Gun Control is Racist, and always has been.

[Vastator]

The first laws prohibiting ownership of firearms in this Nation were passed to prevent Blacks, Slave and Free, from owning guns. In Florida, they passed a law that Whites could check the residences of Blacks to insure they didn’t have guns. Not White Police, or Deputies, just regular citizens who worried the darkies would get guns. Gun Control and the Constitution

The prohibition in California against Open Carry was passed two months after the Black Panthers showed up armed in front of the Capital Steps in Sacramento. Again racism drove the Whites to prohibit an action that the Blacks were exploiting.

So today, we hear that we need to ban guns. But who would you be banning them from? The Rural Whites will bury their guns in the woods, and in their yards. Are you going to pass over every square foot with Mine Detectors to find the hidden cache’s of weapons an munitions? Nope. You’ll raid the inner cities where hiding locations are fewer, and probably covered by surveillance video to get the guns. Inner Cities which are predominantly black.

Nobody cared that White’s had assault weapons. The Brady Ban that is lauded about only came about after Gang Bangers got their hands on AK-47’s and Tek-9’s. Once again we had to stop people, and by people they meant Blacks, from getting these things.

So why would you support Gun Control today? Is it because some of the shooters are white and you can pretend that it totally isn’t because you’re afraid of Minorities?

I not only support the right of the people to keep and bear arms. I would support the restoration of this right to people who had been convicted of a Felony, and completed both prison, and probation or parole conditions. In other words, I would be willing to consider their debt completely paid to society and return to them the full rights of of being a citizen. Not just the right to vote which some of you would support.

So tell me why you want to disarm Blacks, who are according to you faced with an even greater threat from White Nationalist and racists? I say arm them. Let them arm up, and give them a chance to defend themselves. The Lord knows the Government isn’t going to do that.

I don't think race should be a factor in anything, including the second amendment. I do, however, have a problem restoring rights to violent felons on anything but a case by case basis.
You'd have a tough time convincing me that a guy that did time for manslaughter will suddenly turn into a model citizen after doing his time.

Race considerations are difficult to explain without coming off as a racist, but facts are facts. Over half of homicides are committed by roughly 1/8 of the population. Is that racist?

Lots of free people aren’t model citizens either. Many just haven’t been caught. If they’ve done their time; then that, should be that. They have every reason for wanting to own a gun, as anyone else. Property to protect, not to mention their own lives, and their loves ones, and their family. They face the same dangers in this country as anyone else. There is no reasonable argument to be made for creating second class citizens in this country.

 

[jc456]

why do you think those blacks are there? too fking funny, it's the ploy. So they can say, see we have all these blacks in our party, then they take control of the black neighborhoods and have them held oppressed. Like Baltimore, Chicago, St. Louis, Detroit. all demoloser controlled. you bunch of fking Racist punks. it's educating the blacks that we are working hard at. many are converting.

Ok, so you have failed to demonstrate the racism in the Chicago gun law other than just basically saying "it is" (paraphrasing). Then you can't explain why Republicans don't have a lot of black support and why there are very few black Republican politicians other than to whine about black politicians being racist to blacks....because they aren't republican? Is that your point?

You don't think the constituents of elected black politicians are smart enough to figure out where the racism is mostly coming from?

not at all. they are forever in the control of the racist leftists. Shit dude, they just voted in another demoloser to the City of Chicago, Black gay woman, and the first month in office she has denied blacks what she campaigned on. it's what they do!!! I tell you, it's sad, truly sad, how the left play the black. it's like blacks don't even know the dems are the kkk. all one can say is,.... What?

So, they should break the chains so to speak and join the party of BrokeLoser who thinks they should still be slaves.

I guess you really do think black people aren't smart enough. Kind of racist of you.

yep, as soon as they do, they get ridiculed and told they are uncle tom's, humiliation is the response to a black being an individual. Want to bet on that one?

Oh, I see. it's all peer pressure like high school. Has nothing to do with the likes of Steve King, or being told they are lazy or stupid by white nationalists, I'm sure.

no, it's dangerous to them, it is threaten life dangerous to them. you should learn how evil the left is. No black allowed outside the plantation. Dude, there are books on this.

