a) Any person in this state who does any of the following
is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year
or in the state prison:
(1) Manufactures or causes to be manufactured, imports into the
state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives,
lends, or possesses any cane gun or wallet gun, any undetectable
firearm, any firearm which is not immediately recognizable as a
firearm, any camouflaging firearm container, any ammunition which
contains or consists of any fléchette dart, any bullet containing or
carrying an explosive agent, any ballistic knife, any multiburst
trigger activator, any nunchaku, any short-barreled shotgun, any
short-barreled rifle, any metal knuckles, any belt buckle knife, any
leaded cane, any zip gun, any shuriken, any unconventional pistol,
any lipstick case knife, any cane sword, any shobi-zue, any air gauge
knife, any writing pen knife, any metal military practice
handgrenade or metal replica handgrenade, or any instrument or weapon
of the kind commonly known as a blackjack, slungshot, billy,
sandclub, sap, or sandbag....

Underlined entries are historically associated with various immigrant groups, but I'm still not really sure what a shobi-zue is.

[GreenStormCloud]

6. It is a hollow walking stick with a hidden dagger. Like a sword cane. N/T

[slackmaster]

7. Any fixed-blade knife (with a blade over 2" IIRC) is illegal to carry concealed in California

But you can carry one of any size openly, and there is no limit on how big of a folding knife you can carry concealed and folded (as long as it isn't a switchblade as defined in PC 653k.)

[spin]

12. So Californians are unable to legally carry this neat little knife concealed?

The late Bob Loveless was a master knife designer. He designed some of the most popular knives in recent history. His name is synonymous with great knife design.

Mike Stewart was personal friends with Bob Loveless and they shared a number of designs. Mike took one of Bob’s most useful designs, added a little bit of a first finger groove and created the City Knife (after the Loveless city knife.)

Specs:

Overall Length: 6.125 Inches
Blade Length:2.6 Inches
Blade Steel: CPM154 @ 60rc
Blade Thickness: .145 Inch
Weight:3.375 Ounces

It comes in the KSF Leather City Sheath. This great sheath was thought up by Wendy Bohn of KnivesShipFree as a design to hold the most important things you need in a day—ID, Credit Cards and a small fixed blade. It carries like a wallet. You will love it.
http://www.knivesshipfree.com/product_info.php?cPath=465_826&products_id=14298

But you can carry this knife openly?

STS-8 Black Blade with Black Canvas Micarta Matte Handle
The Bark River STS-8 is the third model in the Special Tactical Series made at the bequest of Force Recon personnel. The STS-8 is big and tough and ready for anything that comes its way. No expense has been spared utilizing premium 154CM steel the highest quality micartas and G-10 handles.

Overall Length: 13.875 Inches
Blade Length: 8.5 Inches
Cutting Edge Length: 8.4 Inches
Blade Steel: 154cm @ 58rc
Blade Thickness: .290 Inch
Weight: 16 ounces

Made in Escanaba, Michigan
http://www.crystalfallstradingcompany.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=220_35_337&products_id=2501&osCsid=3bacae481cbf924b32f8992c652d633f

The knife laws in California make little sense

[slackmaster]

46. I believe that is correct. You can wear a sword in most of California.

But you can't carry a concealed one.

[spin]

56. Perhaps a bunch of Californians could go to Starbucks armed with swords ...

like this Cold Steel 1917 Naval Cutlass.

[slackmaster]

60. If they were wearing pirate attire, nobody would look at them twice

It's funny how a person's accoutrement alters bystanders' perceptions of the appropriateness of their armaments.

A person wearing a handgun as a sidearm looks perfectly normal to most people, as long as he or she is wearing something that looks like a uniform (as long as it doesn't include white shoes.)

http://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/429/429,1190134929,2/stock-photo-doctor-with-gun-says-lots-about-high-health-and-surgery-costs-5445370.jpg

[spin]

61. I love the picture in your post.

I know several doctors who carry concealed and one guy who wears scrubs to conceal his weapon.

[slackmaster]

62. Lots of docs are shooters.

I don't have confirmation but I'd bet that my cousin in Kansas was one of the first people in the state to apply for a concealed-weapons permit when it went shall-issue.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

11. Racist and Classist

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Straw Man]

15. Lame canard.

"Same position as the KKK"? And Hitler was a vegetarian: if you don't eat meat, you're a Nazi.

