Jim Crow and the Right to Bear Arms

[SycamoreRuger]

When Sarah Silverman produced her satirical video in 2013 promoting the Black NRA, I contended then (as I do today) that I could care less if there is a Black NRA, and in fact I fully and openly supported the concept despite her tongue-in-cheek criticism.

Yesterday, PBS News Hour released a story about the rapidly-growing National African American Gun Association, which aims to get law-abiding Black shooters (and anyone else who wants to join) involved in shooting sports, learning gun safety, and self-defense. I don't see any mention of lobbying on their website, but they seem to be a new organization and hopefully they can begin to influence lawmakers and public perception soon. Let's face it: we need all the unity and help we can get.

Back to the OP - the PBS story linked above talks about the shooting of legally-armed Philando Castile by police during a routine traffic stop in 2016, and how little the NRA did or said in the aftermath. That kind of story is not going to help build strong bonds with a historically democratic segment of the shooting community that could be very beneficial to the pro-2A movement in times like this.

I am proud of Molly and the handful of others here who ensure that "IllinoisCarry helps a lot of people get their rights restored and I would say a larger percentage are black."

[Jeffrey]

Ever heard the name Otis Macdonald?

 

Seriously, April fools day is this Sunday.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BobPistol]

Has the OP bothered to read this thread?

The NRA that did wrong in the past has been overthrown in 1977 and replaced by the current NRA which fights for the human rights (RKBA, self-defense) of ALL.

[tbrooks]

I'm slow...what does RKBA stand for?

[chicagoresident]

Right to Keep and Bear Arms

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)

 

On another note here's an interesting story that's mostly unheard of in the history books. GI's returning from war wanted to take their town back from the democratic run machine. So they ran their own candidates. A black voter was shot by the machine appointed deputy. A battle took place to keep the integrity of the election.

[Lou]

I'm slow...what does RKBA stand for?

Shorthand for Right To Keep and Bear Arms.

[BobPistol]

Interesting article.

 

http://www.cc.org/blog/mlk’s_arsenal_amp_racist_roots_gun_control_us

[tbrooks]

Thanks guys.

[THE KING]

Very good article. Maybe some of the gun control reverends like Jackson and Sharpton should get on the same page as MLK.

[chicagoresident]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2018/04/11/why-killer-mike-is-right-african-americans-should-own-guns/?utm_term=.6c95699e732b

 

Another great article, every once in a while WaPo surprises me. Very much written with the point that gun regulations impact minorities the most. Also written with the true intent of the 2nd ammendment.

 

 

The Washington Post

Democracy Dies in Darkness

 

Made by History Perspective

Why Killer Mike is right: African Americans should own guns

Black Americans have long fought for an equal right to bear arms.

By Ameer Hasan Loggins and Christopher Petrella

April 11

 

Black Panther leader Huey Newton holds a shotgun in an undated photo. (Bettmann/UPI)

Last month, hip-hop artist Killer Mike used an interview conducted by the National Rifle Association’s media arm, NRATV, to advocate for black gun ownership, chiding members of his community for being “lackeys” of the white gun-control movement. The interview prompted fierce social media blowback. Many argued that Killer Mike’s words merely served as fodder for the NRA’s attempt to undermine the youth-led March for Our Lives.

 

Days later, Killer Mike issued a two-part video apology on Twitter. The NRA “used the interview to disparage a very noble campaign that I support. My interview was supposed to be something that continued a conversation,” he clarified, “a conversation about African American gun ownership in these times. We have to remember in our allyship [with whites] that we still have to make sure there are certain rights and demands that we make for us and our community. … I support the march and black people owning guns.”

 

Although the controversy surrounding Killer Mike’s interview and apology received significant publicity, few have properly situated it in the history of white supremacy and gun policy. From the earliest days of the American colonies, gun laws have aimed to arm whites and disarm people of color and indigenous people, part of the quest to maintain white supremacy. People of color and indigenous people have long fought against this double standard, recognizing that gun ownership can be integral to securing equality — especially in a country where white gun ownership is valorized and protected.

 

From the earliest days of European colonization, gun laws served as a proxy for regulating and containing people of color and indigenous people. In 1647, “The Laws and Liberties of Massachusetts” banned any man from repairing “any gun, small or great, belonging to any Indian. … Nor shall sell or give to any Indian, directly or indirectly any such gun, or any gun-powder, shot or lead, or shotmould, or any militarie weapons or armour.” Punishment entailed a fine of 10 pounds or, absent that, corporal punishment.