 

[The Republicans]

son,

I don't know who you are, but I want nothing more but to shoot & kill you for talking disrespectful like that, using slimy gender slurs and implying inappropriate sexual familiarity.

Who the fuck are you trying to pick up and rape? May God strike you dead and send you to hell.

Can anyone send this hot head a warning?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The first laws prohibiting ownership of firearms in this Nation were passed to prevent Blacks, Slave and Free, from owning guns. In Florida, they passed a law that Whites could check the residences of Blacks to insure they didn’t have guns. Not White Police, or Deputies, just regular citizens who worried the darkies would get guns. Gun Control and the Constitution

The prohibition in California against Open Carry was passed two months after the Black Panthers showed up armed in front of the Capital Steps in Sacramento. Again racism drove the Whites to prohibit an action that the Blacks were exploiting.

So today, we hear that we need to ban guns. But who would you be banning them from? The Rural Whites will bury their guns in the woods, and in their yards. Are you going to pass over every square foot with Mine Detectors to find the hidden cache’s of weapons an munitions? Nope. You’ll raid the inner cities where hiding locations are fewer, and probably covered by surveillance video to get the guns. Inner Cities which are predominantly black.

Nobody cared that White’s had assault weapons. The Brady Ban that is lauded about only came about after Gang Bangers got their hands on AK-47’s and Tek-9’s. Once again we had to stop people, and by people they meant Blacks, from getting these things.

So why would you support Gun Control today? Is it because some of the shooters are white and you can pretend that it totally isn’t because you’re afraid of Minorities?

I not only support the right of the people to keep and bear arms. I would support the restoration of this right to people who had been convicted of a Felony, and completed both prison, and probation or parole conditions. In other words, I would be willing to consider their debt completely paid to society and return to them the full rights of of being a citizen. Not just the right to vote which some of you would support.

So tell me why you want to disarm Blacks, who are according to you faced with an even greater threat from White Nationalist and racists? I say arm them. Let them arm up, and give them a chance to defend themselves. The Lord knows the Government isn’t going to do that.

Conservatives and Republicans prohibiting blacks from possessing guns was racist.

Necessary, proper, and constitutional firearm regulatory measures are not.

 

[SavannahMann]

The first laws prohibiting ownership of firearms in this Nation were passed to prevent Blacks, Slave and Free, from owning guns. In Florida, they passed a law that Whites could check the residences of Blacks to insure they didn’t have guns. Not White Police, or Deputies, just regular citizens who worried the darkies would get guns. Gun Control and the Constitution

The prohibition in California against Open Carry was passed two months after the Black Panthers showed up armed in front of the Capital Steps in Sacramento. Again racism drove the Whites to prohibit an action that the Blacks were exploiting.

So today, we hear that we need to ban guns. But who would you be banning them from? The Rural Whites will bury their guns in the woods, and in their yards. Are you going to pass over every square foot with Mine Detectors to find the hidden cache’s of weapons an munitions? Nope. You’ll raid the inner cities where hiding locations are fewer, and probably covered by surveillance video to get the guns. Inner Cities which are predominantly black.

Nobody cared that White’s had assault weapons. The Brady Ban that is lauded about only came about after Gang Bangers got their hands on AK-47’s and Tek-9’s. Once again we had to stop people, and by people they meant Blacks, from getting these things.

So why would you support Gun Control today? Is it because some of the shooters are white and you can pretend that it totally isn’t because you’re afraid of Minorities?

I not only support the right of the people to keep and bear arms. I would support the restoration of this right to people who had been convicted of a Felony, and completed both prison, and probation or parole conditions. In other words, I would be willing to consider their debt completely paid to society and return to them the full rights of of being a citizen. Not just the right to vote which some of you would support.

So tell me why you want to disarm Blacks, who are according to you faced with an even greater threat from White Nationalist and racists? I say arm them. Let them arm up, and give them a chance to defend themselves. The Lord knows the Government isn’t going to do that.

Conservatives and Republicans prohibiting blacks from possessing guns was racist.

Necessary, proper, and constitutional firearm regulatory measures are not.

That is the rub. The Founders never expected, nor envisioned any regulations or limits on firearms.