Rubbish.

[HankyDubs]

19. and yet

if you call me a nazi because I eat meat, then it is valid to point out that Hitler was a vegetarian. And that's what we have here.

[Straw Man]

36. And yet you've got it exactly backwards.

if you call me a nazi because I eat meat, then it is valid to point out that Hitler was a vegetarian. And that's what we have here.

And Hitler was a vegetarian: if you don't eat meat, you're a Nazi.

Guilt by assocation, Hankey. It doesn't work, not on either side. That's not what we have here.

[HankyDubs]

44. you aren't understanding?

if the gungeon posters here want to assert or sleazily imply (funny how gutless some people are) that pro-control people are racist, then clearly it is perfectly fair to point out the obvious racism that has infected the pro-gun movement.

Back to the analogy: If you want to call me a Nazi because I eat meat (call me racist because I support control), then it's valid to point out that Hitler was a vegetarian (point out how obviously racist the gun movement is).

[ProgressiveProfessor]

51. So you contend that historically gun control was not rooted in racism and classism?

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Straw Man]

71. More vegetarian Nazis, I see.

You just can't resist, can you.

[eqfan592]

16. Now THAT is a real DUzy....

If you seriously believe that simply because two people (or groups of people) are in agreement on one particular issue that somehow they are in agreement on all, or that somehow the sins of one person or group must somehow rub off on the other because of this agreement, then you have some very SERIOUS issues you need to work out, because that is probably one of the most ridiculous assertions I have ever heard on this forum.

The racists roots of gun control legislation cannot be denied. Unless you can find similar deep roots for the loosening of such legislation, then you have absolutely no leg to stand on.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HankyDubs]

26. probably you should read the op

and for the record, I never said the gun control side was racist by definition.

But I am saying that the pro-gun side depends on racism and would be washed up without it. Look at the Tea Klan.

As the OP said clearly, and some others have in their responses, the clear goal is to associate gun control with racism.

And to that I say, go ahead! Call Bobby Rush a racist. Call MLK a racist. Make fools of yourselves.

[eqfan592]

28. And I'm saying...

...that you can't prove your assertion because your making shit up as you go. I'm sure it makes it easier for you to think of your opposition as all closet racists, though.

And MLK had a concealed carry permit....

[HankyDubs]

29. please write posts that have meaning

just attacking me without any substance at all is boring. Make an argument of some kind.

MLK said: READ THE SIG...now call MLK a racist.

[X_Digger]

30. Well, MLK *applied* for a permit..

He was denied.

Of course, Hanky would rather not hear such quotes from MLK--

"As we have seen, the first public expression of disenchantment with nonviolence arose around the question of "self-defense." In a sense this is a false issue, for the right to defend one's home and one's person when attacked has been guaranteed through the ages by common law." Martin Luther King, Jr., Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community? Chapter II, Black Power, Page 55, Harper & Row Publishers Inc., First Edition, 1967.

[eqfan592]

31. Thanks for the correction.

I thought he actually had one. That was my mistake.

[HankyDubs]

32. just keep reading the sig

every single time this bullshit charge is made.

[eqfan592]

33. Lol, you seem to think that it was impossible...

...for MLK to have a nuanced opinion. I find this to be VERY curious indeed..... :P

[X_Digger]

35. *snort* As if one refutes the other? Riiiiight..

Keep huffing and puffing, I'm sure the oxygen deprivation will kick in soon.

[HankyDubs]

37. go ahead

call Bobby Rush a racist. Call MLK III a racist. Pretend that MLK would be on the pro-gun side of the debate...

and then READ THE SIG

[X_Digger]

38. Refuting arguments that I haven't made.. again?!? *sigh* n/t

[HankyDubs]

40. wake me up when you make one.

[X_Digger]

17. Still with the association fallacies? n/t

[HankyDubs]

20. I guess you'd say the same to the OP?

Nope? Hehehe.

[X_Digger]

22. No, the OP made a direct claim.. didn't try to associate anyone with anything.

You're herping the derp especially hard these days.

[HankyDubs]

24. he made the claim based on an association

maybe your extreme bias makes reading difficult.

[X_Digger]

25. Name the association.. feel free..

Here, I'll quote it for you..

Garry is right, Gun Control is very racist, just not in the way he thinks...

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HankyDubs]

39. How's this for an association?

Ted Nugent!!!

