Black Man With A Gun?

[pipoman]

An interesting site to browse.

http://www.blackmanwithagun.com/site/default.asp?sec_id=140000845



This site is proof that America is still home of the brave and land of the free. Where else could a man of color audaciously exclaim his belief in the right to keep and bear arms? It shouldn’t matter what color you are but until we get to that point the title of the site raises eyebrows. Unfortunately:

* Racist still have issues with it.
* Fifty-percent of the victims of a violent crime won’t agree with me.
* Elitist won’t care too much for my shtick.
* Those educated by the mainstream media can’t understand me.
* Politicians won’t tell you about the firearms in their homes but will try to take yours.

I am just one man but I represent millions of law-abiding gun owners in urban areas of the US.

On this site you find links to my weekly listener supported podcast, members guest book, history, blogs and more. Welcome.

-snip-

I support the right to keep and bear arms for law-abiding citizens. I believe I have the right to protect my family from criminals, terrorist or whosoever seeks to deprive me of life, liberty or limb. I am not supporting vigilantism. Violence begets violence. But I know that blaming guns for the blatant disregard some have for life is not the answer.

I am sure some here will go to the ends of their Google to prove this man and organization to be, "Racist, misogynist, right wing dupe(s)", disregard those who project this vile spew and realize that those who claim the gun rights movement is a whites only club are simply wrong.

[iverglas]

1. "I am sure some here will go to the ends of their Google"

and I guess you just figure everybody else hereabouts is really really stupid. Or ignorant. Or both.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=130413&mesg_id=130777

You will note the name on the post (mine) and the date on the post (October 2006).

Just fyi.

[Duke Newcombe]

3. Wow...and as if on cue...

there you are. Predictable.

Duke

[pipoman]

8. Isn't this you

who on another thread is proclaiming a man, who happens to be black and believe he should have the means to protect himself from those who wish him harm, whom I assume you really know nothing about, an "African-American stooge" of the right wing?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=181151&mesg_id=181258

[jody]

9. Darn it pipoman, it's not fair to use a poster's words against them. That's as bad as using facts to

refute a hysterical, vitriolic tirade as I've observed on other threads.

[tburnsten]

11. It is impossible that those white men

can be anything but racists using that poor old black man against his better interests. Completely impossible. We know from her previous posts that all white men might as well be members of the aryan nation for all the anti-immigrant, anti-black, anti-hispanic, and anti-non-white-poor sentiment they espouse. For shame pipoman, you should know all this by now.

[tburnsten]

2. already got a "he can somehow be connected to someone who

had something to do at some point in time with a person who may or may not have been registered as a repuke. There. Anything he says about anything is worthless".


That was quick!

[Howzit]

7. So, when the Democrats inherit the senate and congress we mustn't listen to them because

those entities were at one time dominated by Republicans...

[tburnsten]

10. Very good grasshopper

you are learning fast, anything that can be connected to anyone who holds any less enlightened views or spoke any less enlightened words ever is vile and trashy.

I don't think some people who aren't members of our country realize the fluidity of American political affiliations and the staggering numbers of people who choose candidates based on the candidate themselves, or who switch parties based on which one is covering the greatest portions of their needs. We don't have super-defined splits between parties and ideologies with almost militant political groups, except for the people who are REALLY out there. Of course they always end up being the most vocal, unfortunately.

[spin]

4. Very interesting link, thanks...

From the link in the OP:

The history link below shares the knowledge I have found about gun control.

(1) It was founded on racist gun laws

(2) It always is supported by the elite (that have bodyguards or police to protect them).

(3) Is still used for political power.

(4) It is profitable.

(5) It has never saved a life.

(6) It does not prevent crime.

(7) There is no law that has not already been written (from the Ten Commandments to the present day) that has stopped mankind from war or murder.
http://www.blackmanwithagun.com/site/cpage.asp?cpage_id=140019512&sec_id=140000845

The history link is very informative: http://www.blackmanwithagun.com/site/cpage.asp?cpage_id=140019513&sec_id=140000845&nc=1216699355906

After reading the historical info, I feel that the gun control movement is indeed racist. For example:

After the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in 1878, most States turned to "facially neutral" business or transaction taxes on handgun purchases. However, the intention of these laws was not neutral. An article in Virginia 's official university law review called for a "prohibitive tax...on the privilege" of selling handguns as a way of disarming "the son of Ham," whose "cowardly practice of 'toting' guns has been one of the most fruitful sources of crime.... Let a negro board a railroad train with a quart of mean whiskey and a pistol in his grip and the chances are that there will be a murder, or at least a row, before he alights." Thus, many Southern States imposed high taxes or banned inexpensive guns so as to price blacks and poor whites out of the gun market.