 

[Ernie S.]

The first laws prohibiting ownership of firearms in this Nation were passed to prevent Blacks, Slave and Free, from owning guns. In Florida, they passed a law that Whites could check the residences of Blacks to insure they didn’t have guns. Not White Police, or Deputies, just regular citizens who worried the darkies would get guns. Gun Control and the Constitution

The prohibition in California against Open Carry was passed two months after the Black Panthers showed up armed in front of the Capital Steps in Sacramento. Again racism drove the Whites to prohibit an action that the Blacks were exploiting.

So today, we hear that we need to ban guns. But who would you be banning them from? The Rural Whites will bury their guns in the woods, and in their yards. Are you going to pass over every square foot with Mine Detectors to find the hidden cache’s of weapons an munitions? Nope. You’ll raid the inner cities where hiding locations are fewer, and probably covered by surveillance video to get the guns. Inner Cities which are predominantly black.

Nobody cared that White’s had assault weapons. The Brady Ban that is lauded about only came about after Gang Bangers got their hands on AK-47’s and Tek-9’s. Once again we had to stop people, and by people they meant Blacks, from getting these things.

So why would you support Gun Control today? Is it because some of the shooters are white and you can pretend that it totally isn’t because you’re afraid of Minorities?

I not only support the right of the people to keep and bear arms. I would support the restoration of this right to people who had been convicted of a Felony, and completed both prison, and probation or parole conditions. In other words, I would be willing to consider their debt completely paid to society and return to them the full rights of of being a citizen. Not just the right to vote which some of you would support.

So tell me why you want to disarm Blacks, who are according to you faced with an even greater threat from White Nationalist and racists? I say arm them. Let them arm up, and give them a chance to defend themselves. The Lord knows the Government isn’t going to do that.

I don't think race should be a factor in anything, including the second amendment. I do, however, have a problem restoring rights to violent felons on anything but a case by case basis.
You'd have a tough time convincing me that a guy that did time for manslaughter will suddenly turn into a model citizen after doing his time.

Race considerations are difficult to explain without coming off as a racist, but facts are facts. Over half of homicides are committed by roughly 1/8 of the population. Is that racist?

Lots of free people aren’t model citizens either. Many just haven’t been caught. If they’ve done their time; then that, should be that. They have every reason for wanting to own a gun, as anyone else. Property to protect, not to mention their own lives, and their loves ones, and their family. They face the same dangers in this country as anyone else. There is no reasonable argument to be made for creating second class citizens in this country.

As I said, I would be good with restoring rights on a case by case basis. Suppose our subject has prior convictions for... rape, armed robbery and manslaughter, all committed with a firearm. He has now completed his sentence and parole. Is it in the public's best interest for him to be walking around with a concealed weapon? Granted, he still is at risk perhaps more so than the average person due to his prior life style, but he has twice proven that he has not been rehabilitated by incarcerations.

Let's take another guy who has done 10 years for embezzlement. He has no violent felonies, no domestic or sexual abuse arrests and appears to be remorseful. I can't see him being deprived of his 2nd Amendment rights for the rest of his life.

So who decides? Perhaps a parole board? All states have some kind of review process for early prison release. Perhaps they could make a judgment at the time of a parole hearing, or maybe after a period of time after release.

 

[Vastator]

The first laws prohibiting ownership of firearms in this Nation were passed to prevent Blacks, Slave and Free, from owning guns. In Florida, they passed a law that Whites could check the residences of Blacks to insure they didn’t have guns. Not White Police, or Deputies, just regular citizens who worried the darkies would get guns. Gun Control and the Constitution

The prohibition in California against Open Carry was passed two months after the Black Panthers showed up armed in front of the Capital Steps in Sacramento. Again racism drove the Whites to prohibit an action that the Blacks were exploiting.

So today, we hear that we need to ban guns. But who would you be banning them from? The Rural Whites will bury their guns in the woods, and in their yards. Are you going to pass over every square foot with Mine Detectors to find the hidden cache’s of weapons an munitions? Nope. You’ll raid the inner cities where hiding locations are fewer, and probably covered by surveillance video to get the guns. Inner Cities which are predominantly black.