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008200023

"There's a lot of white people in this crowd -- I like that! (Dubuque) is a white town."

http://thecurvature.com/2007/08/28/offensive-remark-of-the-week-7/

I was in Chicago. I said, “Hey, Obama, you might want to suck on one of these, you punk!” Obama, he’s a piece of shit. And I told him to suck on my machine gun. Let’s hear it for it. And I was in New York. I said, “Hey, Hillary, you might want to ride one of these into the sunset, you worthless bitch!”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1e4L_ghwjU

"I'm on top of a real America, workin' hard playin' hard WHITE shitkickers who are independent and get up everyday.." <--one of the gems of this long racist rant.

http://www.michiganliberal.com/diary/17625/ted-nugent-delivers-racist-lecture-to-europe

"The brain-dead politically correct facade of multiculturalism was primarily for the benefit of Muslims, and you know it. European leaders were scared to be labeled as intolerant religious bigots by Muslims. Their fear was misplaced. They should have been vociferously condemning Muslims who wanted to be treated separately."

But our NRA hero does have his defenders: http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t735023/

But now Xdiggy says: Association fallacy! Association??? You're paying his salary!!!

The gun rights movement depends on racism for its survival and here is its official racist spokesman.

[Straw Man]

41. Ted Nugent is a racist asshole who owns guns.

And Hitler was a vegetarian who murdered millions.

Will there be anything else?

[HankyDubs]

43. you forgot

that Ted Nugent is (or was as of 2007) an NRA board member.

Ted Nugent is a racist asshole who sits on the NRA's board.

[eqfan592]

49. Yes, because he strongly supports firearm rights.

Your contention is that he supports them BECAUSE he is racist, a contention you have failed to properly support.

End of story.

[Straw Man]

54. And you forgot ...

... that Roy Innis is a black man who sits (or sat as of 2008) on the NRA's board.

This is just tit-for-tat guilt by association, and goes nowhere. The racist history of gun control is indisputable; no conclusions can be drawn about the current situation. Not every gun rights advocate is Ted Nugent; not every gun control advocate is Martin Luther King.

[HankyDubs]

65. yeah and herman cain is a republiklan

But that doesn't mean the republiklan party isn't racist. It only means that Mr. Cain is a token and Mr. Innis is a token.

The racist dynamic in the current gun rights movement is indisputable. Everyone here who supports the NRA supports Ted Nugent..financially.

[Straw Man]

72. I was wondering if you'd play the "token" card.

And there it comes, just like clockwork. But if the gun rights demographic is so overwhelmingly racist, why do they see the need for this kind of tokenism? The KKK certainly doesn't.

Cute word games aside, if you can't distinguish the Republican party from the Klan, you need a few lessons in the political spectrum.

[gejohnston]

73. But look at the Republicans on your side

"As much as I oppose the average person's having a gun, I recognize that some people have a legitimate need to own one. A wealthy corporate executive who fears his family might get kidnapped is one such person. A Hollywood celebrity who has to protect himself from kooks is another. If Sharon Tate had had access to a gun during the Manson killings, some innocent lives might have been saved."

-Joseph McNamara, San Jose, California ex-Police Chief, and HCI spokesman), Safe and Sane (book) ,1984, p. 71-72

He now works at that very progressive thank tank called the Hoover Institute
http://www.hoover.org/fellows/10420
Then there is Brady, Helmke, Sugarmann
Oh yeah, Trent Lott and Richard Shelby

[gejohnston]

80. He is also

a racist asshole who, from what I understand, likes them young.
a racist asshole that plays the guitar
a racist asshole that makes talented rockers turn in their graves
a racist asshole that enrolled in college just to avoid the draft

[X_Digger]

45. Herp^2!

C'mon Hunky, what's it called when you 'double down' on a 'double down'? Is that a 'quad down'?

Question for ya.. what does the NRA have to do with whether or not gun control has racist roots?

What relevance does it (or it's board members) have to the question at hand?

[DonP]

47. "If I can just reach that straw over there ... uhhhh...almost touch it ..."

"Then I'll show all these pro gun people will see how smart and right I am and they'll all feel stupid"

Straw grasping gun control fan-s. Gotta love 'em.

Thankfully we can afford to view them with some humor since they are increasingly rare and should probably be on the endangered activist list.

