Gun Control's racist roots a red herring?

[RSillsbee]

In a recent thread one of our members stated that the idea that gun control has racist root is a read herring, after giving it some thought I think he may be right.

While I do believe that gun control has its roots in attempts by whites to disarm people of color it occurs to me that if the laws themselves had merit they would stand on it.

IMO would should move away from worrying about the racist roots of gun control (except as the laws themselves were blatant civil rights violations) and examine it on how well they work today.

Of course to see how well they work today we need look no farther than Chicago but I'm not sure how their racist roots are relevant today

[rfranklin]

1. It's garbage...

People who want gun control want to be safe in their neighborhoods without criminals running around brandishing weapons. And most citizens do not want to carry weapons themselves. You may argue with this if you are a fan of carrying a weapon but I know of virtually no one in my N.J. community who is obsessed with restrictions on carrying a gun.

DISCLOUSRE: I am licenced to own a handgun.

[RSillsbee]

3. Criminals brandishing weapons

People who want gun control want to be safe in their neighborhoods without criminals running around brandishing weapons.

How well did Chicago's strict gun control laws work in accomplishing this?

most citizens do not want to carry weapons themselves.

Where I live (Colorado) most citizens do carry ,or at least own. guns

DISCLOUSRE: I am licenced to own a handgun.

I don't need a license to own a handgun

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

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

[RSillsbee]

16. Flamebait

I thought I made it clear that I thought gun control laws should be examined on their merit whether or not they were originally racist in origin and I stated that I thought they were a failure.

How is that flame bait?

what's wrong with requiring a license for a deadly weapon?

Once you open the door to licensing you open the door to unilateral license revocation

[rfranklin]

31. The boogeyman! They're gonna grab all our guns!

Head for the bunker!

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

33. It is not unheard of.

There are many examples of other nations doing exactly that.
Even in america, some states have acted to confiscate registered firearms and use certain registries to track down owners.

It HAS happened... it's not a boogeyman, it's history.
Whose to say registration won;t be abused in the future?

[SteveM]

23. I agree, it is garbage to base gun-control laws on racist foundations...

In my community, no one is obsessed with restrictions on carrying guns, either. Of course, I live in Austin, Texas.

[rfranklin]

29. The racist meme is a rightwing wedge talking point...

it has no validity.

[SteveM]

32. You are wrong, the "wedge" is gun-control advocacy of racist policy...

"The racist meme" is racist "fact," acknowledged by writers of both the left and the right. The only "wedge" that I see is gun-controllers in this forum who try to deny history and good argument in order to continue advancing the cause of gun-control.

Somewhere along the line, some "liberals" and "progressives" are going to have to admit to complicity -- however unwitting -- in racist agendas, including that of gun control. They simply cannot deny such, then quickly make a slop-shot association with the "Right."

[spin]

28. Why do you have to have a license to own handgun?

I did some quick research and found a page with the gun permit application in New Jersey.
http://www.state.nj.us/njsp/info/pdf/firearms/sts-033.pdf
You have to get the approval of the local police department to purchase a handgun? I can see abuse of the system by a racist police department

I also found the application for a concealed carry permit.
http://www.state.nj.us/njsp/info/pdf/firearms/sp-642.pdf
Obviously New Jersey is a "may issue" state. May issue can easily be used to deny a person the right to carry a firearm based on his race, income or social status.

You live in a state where you may well have to kiss some bureaucrat's ass to get a permit to buy or carry a firearm and you can't see the possible racism involved in your states gun laws?

Let's compare New Jersey to Florida.

Do I have to get a permit to buy a handgun in Florida? NO

Do I have to get a permit to buy multiple firearms or handguns in a month? NO

Do I have to have a permit to carry a loaded firearm in my vehicle. NO
Section 790.001(17) defines the term "securely encased" to mean "in a glove compartment, whether or not locked; snapped in a holster; in a gun case, whether or not locked; in a zippered gun case; or in a closed box or container which requires a lid or cover to be opened for access."

Do I have to have a permit to carry concealed? YES
Florida is a "shall issue" state. I don't have to get the permission of any police department. If I have a clean record and follow the simple procedure to obtain a photo and fingerprints and a certificate of having attended a weapons training class and I pay a modest fee of $117 - within 90 days, I should get my carry permit good for 7 years.

Criminals do not bother to obtain permits to buy or carry firearms. They are criminals. They do not (by definition) obey laws.