Nobody cared that White’s had assault weapons. The Brady Ban that is lauded about only came about after Gang Bangers got their hands on AK-47’s and Tek-9’s. Once again we had to stop people, and by people they meant Blacks, from getting these things.

So why would you support Gun Control today? Is it because some of the shooters are white and you can pretend that it totally isn’t because you’re afraid of Minorities?

I not only support the right of the people to keep and bear arms. I would support the restoration of this right to people who had been convicted of a Felony, and completed both prison, and probation or parole conditions. In other words, I would be willing to consider their debt completely paid to society and return to them the full rights of of being a citizen. Not just the right to vote which some of you would support.

So tell me why you want to disarm Blacks, who are according to you faced with an even greater threat from White Nationalist and racists? I say arm them. Let them arm up, and give them a chance to defend themselves. The Lord knows the Government isn’t going to do that.

I don't think race should be a factor in anything, including the second amendment. I do, however, have a problem restoring rights to violent felons on anything but a case by case basis.
You'd have a tough time convincing me that a guy that did time for manslaughter will suddenly turn into a model citizen after doing his time.

Race considerations are difficult to explain without coming off as a racist, but facts are facts. Over half of homicides are committed by roughly 1/8 of the population. Is that racist?

Lots of free people aren’t model citizens either. Many just haven’t been caught. If they’ve done their time; then that, should be that. They have every reason for wanting to own a gun, as anyone else. Property to protect, not to mention their own lives, and their loves ones, and their family. They face the same dangers in this country as anyone else. There is no reasonable argument to be made for creating second class citizens in this country.

As I said, I would be good with restoring rights on a case by case basis. Suppose our subject has prior convictions for... rape, armed robbery and manslaughter, all committed with a firearm. He has now completed his sentence and parole. Is it in the public's best interest for him to be walking around with a concealed weapon? Granted, he still is at risk perhaps more so than the average person due to his prior life style, but he has twice proven that he has not been rehabilitated by incarcerations.

Let's take another guy who has done 10 years for embezzlement. He has no violent felonies, no domestic or sexual abuse arrests and appears to be remorseful. I can't see him being deprived of his 2nd Amendment rights for the rest of his life.

So who decides? Perhaps a parole board? All states have some kind of review process for early prison release. Perhaps they could make a judgment at the time of a parole hearing, or maybe after a period of time after release.

The public’s interest was “satisfied” when he was released.

 

[Ernie S.]

The first laws prohibiting ownership of firearms in this Nation were passed to prevent Blacks, Slave and Free, from owning guns. In Florida, they passed a law that Whites could check the residences of Blacks to insure they didn’t have guns. Not White Police, or Deputies, just regular citizens who worried the darkies would get guns. Gun Control and the Constitution

The prohibition in California against Open Carry was passed two months after the Black Panthers showed up armed in front of the Capital Steps in Sacramento. Again racism drove the Whites to prohibit an action that the Blacks were exploiting.

So today, we hear that we need to ban guns. But who would you be banning them from? The Rural Whites will bury their guns in the woods, and in their yards. Are you going to pass over every square foot with Mine Detectors to find the hidden cache’s of weapons an munitions? Nope. You’ll raid the inner cities where hiding locations are fewer, and probably covered by surveillance video to get the guns. Inner Cities which are predominantly black.

Nobody cared that White’s had assault weapons. The Brady Ban that is lauded about only came about after Gang Bangers got their hands on AK-47’s and Tek-9’s. Once again we had to stop people, and by people they meant Blacks, from getting these things.

So why would you support Gun Control today? Is it because some of the shooters are white and you can pretend that it totally isn’t because you’re afraid of Minorities?

I not only support the right of the people to keep and bear arms. I would support the restoration of this right to people who had been convicted of a Felony, and completed both prison, and probation or parole conditions. In other words, I would be willing to consider their debt completely paid to society and return to them the full rights of of being a citizen. Not just the right to vote which some of you would support.

So tell me why you want to disarm Blacks, who are according to you faced with an even greater threat from White Nationalist and racists? I say arm them. Let them arm up, and give them a chance to defend themselves. The Lord knows the Government isn’t going to do that.