I highly recommend both pro and anti-gun posters visit the site and comment.

[comradebillyboy]

5. very interesting point of view

This is the first time I have seen an argument that the gun control movement is racist. More often defenders of the second amendment are (wrongly) portrayed as racist.

[spin]

6. My personal experience leads me to believe...

that people who are regular shooters and who carry concealed are not racist.

True, this group of dedicated shooters oppose people who use firearms in irresponsible or criminal ways. This attitude applies to all races. Bad guys can be white, black, Hispanic or oriental. Race and gender is irrelevant. Bad guys threaten honest people. Honest people of any race or gender have the right to defend themselves against the bad guys.

The range that I used to shoot at welcomed everyone interested in shooting. If they expressed interest and asked for help, the regular members were more than willing to assist.

I have often suspected that gun control is fostered by rich elitist individuals who live in fear of poor people of any race. While they enjoy the means and the status to live in gated communities, the ability to hire armed guards if they are wealthy enough and the wealth and power to secure special privilege that enables them to own weapons, they still fear the mass of people without the advantages they enjoy.

[SteveM]

12. Sometimes gun-controllers turn the world on its head...

I often post this link which summarizes the racist nature of gun laws:

www.georgiacarry.org Scroll to the Heller Brief

Gun control laws have often gone after immigrant peoples, esp. Italians in the early part of the 20th Century.

"Let every state and province in America look out sharply for the bird-killing foreigner; for sooner or later, he will surely attack your wild life. The Italians are spreading, spreading, spreading. If you are without them to-day, to-morrow they will be around you. Meet them at the threshold with drastic laws, throughly enforced; for no half way measure will answer....

"In New York, we require from an alien a license costing $20, and it has saved a million (perhaps) of our birds..."

And excerpts from the law then extant in Pennsylvania:

"...and to that end it shall be unlawful for any unnaturalized foreign-born resident, within this Commonwealth, to either own or be possessed of a shotgun or rifle of any nature."

Above quotes from OUR VANISHING WILD LIFE, Hornaday, William T., Sc.D., Director New York Zoological Park, New York Zoological Society, 1913.

[old mark]

25. "Sometimes gun-controllers turn the world on its head"...

like 99% of the time. I have been a pro-gun, gun-owning Democrat for over 40 years, and I am still finding out things I never knew about the gun-control folks' lack of candor and reliance on nonsense to make their money.

We need to get some real informtation on this to the Democrats running for office to get them to understand the facts of this scam.
The entire anti gun movement is racist and anti labor and anti Democrat, yet they have the Dems in power believing that most Democrats support the anti-gun position. We are losing votes and elections because of this, and we are being blamed for the entire movement.

Can we wake these people up?


mark

[Otto DeFay]

14. You might find this post interesting

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x134977

[iverglas]

20. yawn

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=134977&mesg_id=164160

[Recursion]

15. It's one of the most common critiques of gun control...

...that you'll find from the left.

California didn't give a damn about gun control until some Black Panthers decided to (legally) appear in public armed. Show a suburban white soccer mom an armed black man and you'll have a moral panic faster than you can say "NIMBY".

[krispos42]

16. benEzra did a pretty good post about it

"The conservative roots of U.S. gun control..."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x134977

[radioburning]

18. See Bowling for Columbine...n/t

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

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

[TPaine7]

21. The "people" who wrote the post

or the people who slammed him? Or maybe the people who intelligently discussed the propriety of the questionable post.

I don't get the impression that it's a racist site from what I read. Isolated racist and offensive posts and posters prove nothing.

[biermeister]

13. I download his podcast from time to time and find it very interesting

he seems like a very knowledgeable and sincere person. It's worth giving it a listen, at least to form your own opinion

[TPaine7]

17. No, absolutely not.

Better to label him so we can condemn him out of hand. That way we can ignore anything he says, no matter how well grounded in truth, logical, and correct his reasoning. Doesn't that make more sense?