[HopeHoops]

2. That's a mixed bag. There's an alarmingly high correlation between racists and gun nuts, but....

... The issue of gun rights isn't the province of one side or the other on any level, political, racist, race, religion, whatever. I'm a non-racist white gun owner who favors reasonable gun control like restrictions on possession by violent convicted offenders, the types of weapons, and the need for registration if carrying in public. Where does that put me?

If you need an automatic weapon for hunting, your aim sucks. Gun control is a practical thing but it does need balance. The Second Amendment wasn't written with the knowledge of the kinds of weapons we have on the streets now, but neither should it be taken literally unless you all want to go back to packing one slug at a time. The idea that gun control is somehow "racist" is comical at best. Criminals aren't going to pay attention to the gun laws anyway, regardless of their race or political bias. We do however need strong laws and penalties to deal with those who are caught.

[PavePusher]

5. Hunting w/ automatic weapons? Talk about red herrings...

Speaking of registration, have you made sure to register all your books and papers?

Speaking of types of weapons, do you have any high-volume or oversized books? How about really cheap, easily concealable paperbacks?

Surely there was no concept of high-speed communication at the time the First Amendment was written... If you want to take it litterally, you should restrict yourself to quill pens and horse-post.

[SteveM]

24. I have some problems, here...

"I'm a non-racist white white gun owner who favors reasonable gun control like restrictions on possession by violent convicted offenders, the types of weapons, and the need for registration if carrying in public."

I can't argue against your position, though "types of weapons" is an all-American favorite for gun-prohibitionists. The so-called assault weapons ban did nothing but convert the semi-automatic medium-powered carbine into the post popular center-fire rifle we have in America today. In fact, it is fast becoming the new big-game hunting rifle in this country. (BTW, I know of no one who uses an "automatic weapon for hunting," and know of no state which allows such; something of a red "snapper" itself.)

"Gun control is a practical thing but it does need balance."

What do you mean by "practical thing," and what standard is there to your "balance?"

"The idea that gun control is somehow 'racist' is comical at best."

Even some gun-control advocates of the late 1960s admitted the GCA of 1968 was an attempt to restrict ownership of guns by blacks. This is just too recent an assessment by advocates of gun-control to dismiss as "comedy." (Note: gun-control advocates at the time were not necessarily racist in their outlook, or motivations, but they saw what was behind the legislation nevertheless.)

I agree with you that "we need strong laws and penalties to deal with those who are caught."

[spin]

34. Where can you use an automatic weapon for hunting in the U.S.?

I believe that all 50 states ban hunting with a fully automatic or select fire weapon. Semi-auto firearms have been used by hunters for many years. Semi-auto "black rifles" are gaining popularity in hunting circles in calibers such as .308.

Racism is never comical and in fact gun control does indeed have racist roots.

Posted by Chauncey DeVega at 4:49 pm
June 29, 2010

The Supreme Court has taken one more step in reinforcing the 2nd Amendment and the right of American citizens to keep and bear arms. I may lose my “progressive” bonafides among some of you for this one, but I am happy with the ruling, and hopefully the lower courts will make it possible for the good folks of Chicago to register and own a handgun legally.

***snip***

To my respectable negro bonafides, there is a long history of disarming black folk in this country beginning with the slave codes, through to Reconstruction, Jim Crow, and into the Right-wing law and order reactionary politics which followed the 1960s. I have always felt that just as The Deacons for Defense, the brave brothers who defended their communities against white lynch mobs in the bloody summer of 1919, and even our sister Harriet Tubman understood, there is something special about the power of a respectable negro with a gun.

Editor and founder of the blog We Are Respectable Negroes which has been featured by the NY Times, the Utne Reader, and The Atlantic Monthly. Writing under a pseudonym, Chauncey DeVega's essays on race, popular culture, and politics have appeared in various books, as well as on such sites as the Washington Post's The Root and Popmatters.
http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/06/29/the-racist-roots-of-gun-control-the-supreme-court-takes-one-more-step-towards-striking-down-draconian-gun-control-laws/

I would also recommend you take some time to watch a series of videos called "Negros with Guns" on You Tube at:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=negroes%20with%20guns&search=Search&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&spell=1

[sharesunited]

4. Chicago only demonstrates that guns will flow into a gun-free oasis from outside.

A seamless oasis from sea to shining sea is what is needed.