I don't think race should be a factor in anything, including the second amendment. I do, however, have a problem restoring rights to violent felons on anything but a case by case basis.
You'd have a tough time convincing me that a guy that did time for manslaughter will suddenly turn into a model citizen after doing his time.

Race considerations are difficult to explain without coming off as a racist, but facts are facts. Over half of homicides are committed by roughly 1/8 of the population. Is that racist?

Lots of free people aren’t model citizens either. Many just haven’t been caught. If they’ve done their time; then that, should be that. They have every reason for wanting to own a gun, as anyone else. Property to protect, not to mention their own lives, and their loves ones, and their family. They face the same dangers in this country as anyone else. There is no reasonable argument to be made for creating second class citizens in this country.

As I said, I would be good with restoring rights on a case by case basis. Suppose our subject has prior convictions for... rape, armed robbery and manslaughter, all committed with a firearm. He has now completed his sentence and parole. Is it in the public's best interest for him to be walking around with a concealed weapon? Granted, he still is at risk perhaps more so than the average person due to his prior life style, but he has twice proven that he has not been rehabilitated by incarcerations.

Let's take another guy who has done 10 years for embezzlement. He has no violent felonies, no domestic or sexual abuse arrests and appears to be remorseful. I can't see him being deprived of his 2nd Amendment rights for the rest of his life.

So who decides? Perhaps a parole board? All states have some kind of review process for early prison release. Perhaps they could make a judgment at the time of a parole hearing, or maybe after a period of time after release.

The public’s interest was “satisfied” when he was released.

No! He was sentenced for the 3rd time for a crime committed with a firearm According to some judge, hie debt has been paid, but it is definitely NOT in the public interest to have him out on the street with a gun unless he has changed his life style and value system radically. A group of people, similar to a parole board could identify those that have changed and those who likely will never change. If we issue blanket restoration of all felons that have served their time, we are just begging for them to return to their prior life styles, not that having 2nd Amendment rights removed after our example's first conviction stopped him from having a gun handy for hie subsequent felonies.

 

[Vastator]

The first laws prohibiting ownership of firearms in this Nation were passed to prevent Blacks, Slave and Free, from owning guns. In Florida, they passed a law that Whites could check the residences of Blacks to insure they didn’t have guns. Not White Police, or Deputies, just regular citizens who worried the darkies would get guns. Gun Control and the Constitution

The prohibition in California against Open Carry was passed two months after the Black Panthers showed up armed in front of the Capital Steps in Sacramento. Again racism drove the Whites to prohibit an action that the Blacks were exploiting.

So today, we hear that we need to ban guns. But who would you be banning them from? The Rural Whites will bury their guns in the woods, and in their yards. Are you going to pass over every square foot with Mine Detectors to find the hidden cache’s of weapons an munitions? Nope. You’ll raid the inner cities where hiding locations are fewer, and probably covered by surveillance video to get the guns. Inner Cities which are predominantly black.

Nobody cared that White’s had assault weapons. The Brady Ban that is lauded about only came about after Gang Bangers got their hands on AK-47’s and Tek-9’s. Once again we had to stop people, and by people they meant Blacks, from getting these things.

So why would you support Gun Control today? Is it because some of the shooters are white and you can pretend that it totally isn’t because you’re afraid of Minorities?

I not only support the right of the people to keep and bear arms. I would support the restoration of this right to people who had been convicted of a Felony, and completed both prison, and probation or parole conditions. In other words, I would be willing to consider their debt completely paid to society and return to them the full rights of of being a citizen. Not just the right to vote which some of you would support.

So tell me why you want to disarm Blacks, who are according to you faced with an even greater threat from White Nationalist and racists? I say arm them. Let them arm up, and give them a chance to defend themselves. The Lord knows the Government isn’t going to do that.

I don't think race should be a factor in anything, including the second amendment. I do, however, have a problem restoring rights to violent felons on anything but a case by case basis.
You'd have a tough time convincing me that a guy that did time for manslaughter will suddenly turn into a model citizen after doing his time.

Race considerations are difficult to explain without coming off as a racist, but facts are facts. Over half of homicides are committed by roughly 1/8 of the population. Is that racist?