 

Connecticut replicated this statute almost word for word in 1650. Ten years later, Connecticut officials declared that “Negroes” and “Indians” were exempt from serving in the militia, which for practical purposes meant they could not possess firearms.

 

Such laws spread over the next 200 years. For example, in 1712, South Carolina disqualified slaves from gun ownership on account of their “barbarous, wild, savage natures,” as they could not be “governed by the laws, customs and practices of this Province.” This prohibition aimed to “restrain the disorders, rapines and inhumanity to which they are naturally prone and inclined; and may also tend to the safety and security of the people of this Province and their estates.”

 

In the aftermath of the ratification of the Constitution, a number of states sought to enact laws spelling out the racial boundaries of gun policy. In 1825, Florida’s “Act to Govern Patrols” provided that white citizens “shall enter into all negro houses and suspected places, and search for arms and other offensive or improper weapons, and may lawfully seize and take away all such arms, weapons, and ammunition.”

 

From the outset, people of color and indigenous people understood that disarming them was an integral piece of subjugating them — and accordingly resisted. In the 19th century, Harriet Tubman rescued hundreds from slavery while armed with a pistol and a three-foot-long ivory-handled sword. In 1893, a year after black abolitionist Ida B. Wells published “Southern Horrors,” a text detailing the lynchings of black people in the South, she observed that “the Winchester rifle deserved a place of honor in every Black home, and it should be used for that protection which the law refuses to give.”

 

Leaders of the 20th-century struggle for civil rights recognized the ongoing need for self-defense in the form of gun ownership. In fact, even Martin Luther King Jr., one of the staunchest advocates of nonviolence, applied for a concealed carry permit in 1956 after his house was bombed. Although his application was denied, armed supporters guarded his home.

 

 

Contrary to mainstream narratives that highlight nonviolence, firearms were central to the modern civil rights movement. Influential organizations such as the Louisiana-based Deacons for Defense and Justice protected nonviolent demonstrations by the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) against Ku Klux Klan violence by bringing their guns to protests. Malcolm X and advocates of Black Power, including Robert Williams, author of the 1962 bestseller “Negroes With Guns,” believed that because the U.S. government was “either unable or unwilling to protect the lives and property” of black people, they had to defend themselves “by whatever means necessary.”

 

Maybe the best parallel to Killer Mike’s orientation toward black gun ownership was the stance taken by the Black Panther Party a half-century ago.

 

The Panthers first took up arms in October 1966 to defend members of their community against repeated harassment and violence perpetrated by the Oakland Police Department. On May 2, 1967, a cadre of armed Black Panthers ascended the steps of the California State Capital Building in Sacramento. Co-founder Bobby Seale read a statement saying, “The time has come for black people to arm themselves against this terror before it is too late.”

 

 

In a direct response to the demonstration, however, then-Gov. Ronald Reagan signed the Mulford Act (colloquially known as the Panther Bill), which, according to the Los Angeles Times, banned “the carrying of loaded weapons in most public places” in California. Reagan endorsed the bill by saying that guns were a “ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will.” As with denying King a concealed-carry permit, it was clear that white America would not accept African Americans taking advantage of their right to bear arms.

 

 

To this day, gun laws are wielded against black Americans. White people may be more likely to own or carry a gun, but black people are more likely to be imprisoned for it, or shot for legally practicing their Second Amendment rights, a reality most clearly exemplified by the 2016 shooting of Philando Castile, for which police officer Jeronimo Yanez was acquitted of all charges.

 

In his NRATV interview and subsequent apology, Killer Mike highlighted the importance of having a serious and sustained national conversation about black gun ownership in the United States. Wherever one stands on the issue of gun ownership, one must wrestle with the reality that firearms policy has for hundreds of years served to regulate the bodies and movement of people of color and indigenous people. Arming themselves has helped African Americans escape subjugation and enjoy the equal rights promised to them by the law. Given the fierce resistance to gun control, Killer Mike just might be onto something.

 

Ameer Hasan Loggins is a Ph.D. candidate in African Diaspora studies at the University of California, Berkeley. Follow @LeftSentThis

Christopher Petrella teaches at American University and serves as The Antiracist Research & Policy Center's Director of Advocacy & Strategic Partnerships. Follow @CFPetrella

The Post Recommends

[Raw Power]

Has the OP bothered to read this thread?