I hear that a coalition of attorneys general is petitioning certain states they have identified as the source of guns used in crimes to tighten up their gun sale regulations.

[RSillsbee]

6. Both Australia and The UK are seamless oasises

Yet criminals in both still have access to guns, some manufactured in English machine shops.

Perhaps we need a machinist free oasis from sea to shining sea as well?

[sharesunited]

7. Child porn is still produced and distributed too. Should the public policy against it be abandoned?

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

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

[sharesunited]

12. The analogy continues to be perfectly apt and irrefutable.

Something inherently dangerous to society, for which zero tolerance among the populace is the appropriate response.

Despite the 1st Amendment in the case of CP.

Despite the 2nd Amendment in the case of guns and ammo.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

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

[Glassunion]

15. You left your gun alone in a box with itself!!!???

You are endangering the gun. Get it away from itself before it hurts itself...


Did I just divide by zero?

[Katya Mullethov]

19. Cant argue withat

You win again .

[X_Digger]

20. Are cameras licensed, or scarce?

Do we have to remind you again that you're comparing apples to cantaloupes?

[friendly_iconoclast]

21. However apt, it still does not explain why 'gunfree' Australia and Britain- aren't

It would appear that "seamlessly oasis" is a much a mirage as "universal world peace", and that you are reluctant to acknowledge

this.

[rrneck]

39. Your moralizing

is prohibited by the first amendment.

[MicaelS]

11. Fallacy....

How many civilized countries allow child porn to be legal?

[provis99]

18. Russia, for one.

[Glassunion]

13. Make "cameras" and "film/digital-media" a scarcity...

I blame the sacrosanct proliferation of image capturing devices fed by an unnatural affection to the first amendment.

[SteveM]

25. Are you back to child porn again?

[rrneck]

37. How does one use child porn in self defense against an assault?

Describe the process in concrete terms.

[Riftaxe]

30. It seemed to work so

well for prohibition....:rofl:

[lawodevolution]

36. "4. Chicago only demonstrates that guns will flow into a gun-free oasis from outside. "

SU's gun free oasis is Nigeria the country with the lowest gun
Possession rate on earth. They kill people by the hundreds at a time with machetes.

[AtheistCrusader]

44. Oasis? Really?

[beevul]

46. Its always someone elses fault isn't it?

"Chicago only demonstrates that guns will flow into a gun-free oasis from outside."

It also demonstrates that Chicago is iether unwilling or unable to do that which is encumbent on them to do when enacting such laws:


Do what it takes to make them work, OR, realize that it wont;

INSTEAD OF BLAMING THIER NEIGHBORS, OR MAKING IT THIER NEIGHBORS (WHO HAVE DIFFERENT LAWS) RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE THIER OWN LAWS WORK.


How odd that you haven't adressed that.


How very odd indeed.

[one-eyed fat man]

47. Nah, it's simpler than that

Chicago proves that shit will accumulate in the lowest cesspool.

[Buzz cook]

10. Gun control laws used to be racist. Now the right uses other means.

The right uses the court system to control minorities.
Felons cannot own firearms. Since being male and black in America is a crime, a large percentage of the minority population has lost the right to legally own firearms.

Of course that is just a side benefit to the right. Where they really win is in the states where felons lose the right to vote.
(Just in case you forgot, the felon purge in Florida was one of the reasons the right was able to steal that election)

Of course the majority of people who claim to support a right to bear arms also support stricter punishment of felons including removing their civil rights after they have served their time.

It's a typical trick of the right. Claim moral high ground while in reality supporting the exact opposite.

Of course here on DU there aren't any right wingers;-) So the folks who use that argument are simply misinformed.

[SteveM]

26. The GCA of 1968 was racist in motivations. It is still on the books...

Perhaps you have changed YOUR reasons for why this law should remain, but you can't deny a major act was racist when passed in 1968.

Now, lest I accuse you of being politically "Right," do you now advocate relaxing or eliminating the restrictions on felons owning firearms? How 'bout the right to vote?

"Of course the majority of people who claim to support a right to bear arms also support stricter punishment of felons including removing their civil rights after they have served their time."

Who is this majority which "supports stricter punishment of felons including removing their civil rights after they have served time." Are they here? Elsewhere? In this forum, there has been advocacy of lessening the restrictions on firearm ownership once a felon (especially non-violent) has served time. Indeed, there is provision in many states for convicted felons to apply for gun-ownership of some sort.