Lots of free people aren’t model citizens either. Many just haven’t been caught. If they’ve done their time; then that, should be that. They have every reason for wanting to own a gun, as anyone else. Property to protect, not to mention their own lives, and their loves ones, and their family. They face the same dangers in this country as anyone else. There is no reasonable argument to be made for creating second class citizens in this country.

As I said, I would be good with restoring rights on a case by case basis. Suppose our subject has prior convictions for... rape, armed robbery and manslaughter, all committed with a firearm. He has now completed his sentence and parole. Is it in the public's best interest for him to be walking around with a concealed weapon? Granted, he still is at risk perhaps more so than the average person due to his prior life style, but he has twice proven that he has not been rehabilitated by incarcerations.

Let's take another guy who has done 10 years for embezzlement. He has no violent felonies, no domestic or sexual abuse arrests and appears to be remorseful. I can't see him being deprived of his 2nd Amendment rights for the rest of his life.

So who decides? Perhaps a parole board? All states have some kind of review process for early prison release. Perhaps they could make a judgment at the time of a parole hearing, or maybe after a period of time after release.

The public’s interest was “satisfied” when he was released.

No! He was sentenced for the 3rd time for a crime committed with a firearm According to some judge, hie debt has been paid, but it is definitely NOT in the public interest to have him out on the street with a gun unless he has changed his life style and value system radically. A group of people, similar to a parole board could identify those that have changed and those who likely will never change. If we issue blanket restoration of all felons that have served their time, we are just begging for them to return to their prior life styles, not that having 2nd Amendment rights removed after our example's first conviction stopped him from having a gun handy for hie subsequent felonies.

Once released; he is the public, as much as you, or anyone else...

 

[Ernie S.]

Are you comfortable with him having a gun and living next door?

 

[Vastator]

Are you comfortable with him having a gun and living next door?

Yep.

 

[Ernie S.]

Next door to you, maybe, but not next door to me and I carry 16 hours a day.

 

[SavannahMann]

Next door to you, maybe, but not next door to me and I carry 16 hours a day.

Let’s say your child is driving, and has an accident because he is speeding. Would you trust that child behind the wheel in the future? We lose ten times the number of people shot to auto accidents. Yet we let people behind the wheel who have lost their license for a period, and driving is viewed as a privilege, not a right. We let those people regain their driving privileges even if they have multiple DUI convictions.

Once they have passed the revocation time limit, we let them back on the roads in a machine that can kill as easily as a gun can.

Do you drive? If you travel on the roads then chances are one of those cars around you is driven by an unlicensed driver. It is certain that several of those drivers have had multiple violations regarding driving, and at least one has lost their license in the past.

That worries me far more than the chance a baddie with a gun will come after me.

So how do we as a society respond? Do we say that three strikes and you are never allowed to drive again? Do we say that we must ban cars because people can’t drive responsibly? No, we mandate how you must protect yourself. Your car must have seatbelts in use. You must have airbags. Your car must meet minimum safety standards for your protection. Isn’t it odd that when we come to the far more deadly autos we mandate how you must protect yourself, instead of barring all speeders for life from ever getting behind the wheel?

 

[Vastator]

Next door to you, maybe, but not next door to me and I carry 16 hours a day.

Your neighbor may very well feel the same about you. Maybe you should have your rights taken away for their comfort...

 

[Timmy]

So gun control are a racial movement? This is the dumbest thing I ever had seen on here! Gun control doesn’t work just look at Chicago!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The AK-47 and AR-15 were around for thirty years and nobody cared. Until Black Criminals, Drug Dealers and Gang Bangers started using them. Then we needed The Brady Law. In California it was legal to open carry. Until the Black Panthers stood in front of the Capital armed. Then it was illegal just two months later. Here's How The Nation Responded When A Black Militia Group Occupied A Government Building | HuffPost

Read what the Black Panthers were saying, and remove the word Black, and you have the same language used by many here. Yet the result was very different. The politicians rushed to pass a law prohibiting the behavior.

One of the first laws passed in this country was to insure that neither Slaves nor Free Blacks could own a firearm.