 

The NRA that did wrong in the past has been overthrown in 1977 and replaced by the current NRA which fights for the human rights (RKBA, self-defense) of ALL.

 

And yet they still failed to come to the defense of a lawful CCL holder who was killed in a Minneapolis suburb recently.

 

The NRA failures of 1968 are still with the agency in many ways today.

[matkinson]

 

Has the OP bothered to read this thread?

 

The NRA that did wrong in the past has been overthrown in 1977 and replaced by the current NRA which fights for the human rights (RKBA, self-defense) of ALL.

 

And yet they still failed to come to the defense of a lawful CCL holder who was killed in a Minneapolis suburb recently.

 

If you haven't watched the video evidence, you should. It's a shame that Mr. Castile died, but it certainly appeared to be a case where he pulled out a gun during a traffic stop.

[tbrooks]

 

 

Has the OP bothered to read this thread?

 

The NRA that did wrong in the past has been overthrown in 1977 and replaced by the current NRA which fights for the human rights (RKBA, self-defense) of ALL.

 

And yet they still failed to come to the defense of a lawful CCL holder who was killed in a Minneapolis suburb recently.

 

If you haven't watched the video evidence, you should. It's a shame that Mr. Castile died, but it certainly appeared to be a case where he pulled out a gun during a traffic stop.

 

Looks like you need to re-watch that video...where did he "pull out" a gun during the stop? Didn't the cop get trigger happy/scared while Mr. Castile was fidgeting?

[tkroenlein]

Right or wrong, a jury of his peers found the officer innocent. There is absolutely nothing the NRA could have done to affect another outcome.

 

Let's not rehash this.

[kevinmcc]

Historically there is evidence that if a black man and a white man both enter a courtroom for the same crime the white man is more likely to receive probation or have his charges reduced/dropped. The black man isn't given the same slap on the wrist but will likely be sent off to prison or at the very least leave the courtroom with a felony.

 

To that end, the black man then will likely never have the right to regain the Constitutional Right to Bear Arms. He has a greater risk of being assaulted, robbed, murdered, etc.. but even after demonstrating years of good behavior he can't own a gun.

 

So I feel that organizations like the NRA only fight for the white folks to have guns.

You need to listen to Tommy Sotomayor, DJJustJay, Anthony Brian Logan, Jesse Lee Peterson, Mind of Jamal, and other conservative blacks.

 

The non-sense that comes out of "Pro-Black" community is just excuses and hatred.

 

Ever heard of Otis McDonald? Maybe you should look him up...

[vito]

More than any other organization, the NRA has tried to educate the public that many of the gun control laws passed in this country were specifically aimed at denying blacks the ability to defend themselves. The NRA has considered itself a civil rights organization and has promoted the idea that the RKBA is a universal right of Americans that should not be denied to minorities or anyone else. I can't speak for what the NRA was back before 1977, or before about 1990 actually, since that is when I first became a member, but since I have been part of this organization I have felt proud for the values that the NRA stands for and for their commitment to securing the rights under the 2A for all of us.

[djchitown]

I just received my FOID card after appealing the denial. Feeling Awesome right now!

[2smartby1/2]

When I get some time, I'll read some of the articles. I used to be a fan of the NRA, but sometime in the 90's, I feel like it lost it apolitical status and also became a lobbyist for the gun industry as opposed to being about safety and sport.

 

Because of that, I (and most other blacks like me) don't give two craps about "Colion Noir" (Colion Black...really?), better known as Collins Iyare Idehen Jr.....whose parents are immigrants from one of those....how do you say..."****-hole countries"? (Both are from Nigeria)

[2smartby1/2]

 

You need to listen to Tommy Sotomayor, DJJustJay, Anthony Brian Logan, Jesse Lee Peterson, Mind of Jamal, and other conservative blacks.

 

The non-sense that comes out of "Pro-Black" community is just excuses and hatred.

 

Ever heard of Otis McDonald? Maybe you should look him up...

 

The OP's initial post came off as trolling...but this response is really condescending.

[Sigma]

Why are we responding to this garbage? Joined in Feb, on 8 posts. Do the math

[chicagoresident]

When I get some time, I'll read some of the articles. I used to be a fan of the NRA, but sometime in the 90's, I feel like it lost it apolitical status and also became a lobbyist for the gun industry as opposed to being about safety and sport.