Again, do you support "stricter punishment," or no? If not, then you may be in agreement with many here.

I am not impressed by your cantilevered logic assigning positions to "rightists" when you are not clear as to your own. Let's hear about YOUR position. Perhaps you are "misinformed."

[Buzz cook]

43. That's an assertion you might want to prove

I can't deny it was racist because you have yet to prove it was racist.

I support returning all civil rights to former felons who have served their time. I also oppose the use of parole as a way to keep felons on a string while still denting them their civil rights.

"Who is this majority which "supports stricter punishment of felons including removing their civil rights after they have served time."

Well let's start with the republican party. The people who are the main beneficiaries of keeping minorities from voting.
That's not too difficult a jump for you is it?

"Again, do you support "stricter punishment," or no? "

Your reading comprehension must not be up to par if you think I do.

I'm sure I am in agreement with many on this forum on many issues. It is Democratic Underground after all, not Free Republic.

Where you and I seem to disagree is whether the use of the race card in opposing gun control is a valid argument. I personally think it is right wing rhetoric that fails the sniff test.

Unfortunately right wing rhetoric is often effective and people who should know better often pick it up to score cheap debating points.

[SteveM]

53. So, here you go...

http://www.constitution.org/cmt/cramer/racist_roots.htm

Pay attention to footnotes 55-59, source citations limited to the 20th Century.

"Well, let's start with the republican party..."

Go ahead, if you want. I was under the impression that people posting in this forum were Democrats, and those were the people in discussion.

The disagreement is merely your opinion that race is no longer a factor in gun control. I have supported mine with documentation well into the 20th Century. You cannot deny the history of racism in gun-control; you are merely hoping the influence of race has evaporated. But that history is too fresh for hope.

Your characterization of race within the gun-control debate as "right wing rhetoric" is in itself an attempt to cheapen the debate. There are some writers such as Don Kates who also see the influence of race. So did Sherrill in 1968. They ain't no right-wingers.

Yours for reading comprehension!

[one-eyed fat man]

17. Roots, then and now.

Laws Designed To Disarm Slaves, Freedmen, And African-Americans

The first gun law passed in what would later become the United States was a Virginia statute prohibiting free blacks "to keep or carry any firelock of any kind, any military weapon, or any powder or lead."

North Carolina in 1840, "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 thereof, he or she shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and may be indicted therefor."

The end of slavery in 1865 did not eliminate the problems of racist gun control laws. The various Black Codes adopted after the Civil War required blacks to obtain a license before carrying or possessing firearms or bowie knives. These Codes are sufficiently well-known that any reasonably complete history of the Reconstruction period mentions them. These restrictive gun laws played a part in provoking Republican efforts to get the Fourteenth Amendment passed. Republicans in Congress apparently believed that it would be difficult for night riders to provoke terror in freedmen who were returning fire. (Quaint notion, that)

Only the naive or the dishonest can deny the racist intent.

In truth, attempts to regulate the civilian possession of firearms have five political functions. They
(1) increase citizen reliance on government and tolerance of increased police powers and abuse
(2) help prevent opposition to the government
(3) facilitate repressive action by government and its allies
(4) lesson the pressure for major or radical reform
(5) can be selectively enforced against those perceived to be a threat to government.

While a few gun control proponents might acknowledge that such measures have been used in these ways in the past, they would vehemently deny that the controls that they support are either racist or elitist, since they would apply to everybody and are aimed at reducing violence for everybody.

Eldridge Cleaver noted in 1968: "Some very interesting laws are being passed. They don't name me; they don't say, take the guns away from the niggers. They say that people will no longer be allowed to have (guns). They don't pass these rules and these regulations specifically for black people, they have to pass them in a way that will take in everybody."

The California ban on the open carry of firearms was in direct response to a Black Panther protest at the state Capitol.

Investigative reporter Robert Sherrill, himself no lover of guns, concluded in his book The Saturday Night Special that the object of the Gun Control Act of 1968 was black control rather than gun control. According to Sherrill, Congress was so panicked by the ghetto riots of 1967 and 1968 that it passed the act to "shut off weapons access to blacks, and since they (Congress) probably associated cheap guns with ghetto blacks and thought cheapness was peculiarly the characteristic of imported military surplus and the mail-order traffic, they decided to cut off these sources while leaving over-the-counter purchases open to the affluent."