So how is it that these laws prohibiting firearm ownership are not racist? Their entire history has been based upon race. Even today, the proof that they do not work is Chicago as you said. Chicago where they are working to keep the guns out of the hands of Blacks in the city. Whites in the suburbs are allowed to own guns. Why are the people in the city restricted?

Geographic limitations, those Blacks in the city are still getting Guns, so we have to go wider. We have to limit the White Folks because Blacks in Chicago are still getting guns. Geographic limitations, those within the city, do not work.

Those pushing for Gun Control are Racist. The minorities who are involved believe they are doing the right thing, and are unable to see the best defense for their population is the right to keep and bear arms. They think they can Trust Whitey to take care of them.

Really ? How about the old Chicago gangsters using tommy guns ? Which we banned .

 

[The Original Tree]

I asked you where the violence was at. and you dipped and dragged. goes back to the 70's for me, when the blacks I worked with told me they lie on the floors on New Year's eve because so many bullets fly. In a city where guns were banned. too fking funny. dude, it's racist as the day is long. where's all the security? oops.. can you say, RACIST?

Since you can't find anything stating the law was racist I guess you kind of can't show that it was, huh?

Chicago has a bad history of gun violence, they tried to reduce that violence with a poorly written law to ban guns in the city. I don't see how it's racist

I don't have to. I've explained why it was racist. you are racist, you're continuing to prove how racist you truly are. thanks.

No, the fact that a law exists to curb a behavior does not show that the law is racist.

sure it does. it always has, it is the point of every law concerning blacks. you all hate the black man, and then you yell racist to distract your actual intentions. but people like us see the ploy and the hate and are slowly converting sentiment within the black environment.

Every law concerning blacks?

Do you realize that Democrats actually have black people in the party and elected representatives? I think there are what, 2 black Republicans in Congress and one of them just announced their retirement. If you say your side is so open minded and in support of civil rights, how come blacks are losing representation in the Republican party?

Because you ostracize, harass and criminally assault Uppity Black Folks who want to think for themselves and call them Uncle Toms if they dare try to walk around while being Conservative. There are many Black Conservatives, but they have to keep their mouth shut, or you will assault them and make their life a living Hell.

 

[Ernie S.]

Next door to you, maybe, but not next door to me and I carry 16 hours a day.

Your neighbor may very well feel the same about you. Maybe you should have your rights taken away for their comfort...

I am not a felon I have carried a weapon daily for nearly 50 years and haven't shot anyone My neighbor knows what I am about with a firearm Hell he shoots with me off my back porch. He has no reason to be concerned for his safety because I own weapons. Now, the lady down the road with 2 prior felony convictions has demonstrated she shouldn't have the right to carry. She walked in to a near by elementary school and started shooting at her sister who is a kitchen worker there.

I get where you're coming from. Once your debt to society has been paid, you should be able to resume your life with all its rights and responsibilities.I'm all for that up to a point, but people with violent felonies with guns puts society at risk unless we can somehow assure that these felons have been rehabilitated.

So, just for shits and giggles, how do you feel about sexual offender registries?

 

[Ernie S.]

Next door to you, maybe, but not next door to me and I carry 16 hours a day.

Let’s say your child is driving, and has an accident because he is speeding. Would you trust that child behind the wheel in the future? We lose ten times the number of people shot to auto accidents. Yet we let people behind the wheel who have lost their license for a period, and driving is viewed as a privilege, not a right. We let those people regain their driving privileges even if they have multiple DUI convictions.

Once they have passed the revocation time limit, we let them back on the roads in a machine that can kill as easily as a gun can.

Do you drive? If you travel on the roads then chances are one of those cars around you is driven by an unlicensed driver. It is certain that several of those drivers have had multiple violations regarding driving, and at least one has lost their license in the past.

That worries me far more than the chance a baddie with a gun will come after me.

So how do we as a society respond? Do we say that three strikes and you are never allowed to drive again? Do we say that we must ban cars because people can’t drive responsibly? No, we mandate how you must protect yourself. Your car must have seatbelts in use. You must have airbags. Your car must meet minimum safety standards for your protection. Isn’t it odd that when we come to the far more deadly autos we mandate how you must protect yourself, instead of barring all speeders for life from ever getting behind the wheel?