Some people refuse to accept simple history. The historically racist roots of gun control are one of the more embarassing things about their position. It's like an adult arguing with a 9 year old.

"You're the racist!"

"Well son that's not true, the actual history is ..."

"La la la I can't hear you, you racist you and you can't make me."

[HankyDubs]

66. oh it's quite relevant

you pay money to an organization that puts this sleaze on its board. You CHOOSE to be associated with him. You deliberately embrace his racist views with cash money. How much do you pay in NRA dues per year? That's exactly how much you support Ted Nugent.

[X_Digger]

78. Relevant to this topic? No.. red herring.

A transparent attempt, at that.

*tsk* *tsk* *tsk* ... I thought you'd improved.

[DanTex]

48. Gun Control and Racism

Conservatives love to claim that gun control is racist, but, like most conservative claims, minorities disagree: if you look at polls, you will find that minorities favor stronger gun control laws. Similarly the GOP/NRA also loves to claim that gun control harms women, because a gun allows a woman to effectively defend herself against a physically stronger attacker. Of course, if you poll women, you again find greater support for gun control than men. Yet another argument the GOP/NRA likes to make is that gun control hurts the poor, because a law that makes it more difficult or expensive to acquire a gun will affect the poor the most. And yet again, those in the lowest income bracket support gun control more than the general population.

In the end, we have a very common situation: the demographic which most favors the right-wing side of the issue are white males. Moreover, it's also not uncommon for conservatives to actually claim that the liberal side of the issue is where "real racism" is -- in addition to guns, think welfare, etc.


The irrelevant historical sidenotes that the GOP/NRA like to bring up are no more persuasive than the argument that the GOP is the "party of Lincoln". Today's reality is that loose gun laws contribute to the plague of violence that affects the urban poor, often minorities, more than any other group. It's no surprise that those most directly affected by gun violence support stricter gun control laws. To most conservative white men, gun violence is theoretical -- these people like to babble about self-defense, perhaps while admiring the engineering of the latest addition to their gun collection, and scoffing at "gun-grabbing" ignoramuses ('he said "clip" instead of "magazine" -- the horror!').

But, understandably, those for whom gun violence is a daily reality have a much different take.

Does this mean all pro-gun people are racist? Of course not. The intelligentsia of the pro-gun movement, including the tiny group of pro-gun liberals, likes to opiate themselves from the reality using some pseudointellectual claptrap about self defense and how guns reduce crime. It allows them to pretend that their views are not actually contributing to violence, especially among the urban poor. But the majority of pro-gun people are not delusional intellectuals -- they are conservative white men who care about the interests of conservative white men.


PS This reminds me of a Daily Show episode from a while back which covered the "guns for tots" toy gun drive, in which a libertarian activist decided to give away toy guns in Harlem. Surely in his affluent suburb, nobody ever gets shot because of a toy gun being mistaken for a real one...

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-may-12-2005/banned-aid

[eqfan592]

50. Actually, the reality is that...

... years of poor economic, education, drug, criminal justice and "urban development" policies contribute to the plague of violence that affects the urban poor. Solve these issues, and you solve the violence issue. "Loose" gun laws have literally nothing to do with it, and no number of poorly constructed papers written by amateurs on the subject matter sponsored by the Joyce Foundation that you can bring forward will change that reality.

What conservative controlled orgs such as the Brady Campaign have managed to do is convince many people that somehow the firearms are the primary issue (hence the polling data you cite). They'll trot out a newspaper article about a violent crime, trot out a study written by somebody who doesn't know the first thing about criminology as "conclusive evidence" that it's all about the guns, and proceed to play on the emotions of those affected by the violence to support their long term political agenda. And of course, anybody who try's to call any of this into question is just being "anti-science."

This has caused Dems to continue to try and expend political power in a direction that will NOT bring forward a long term solution to our nations violence problem, and that totally fails to address the various root causes of the problem in the first place. This has proven to be disastrous for the urban community.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

52. "irrelevant historical sidenotes"? Is that what you call the inconvenient facts?

"Tiny group of pro gun liberals" Another demonstration of cluelessness.

You are seriously out of touch...

[DanTex]

58. Out of touch with DU Guns, perhaps...

Meanwhile, out in the real world, liberals come down pretty heavily in support of gun control. If you look at polls, you would know this. Or maybe you don't believe in polls. Whatever helps you deny reality, I guess.