As B. Bruce-Briggs has written in the Public Interest, "It is difficult to escape the conclusion that the 'Saturday Night Special' is emphasized because it is cheap and is being sold to a particular class of people. The name is sufficient evidence--the reference is to 'niggertown Saturday night.'"

Deny it still? Police-issued license and permit laws, unless drafted to require issuance to those not prohibited by law from owning guns, are routinely used to prevent lawful gun ownership among "unpopular" populations. Look no further than New York. The wealthy, the connected, have no problems getting a license. The overturned DC and Chicago bans, were primarily enforced against blacks.

Public housing residents, approximately 3 million Americans, are singled out for gun bans. Even the warrant-less searches and seizures of public housing that President Clinton defended are eerily similar to an 1825 Florida statute, that provided white citizen patrols "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...."

...............quack like a duck?

[SteveM]

27. Nice superposed. nt

[Straw Man]

54. Superposed?

Look again--I'm pretty sure it's a side-by-side viewed from the bottom.

[SteveM]

55. ulp- - - you're right! "Doctor, my eyes..."

And here I have a Stevens 311D. His looks like something more expensive.

[SteveM]

22. Well, how far do you want to go back in time?...

"The gun control advocate and journalist Robert Sherrill frankly admitted that the Gun Control Act of 1968 was 'passed not to control guns but to control blacks,' and Barry Bruce-Briggs, writing in The Public Interest, stated in no uncertain terms that "it is difficult to escape the conclusion that the Saturday Night Special is emphasized because it is cheap and it is being sold to a particular class of people. The name is sufficient evidence. The reference is to 'Niggertown Saturday Night.'"

http://www.guncite.com/journals/gun_control_markdis.html

How 'bout back to when Electric Lady Land was charting? Of course, gun control is a failing policy (in the very terms of debate set by the 'controllers) today, but as with all civil rights, they face attack from some quarters at least some of the time; lately, the bogey is anyone who has been "assigned" to the no-fly list, or put on a Tear-r-ist Watch List. But the fill-in-the-blank nature of prohibitionism always has a special fondness for any Other de Jour which may come along.

[spin]

35. Anybody with an interest in this subject should watch a series of videos on You Tube ...

called: "Negroes with Guns".

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=negroes%20with%20guns&search=Search&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&spell=1

[Pavulon]

38. Past, shit. Right now. Bet my ass my white doctor wife can get a permit

in Chicago, may require a lawyer to disperse some cash but would happen, 100%. Now try a black female doc, I give her one in four odds based on how much cash she can pay in "incentive" through an attorney of course..

Black LRN female with no money, 1:100. Black male LRN 1:1000.

It's money based and AS A WHOLE wealth is distributed on racial lines.

[lawodevolution]

40. The ban in Chicago and DC were racist because

A disproportionate amount of law abiding citizens who had their right to own a firearm removed without ever having been convicted of a crime were minorities. I remember a thread where SU mentioned it is irresponsible to promote gun ownership of people in inner cities. While Sara Brady thinks the people of Chicago should not be allowed to own guns, she bought her son a rifle. Because most gun control mainly effects African Americans, it is racist.

[Euromutt]

41. A fair question, and I can agree with you to some extent

I do think it's not particularly persuasive to throw out the point that older gun control laws were motivated by racism and leave it at that, as if that proved something by itself. But that doesn't make the point a red herring per se, because it does illustrate that, in the past (and the not too distant past at that), gun control laws and the way they have been enforced have all too often been about controlling certain people rather than controlling violence. Show me a licensing system that leaves the decision whether or not to issue to the "discretion" of a member of the executive branch of government, and I'll show you a system that's been used to discriminate against people whom the licensing authority was bigoted against on a personal level.

And I for one can't quite escape the feeling that the argument makes quite a few self-styled liberals and progressives uncomfortable because it strikes close to home by reminding them that they, too, harbor some unresolved prejudices that they might prefer not to be reminded of; hence their keenness to dismiss it out of hand.

You're correct that mere guilt by association is insufficient to condemn gun control, or anything else; that way lies the specious "Hitler was anti-smoking" argument. I'm reasonably convinced the bulk of people who favor increased gun control do so out of the best possible (albeit ill-informed) intentions. But bringing up gun control's history can never be irrelevant, because it provides a way of understanding what might possibly underpin today's proposed measures.

[Glassunion]

42. +1

[RSillsbee]

45. Hitler was anti-smoking

Actually I was going to go with Hitler created the Autobahn therefore the Autobahn must be evil.