Well, you can get your license revoked permanently in many states. California, for example, 4 DUI convictions will get you walking for life as will DUI accidents that results in death or serious injury
Anyway, I never stated I was for permanent forfeiture of rights for felons, only that felons with violent pasts should be reviewed on a case by case basis by something akin to a parole board.

 

[HappyJoy]

Since you can't find anything stating the law was racist I guess you kind of can't show that it was, huh?

Chicago has a bad history of gun violence, they tried to reduce that violence with a poorly written law to ban guns in the city. I don't see how it's racist

I don't have to. I've explained why it was racist. you are racist, you're continuing to prove how racist you truly are. thanks.

No, the fact that a law exists to curb a behavior does not show that the law is racist.

sure it does. it always has, it is the point of every law concerning blacks. you all hate the black man, and then you yell racist to distract your actual intentions. but people like us see the ploy and the hate and are slowly converting sentiment within the black environment.

Every law concerning blacks?

Do you realize that Democrats actually have black people in the party and elected representatives? I think there are what, 2 black Republicans in Congress and one of them just announced their retirement. If you say your side is so open minded and in support of civil rights, how come blacks are losing representation in the Republican party?

Because you ostracize, harass and criminally assault Uppity Black Folks who want to think for themselves and call them Uncle Toms if they dare try to walk around while being Conservative. There are many Black Conservatives, but they have to keep their mouth shut, or you will assault them and make their life a living Hell.

Actually we elect black people into office.

 

[Vastator]

Next door to you, maybe, but not next door to me and I carry 16 hours a day.

Let’s say your child is driving, and has an accident because he is speeding. Would you trust that child behind the wheel in the future? We lose ten times the number of people shot to auto accidents. Yet we let people behind the wheel who have lost their license for a period, and driving is viewed as a privilege, not a right. We let those people regain their driving privileges even if they have multiple DUI convictions.

Once they have passed the revocation time limit, we let them back on the roads in a machine that can kill as easily as a gun can.

Do you drive? If you travel on the roads then chances are one of those cars around you is driven by an unlicensed driver. It is certain that several of those drivers have had multiple violations regarding driving, and at least one has lost their license in the past.

That worries me far more than the chance a baddie with a gun will come after me.

So how do we as a society respond? Do we say that three strikes and you are never allowed to drive again? Do we say that we must ban cars because people can’t drive responsibly? No, we mandate how you must protect yourself. Your car must have seatbelts in use. You must have airbags. Your car must meet minimum safety standards for your protection. Isn’t it odd that when we come to the far more deadly autos we mandate how you must protect yourself, instead of barring all speeders for life from ever getting behind the wheel?

Well, you can get your license revoked permanently in many states. California, for example, 4 DUI convictions will get you walking for life as will DUI accidents that results in death or serious injury
Anyway, I never stated I was for permanent forfeiture of rights for felons, only that felons with violent pasts should be reviewed on a case by case basis by something akin to a parole board.

But that same driver can simply go to the next state over, and get a license. The problems with the prohibited persons class we have developed are numerous. Consistency for one. What constitutes a felony in one state, may not even be a crime in another. But simply moving to another state doesn't restore your rights. Even after serving your prescribed time.
Additionally life sentences of being relegated a second class citizen is unconstitutional on a number of levels. Sure you have corrupt judges who've decided differently, but that doesn't make them correct. It just makes them corrupt. There is a reason this recent class status was enacted. And it is recent. Things weren't always this way. With this set of laws a person who is usually a taxpayer in one way or another; is politically silenced. They cannot vote for a candidate who would rail against a law they fell afoul of. They cannot sit in a jury, and use jury nullification action to spare another fellow citizen their same fate. And they, in the most extreme of cases cannot purchase a firearm. Which besides the obvious recreational, and defensive reasons; keeps them from exerting political power through the barrel of a gun.
Ostracized, and silenced people have far less initiative to behave as what would be perceived as a model citizen, when its codified that no matter ther behavior going forward; they live the rest of their lives as a subject.
That's not even going into the elementary basics of that persons actual self defense. Defense of their loved ones, and property. The ability to make a career in many fields. The list goes on, on and on.
Funny how these measures were all put in place around the same time the civil rights movement was gaining traction. Coincidence?