:sarcasm:

[Seenterman]

22. Im a brown man

And I totally support and exercise my right to bear arms.
I now bear four, and enjoy shooting with my white gun buddies. True not alot of minorities are gun owners, but I think that is changing.
Gun control laws were originally means to keep blacks from owning guns. I belive the first gun control law in this country was that "No Negro may own any type of firearm"
Im at work dont have the time for my google-fu to prove this but maybe someone else can for me?
Or maybe I'll just be back afterwork.

[iverglas]

23. maybe you will ...

Or maybe I'll just be back afterwork.

http://www.google.ca/search?num=30&hl=en&safe=off&q=%22No+Negro+may+own+any+type+of+firearm%22&btnG=Search&meta=

No results found for "No Negro may own any type of firearm".

Oh well, eh?

If you like, I'll google you up everything we need to establish conclusively that the first laws against the sexual assault of women were means to maintain men's control over women's sexuality and reproduction and prevent women from exercising their own autonomy in those regards.

Then we can all call for the elimination of laws against sexual assault, since they are so obviously designed to oppress women.

Why will no one ever join me in this important campaign??

[spin]

24. That may not be exact wording but was the intent...

The historical record provides compelling evidence that racism underlies gun control laws -- and not in any subtle way. Throughout much of American history, gun control was openly stated as a method for keeping blacks and Hispanics "in their place," and to quiet the racial fears of whites. This paper is intended to provide a brief summary of this unholy alliance of gun control and racism, and to suggest that gun control laws should be regarded as "suspect ideas," analogous to the "suspect classifications" theory of discrimination already part of the American legal system.


******snip******

The following year, the North Carolina Supreme Court made one of those decisions whose full significance would not appear until after the Civil War and passage of the Fourteenth Amendment. An 1840 statute provided:

That if any free negro, mulatto, or free person of color, shall wear or carry about his or her person, or keep in his or her house, any shot gun, musket, rifle, pistol, sword, dagger or bowie-knife, unless he or she shall have obtained a licence therefor from the Court of Pleas and Quarter Sessions of his or her county, within one year preceding the wearing, keeping or carrying therefor, he or she shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and may be indicted therefor.
http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/cramer.racism.html

Georgia's gun laws were designed to disarm slaves, freedmen, and black Georgians. Whenever blacks used arms to fight against racism and discrimination,the General Assembly responded with laws criminalizing their actions. Georgia's gun laws were not a crime prevention measure; they were Georgia's way to perpetuate racism, oppression and white supremacy. These racist laws still apply in Georgia.
http://www.georgiacarry.org/cms/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/racist-roots-of-ga-gun-laws.pdf


Before the Civil War ended, State "Slave Codes" prohibited slaves from owning guns. After President Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863, and after the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution abolishing slavery was adopted and the Civil War ended in 1865, States persisted in prohibiting blacks, now freemen, from owning guns under laws renamed "Black Codes." They did so on the basis that blacks were not citizens, and thus did not have the same rights, including the right to keep and bear arms protected in the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as whites. This view was specifically articulated by the U.S. Supreme Court in its infamous 1857 decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford to uphold slavery.
http://www.mcsm.org/racist.html

One undeniable aspect of the history of gun control in the United States has been the conception that the poor, especially the non-white poor, can't be trusted with firearms. Keeping arms away from blacks has always been a concern of white legislators; in fact, the first ever mention of blacks in Virginia's laws was a 1644 provision barring free blacks from owning firearms, and early (p.60)firearm laws were often enacted for the sole purpose of preventing immigrants, blacks, and even agrarian agitators, from owning guns.
http://www.guncite.com/journals/gun_control_markdis.html

Your comment about shooting with your white friends brought back memories of how I introduced a black co-worker to target shooting with handguns. Years afterward he would tell people of how I had trained him and how much fun he had found with his new hobby. He had acquired several handguns over the years including a beautiful nickle plated Colt Python and a Ruger Mini 14 rifle which he had tricked out with a full range of accessories.

When he took the class to acquire his concealed weapons permit, the instructor was so impressed with his ability that he tried to convince him to shoot in competitive events.


WELCOME TO DU.

edited to add welcome