I thought Himmler was the nonsmoking fanatic

[one-eyed fat man]

48. old Adolf

was a strident anti-smoker, vegetarian and animal rights activist. He coined the term "Passivrauchen" i.e., passive smoking or second-hand smoke. He raised the minimum smoking age to 25. No one was permitted to be depicted in print, film, or other media doing anything "athletic, professional or heroic." In fact, you could tell who the filthy Jew villain was in a movie when they lit up. High party officials were admonished not to be filmed or photographed while smoking.

Himmler was a chicken farmer. His big thing was breeding superior Aryans and eugenics. As overseer of the concentration camps, extermination camps, and Einsatzgruppen, Himmler coordinated the killing of some six million Jews, between 200,000 and 500,000 Roma, many prisoners of war, and possibly another three to four million Poles, communists, or other groups whom the Nazis deemed unworthy to live or simply "in the way", including homosexuals, people with physical and mental disabilities, Jehovah's Witnesses and members of the Confessing Church.

The biggest difference between the most strident of the "Nicotine Nazis" now and then is the orginals had snappier uniforms. They also take offense at the term and prefer to be known as the "Tobacco Taliban."

[Kennah]

49. Gun control is people control

Gun control used to be people of color control and foreign people control.

I think it can be instructive to show the past history:
- White people used to control people of color, to a greater extent, and gun control played a part
- As gun control laws became color blind, some white people react angrily because now THEY are the subject of discrimination
- Perhaps some white people, because of gun control laws, will rethink the way they treat people of color
- If all else fails, perhaps some racists will realize that "Hmm, you mean those people might be armed?"

[Glassunion]

50. Welcome to DU! I like your last statement...

- If all else fails, perhaps some racists will realize that "Hmm, you mean those people might be armed?"

Ain't Civil Rights a bitch sometimes?

[jazzhound]

52. "Ain't Civil Rights a bitch sometimes?"

:) :toast:

I find it fascinating that the people who direct slurs at those who choose to carry firearms (concealed/open) have no tolerance for those who demonstrate disdain for gays holding hands in public, or interracial couples. (for example) Their correct response to such bigots would be "It's not about your precious little feelings it's about civil rights." Yet when it comes to the issue of firearms, they expect that their "feelings" should trump the civil rights (self-defense) of others ------ and they lack the integrity and self-awareness to recognize their hypocrisy.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

51. Both racist and classist in their roots. The laws are more subtle today, but it still there

[spin]

60. The objet now is to keep "those people" from owning firearms ...

"Those people" are of course the lower classes which includes most minorities.

New York City is the most egregious example of this form of discrimination. Celebrities and the rich and famous can get permits to own and carry firearms, but the average citizen has little chance of successfully jumping through all the hurdles and affording the expense of a license. I have absolutely no problem with allowing the rich and famous to have firearms, I just believe that the same right should be afforded to all honest citizens for little or no charge.


Never fear J.Lo - your husband Marc Anthony is one of dozens of celebrities authorized to carry a concealed weapon in New York City.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/09/27/2010-09-27_celebrities_seeking_pistol_permits_on_the_rise_in_the_city_lifestyles_of_rich_n_.html#ixzz1560lhMq0

[aikoaiko]

63. This is what I was about to post.

Racist laws are (and were) often classist as well.

[old mark]

56. Gun control WAS used by the racists in the early 20th century and earlier to disarm

people of color/minorities in the US. The same group of politicians and media (Hurst papers, especially) used the image of drug crazed blacks or orientals
to push for ever more powerful guns for police and for laws prohibiting "those people" from owning guns...You might now recall, but there were also laws regulating voting and home ownership, and who could eat in dime store lunch counters, etc...

It is a fact, not like some wishful thinking anti gun nonsense.

mark

[RSillsbee]

57. You might want to reread my OP EOM

[old mark]

58. I read it before I posted, thanks.....nt

[RSillsbee]

59. Did you read this line?

While I do believe that gun control has its roots in attempts by whites to disarm people of color it occurs to me that if the laws themselves had merit they would stand on it.

I never said I didn't believe that gun control had it's roots in racism

[old mark]

61. I know. I am agreeing with you....nt

[RSillsbee]

62. Maybe I need to work on reading comprehension EOM

[old mark]

64. On this forum it is sometimes hard to tell.....;)....nt