 

Because of that, I (and most other blacks like me) don't give two craps about "Colion Noir" (Colion Black...really?), better known as Collins Iyare Idehen Jr.....whose parents are immigrants from one of those....how do you say..."****-hole countries"? (Both are from Nigeria)

Not an NRA fan but they are not "lobbiests for the gun industry". That's pure BS that antigun types spew.

 

If you said they have endorsed politicians that have turned their backs on gun rights, endorsed police unions that are sometimes a conflict of interest for 2a rights, fail to fight the criminal justice system on 2a rights restoration, or worked to pass more restrictive gun control measures in the name of safety then we can be on the same page.

 

Of all the things the NRA wastes member money on, like celebrities, I'm glad they aren't using it to fund fake research that would be used against them.

 

It's in the interest of the NRA to get more armed citizens, not to restrict who can own guns and what types. This is where they've sometimes failed their members.

 

Also when the NRA was a bunch of FUdds that were all about sport it was very destructive to gun rights, especially African American gun rights. That was part of why the NRA cincinnati revolt reshaped them to fight for the right of armed self defense.

 

As far as safety I feel like they've won that fight. Gun accidents are very rare compared to before the gun industry and the NRA's safety campaign. Guns are mechanically safer then they used to be. Things like malfunctions and drop discharges are a big deal now, where in the past the attitude was its a gun, of course its dangerous.

 

Not to mention most publicized gun "accidents" are intentional homicides covered up or are crime guns stashed with no intention of safe storage.

[2smartby1/2]

 

When I get some time, I'll read some of the articles. I used to be a fan of the NRA, but sometime in the 90's, I feel like it lost it apolitical status and also became a lobbyist for the gun industry as opposed to being about safety and sport.

 

Because of that, I (and most other blacks like me) don't give two craps about "Colion Noir" (Colion Black...really?), better known as Collins Iyare Idehen Jr.....whose parents are immigrants from one of those....how do you say..."****-hole countries"? (Both are from Nigeria)

Not an NRA fan but they are not "lobbiests for the gun industry". That's pure BS that antigun types spew.

 

If you said they have endorsed politicians that have turned their backs on gun rights, endorsed police unions that are sometimes a conflict of interest for 2a rights, fail to fight the criminal justice system on 2a rights restoration, or worked to pass more restrictive gun control measures in the name of safety then we can be on the same page.

 

Of all the things the NRA wastes member money on, like celebrities, I'm glad they aren't using it to fund fake research that would be used against them.

 

It's in the interest of the NRA to get more armed citizens, not to restrict who can own guns and what types. This is where they've sometimes failed their members.

 

Also when the NRA was a bunch of FUdds that were all about sport it was very destructive to gun rights, especially African American gun rights. That was part of why the NRA cincinnati revolt reshaped them to fight for the right of armed self defense.

 

As far as safety I feel like they've won that fight. Gun accidents are very rare compared to before the gun industry and the NRA's safety campaign. Guns are mechanically safer then they used to be. Things like malfunctions and drop discharges are a big deal now, where in the past the attitude was its a gun, of course its dangerous.

 

Not to mention most publicized gun "accidents" are intentional homicides covered up or are crime guns stashed with no intention of safe storage.

 

I still see the NRA is a gun lobby. They get funds from the gun industry through avenues like the NRA Ring of Freedom (Corporate Sponsors), advertising for the gun industry, and both direct and indirect contributions from the gun industry either through donations, or paid NRA memberships with purchases. You say it is to get more armed citizens, I say that is simply a means to sell more weapons. If they didn't receive funds or profits for any weapons, advertising, or parts sold, maybe I would be more inclined to think they were less of a lobbyist.

 

They F'd up in 68, and did themselves no favors with us in Minny a few years ago. The NRA may have plenty of interest in me buying plenty of guns ($$$), and will fight for my right to make sure I can buy each and every gun out there, but have shown little interest in actually defending me (other than making sure I can buy more guns) as a gun owner.

[quackersmacker]

 

 

When I get some time, I'll read some of the articles. I used to be a fan of the NRA, but sometime in the 90's, I feel like it lost it apolitical status and also became a lobbyist for the gun industry as opposed to being about safety and sport.