Similarly, as much as right-wingers like to repeat that the GOP is the "party of Lincoln" or that JFK cut taxes for the rich or that, once upon a time, the relationship between gun control and race was different than it is today, none of this matters much in todays political world. As of the last few decades at least, the pro-gun movement has largely consisted of far-right white men. Meanwhile, liberals, along with people for whom gun violence is a daily reality as opposed to some intellectual exercise -- disproportionately minorities and the urban poor -- support stronger gun control. And for good reason. The people "out of touch" in this debate are the rural white conservatives.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

59. You might want to open your eyes a bit, even on DU RKBA enjoys much broader support amongst

liberal and progressives than you give it credit for. The ongoing roll back of repressive firearms laws in most state with bipartisan support is a clue.

In addition to undergrad and graduate courses, I also teach firearms. My classes are filled by and large with GLBTs and women, few if any I would describe as right wing. I am sure the Pink Pistols would disagree with your characterization as well.

If places like NYC imposed voting restrictions as they do firearms restrictions, there would be no argument about it being racist and classist, even today.

Look at the overall net effect of the myriad of laws, especially in repressive areas like NYC and Washington DC...minorities and the lower economic classes are effectively prevented from having firearms. While you and others try whitewash it by discussing high minded motives, the effect remains no different than it was in reconstruction.

[DanTex]

63. Perhaps one of those grad courses involved looking at data of some kind...

You know, like poll data. The kind that shows that liberals are heavily in favor of stronger gun control -- about as much as they support, for example, gay marriage (Democrats around 65-70%, liberals 75-80%). Would you teach your students to infer social trends from casual observation, or systematic data collection?

As you know, in addition to the recent rollback of gun laws, there has also been a rollback of unions, of the social safety net, etc. In other words, a lot of movement to the right.

You make the common mistake of assuming that the success of the gun lobby reflects the will of the people. If you look at polls, you will find, for example, that banning high-capacity magazines is supported by like 70% of the population. Opposition to CCW on campuses or in bars runs about 80%. The gun lobby, however, is so powerful that they are able to get extreme laws passed despite opposition from the general public. And, gun control is not the only issue where a minority on the right holds disproportionate political power. Higher taxes for the wealthy, the public option in HCR are two high-profile examples of policies which poll extremely well, yet are opposed by powerful and successful right-wing minorities.

Again, if you ask minorities and those in lower economic classes how they feel about gun control, by and large they don't agree with you. Neither do most liberals. You can keep ignoring these facts, and, like I said, I'm sure it helps with the cognitive dissonance -- which I'm sure must be pretty severe in pro-gun liberals.

If places like NYC imposed voting restrictions as they do firearms restrictions, there would be no argument about it being racist and classist, even today.

Yes, and the fact that the people who actually consider gun control classist and racist are largely white conservatives is a good example of how voting rights and gun ownership are completely different things.

[gejohnston]

74. Does the phrase

throwing a bone mean anything to you? From my experience, most liberals really don't give a shit about those in lower economic classes especially rural poor. Most urban liberals I met, quite frankly, detests the latter. Yeah they care in the abstract, but not individually.

[gejohnston]

76. you mean the polling data from Frank Luntz when MAIG hired

him for their latest poll? Or the ones created out of thin air by Brady and company?

[virginia mountainman]

77. LOL most of the liberals I know are well armed...

You should leave the ivory tower, and visit with the "real people" sometime.

[spin]

79. Many liberals live in urban areas with tight firearm restrictions ...

and have little contact with honest firearm owners but often hear of, and sometimes witness, the criminal misuse of firearms in their city. Chicago, New York City, San Francisco and Washington D.C. are examples of cities with a high percentage of liberal voters and restrictive gun laws. It's also common in such cities for the residents to look down on people in other areas of the country as backward.

I lived in the Tampa Bay area of Florida which has far less restrictive gun laws than the cities I mentioned and firearm ownership is very common. Before I retired, I worked for an international company which produced products for the aerospace industry, the military and NASA. Many of my co-workers were well educated and had degrees or had attended technical schools and a good percentage were Democrats. I would estimate that 75% of those I worked with owned firearms and many had concealed carry permits.

While not as large an urban area as the cities I mentioned above, the Tampa Bay area is one of the top 20 metropolitan areas in the United States.