 

Because of that, I (and most other blacks like me) don't give two craps about "Colion Noir" (Colion Black...really?), better known as Collins Iyare Idehen Jr.....whose parents are immigrants from one of those....how do you say..."****-hole countries"? (Both are from Nigeria)

Not an NRA fan but they are not "lobbiests for the gun industry". That's pure BS that antigun types spew.

 

If you said they have endorsed politicians that have turned their backs on gun rights, endorsed police unions that are sometimes a conflict of interest for 2a rights, fail to fight the criminal justice system on 2a rights restoration, or worked to pass more restrictive gun control measures in the name of safety then we can be on the same page.

 

Of all the things the NRA wastes member money on, like celebrities, I'm glad they aren't using it to fund fake research that would be used against them.

 

It's in the interest of the NRA to get more armed citizens, not to restrict who can own guns and what types. This is where they've sometimes failed their members.

 

Also when the NRA was a bunch of FUdds that were all about sport it was very destructive to gun rights, especially African American gun rights. That was part of why the NRA cincinnati revolt reshaped them to fight for the right of armed self defense.

 

As far as safety I feel like they've won that fight. Gun accidents are very rare compared to before the gun industry and the NRA's safety campaign. Guns are mechanically safer then they used to be. Things like malfunctions and drop discharges are a big deal now, where in the past the attitude was its a gun, of course its dangerous.

 

Not to mention most publicized gun "accidents" are intentional homicides covered up or are crime guns stashed with no intention of safe storage.

 

I still see the NRA is a gun lobby. They get funds from the gun industry through avenues like the NRA Ring of Freedom (Corporate Sponsors), advertising for the gun industry, and both direct and indirect contributions from the gun industry either through donations, or paid NRA memberships with purchases. You say it is to get more armed citizens, I say that is simply a means to sell more weapons. If they didn't receive funds or profits for any weapons, advertising, or parts sold, maybe I would be more inclined to think they were less of a lobbyist.

 

They F'd up in 68, and did themselves no favors with us in Minny a few years ago. The NRA may have plenty of interest in me buying plenty of guns ($$$), and will fight for my right to make sure I can buy each and every gun out there, but have shown little interest in actually defending me (other than making sure I can buy more guns) as a gun owner.

 

The NRA has done more for firearms training of civilians, police, and military than all other organizations combined. And they've done more for firearms safety than the misguided efforts of folks like Pfather Pfaker and his minions, times a factor of thousands, maybe millions.

 

What they've done a lousy job of is not communicating this massive effort over decades. Maybe they should split into two organizations, political lobbying and public education. One of those is a noble effort! And the other one is sadly necessary.

[chicagoresident]

I still see the NRA is a gun lobby. They get funds from the gun industry through avenues like the NRA Ring of Freedom (Corporate Sponsors), advertising for the gun industry, and both direct and indirect contributions from the gun industry either through donations, or paid NRA memberships with purchases. You say it is to get more armed citizens, I say that is simply a means to sell more weapons. If they didn't receive funds or profits for any weapons, advertising, or parts sold, maybe I would be more inclined to think they were less of a lobbyist.

 

They F'd up in 68, and did themselves no favors with us in Minny a few years ago. The NRA may have plenty of interest in me buying plenty of guns ($$$), and will fight for my right to make sure I can buy each and every gun out there, but have shown little interest in actually defending me (other than making sure I can buy more guns) as a gun owner.

 

I really don't see how the gun lobby (NRA contributed or other groups funded by the manufacturers) hurt our rights (with the exception of the Springfield Armory Rock River arms debacle). Without them we would of been screwed during the Obama years. We also would of been screwed in Illinois last legislative season if it wasn't for local gun/sporting industry lobbiests.

 

Buying more guns is a good thing, the more types available the harder it is to ban certain types. The gun industry has opened up a lot of grounds both in legislature and working around the ATF to get more types of guns available for sale. If the gun industry wasn't involved you'd only be able to buy a short list of guns that meet arbitrary fake "safety" rules like California or Massachusetts.

 

Recently gun rights are being lost in the legislative branch and restored in the judicial branch. You still need people blocking the legislation so you need the gun industry for that massive effort.

 

There are other gun rights groups that are fighting the effort in the judicial branch, but that you can do with more grassroots efforts since it's lawyers and individuals.

 

I wish the NRA actually did have unflinching support of the gun industry. Unfortunately due to their other lobbying ties they don't always have the industries best intentions in mind.