When you live in an area where many if not most of your friends, neighbors and co workers own firearms you develop a far different view of gun ownership than if you live in a area where gun ownership is rare because of restrictive gun laws. Even if you are very liberal, when you know people on a close basis that own firearms, you realize that they are often very well educated and rational individuals and if you discuss the issue of gun control with them they will gladly and politely explain any misconceptions that you have.

Because I was known as a person who shot firearms on a regular basis I often would encounter a person who was considering buying a firearm, frequently for home defense. I always tried to answer any questions but although I do support firearm ownership, I always tried to emphasize the serious responsibility of firearm ownership and would stress that merely buying a firearm is far from enough to guarantee home safety. I would recommend safety courses and some serious time practicing on a range. I also pointed out how important it was to properly secure firearms from children and theft. I always tried to point out that guns are not for everybody and the potential gun owner has to understand the if he/she tends to abuse alcohol, has anger management problems or lives in a volatile relationship with a significant other, than perhaps owning a gun is a poor idea. I would point out that owning a dog, installing burglar alarms and hardening the home so as to making it difficult to break into might be a better solution. I would also mention that realistically the chances of encountering an intruder in your home was slim.

I probably discouraged more people from owning a gun than I did to encourage them to buy one.

I had little interest in owning a firearm when I first moved to the Tampa Bay, area but I was working on the second shift and there were rumors of a prowler in my neighborhood. My wife was concerned. I found a co-worker who was a gun owner and asked for his advice. I considered what he had said and he even offered to sell me one of his handguns. This individual was a strong supporter of gun rights but otherwise held very liberal and progressive views. For example he supported gay rights, although he was a married heterosexual, and this was back in the 70s. He took both me and my wife to the gun range to give us a quick lesson and I discovered just how challenging and how much fun shooting actually was and my wife also enjoyed the experience. We discovered a truly enjoyable and fairly inexpensive hobby. I spent many hours on the range with my wife and several years later we had both became fairly proficient with handguns.

Our daughter would usually go with us to the range and when she was nine years old I started to train her on shooting and firearm safety with a bolt action single shot .22 caliber rifle. Eventually I bought her a small .22 caliber S&W Kit Gun to use on the range as the grip was small enough for her to handle. As she grew she formed an attachment to shooting my .45 ACP S&W Model 25-2 target revolver which was the same size as the .44 magnum that Dirty Harry used in the movie. One night she found an intruder breaking into our home in the kitchen. He had made it halfway through the door when my daughter walked into the kitchen. She pointed the big S&W revolver at him and he wisely decided to run. All the time she spent on the range proved valuable that night.

Many of the gun owners that I knew were Hispanic or Black and I'm proud to say that I introduced shooting to a number of them. Often after work the people I worked with would head out to the shooting range and enjoy some target shooting with handguns and sometimes rifles.

I didn't live in a rich neighborhood as over the 35 years that I owned my home, my neighborhood changed and during the last ten years I lived in a neighborhood which was composed of primarily immigrants from Cuba, Columbia, El Salvador, Puerto Rico and the Dominican Republic. My neighbors were hard working good people and I know that some did own firearms. Since I do not speak Spanish, and often had to find an interpreter (usually one of their children) to talk with my neighbors, my contact with them was limited and a far higher percentage may have owned firearms then I knew.

Now to be fair, the neighborhood I was living in wasn't a slum or a project filled with people who had little opportunity or hope and were not working. The immigrants were people who really appreciated the opportunities our nation offered and they were working to improve their lives and to bring their relatives to this nation. There was crime and a drive by shooting occurred two houses down from mine. The bullets hit a tree and a porch. Several times I witnessed cops chasing people on foot with guns drawn in or near my neighborhood.

Not all liberals and definitely not all Democrats support extremely restrictive gun laws. It is true that a higher percentage of conservatives and Republicans own firearms than Liberals or Democrats, but I feel that that is merely because many liberals and Democrats have little exposure to guns and base their opinion on the tragedies that criminals and gangs commit with their firearms. The forty to eighty million honest people who own firearms rarely cause problems. The few that do get media attention. Many lives are saved by firearms but often such incidents fail to make the news because no shots are fired.

[Remmah2]

53. Gun control discussions seem to be epic.

"they are conservative white men who care about the interests of conservative white men."

Go figure, the conclusion draws itself into a racist assumption.