More sacrifices to the 2nd Amendment

[gowlerk 2,246]

2 hours ago, kallend said:

It is my understanding that 42 angels can stand on the head of a pin.

Know it all.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

On 1/29/2022 at 12:22 PM, NewGuy2005 said:

I think she was trying to be funny.

Don't think so. I think she was reminding people that the NRA has historically shown itself to be against black people carrying guns.

[brenthutch 444]

7 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

Don't think so. I think she was reminding people that the NRA has historically shown itself to be against black people carrying guns.

No longer 

 

[winsor 236]

17 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

Don't think so. I think she was reminding people that the NRA has historically shown itself to be against black people carrying guns.

Out of curiosity, who the hell told you that?

'Gun control' is historically quite demonstrably racist.  A key argument against giving citizenship to freed slaves was the contention that <blacks>, if armed, would shoot anything that moved.

Look it up.

 

BSBD,

Winsor

[brenthutch 444]

18 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

Don't think so. I think she was reminding people that the NRA has historically shown itself to be against black people carrying guns.

It was Democrats who were against black people carrying guns 

[wmw999 2,517]

Because southern yellow dog democrats, especially the ones who would never, ever, vote for the party of Lincoln, are exactly like current left-end progressive democrats. Right.

Wendy P.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

2 hours ago, wmw999 said:

Because southern yellow dog democrats, especially the ones who would never, ever, vote for the party of Lincoln, are exactly like current left-end progressive democrats. Right.

Wendy P.

Don't forget that 'flaming liberal'...

Reagan.

When the Black Panthers began exercising their 2nd A rights, he passed some of the most restrictive gun laws ever. And fast.

 

https://www.history.com/news/black-panthers-gun-control-nra-support-mulford-act

[SkyDekker 1,465]

5 hours ago, winsor said:

Out of curiosity, who the hell told you that?

The Mulford Act.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

4 hours ago, brenthutch said:

It was Democrats who were against black people carrying guns 

The Act is named after a Republican and signed into law by a Republican governor, but it was all the Democrats? Weird logic you have there.

Edited February 1, 2022 by SkyDekker

[billvon 3,063]

Just now, SkyDekker said:

The Act is named after a Republican and signed into law by a republican governor, but it was all the Democrats? Weird logic you have there.

?? I don't think it's strange at all.  In his world, everything bad comes from democrats, everything good comes from republicans.  If republicans do something and it turns out bad, democrats did it first.  If democrats do something and it turns out good, then whatabout this bad thing that happened in Kamchatka that is somehow related.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

5 hours ago, winsor said:

'Gun control' is historically quite demonstrably racist.  A key argument against giving citizenship to freed slaves was the contention that <blacks>, if armed, would shoot anything that moved

Not disputing that. When the NRA had to choose between gun control or allowing black people to carry, they were much more in favour of gun control.

[brenthutch 444]

“The early NRA, founded at the peak of Reconstruction in 1871, never went much farther than its shooting range outside Manhattan, and played no role in the South during Reconstruction or for years thereafter. Church and other early NRA leaders, nearly all of whom were veteran Union officers, unequivocally supported President Ulysses S. Grant’s efforts to crush the Klan.”

That doesn’t sound very racist. 

[winsor 236]

21 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

Not disputing that. When the NRA had to choose between gun control or allowing black people to carry, they were much more in favour of gun control.

Just an aside, but 'black lives matter' would be much more convincing if blacks being shot weren't overwhelmingly shot by other blacks.

There's a big difference between the right to self defense and using people for target practice as a matter of course.

In competitive shooting circles, nobody really cares about race.  Safety is paramount.

 

BSBD,

Winsor

[SkyDekker 1,465]

2 hours ago, winsor said:

Just an aside, but 'black lives matter' would be much more convincing if blacks being shot weren't overwhelmingly shot by other blacks.

There's a big difference between the right to self defense and using people for target practice as a matter of course.

In competitive shooting circles, nobody really cares about race.  Safety is paramount.

 

BSBD,

Winsor

It is unfortunate, but not surprising you need to be convinced that black lives matter.

[winsor 236]

1 hour ago, SkyDekker said:

It is unfortunate, but not surprising you need to be convinced that black lives matter.

Any more or any less than anyone else?  Not a chance.

To suggest otherwise is racist.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

1 minute ago, winsor said:

Any more or any less than anyone else?  Not a chance.

To suggest otherwise is racist.

You already suggested that you don't really care about gun deaths amongst the black population since it is for a large part black on black violence.

Which is interesting, considering you generally say you don't see race but only results. In this case you seem to have no problem pointing out race, in stead of focusing on results.

Another example of you being nowhere near as principled as you claim to be. Your statements on this subject continue to be of the "I can't be a racist cause I have a black friend" variety.

[billvon 3,063]

35 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Which is interesting, considering you generally say you don't see race but only results. In this case you seem to have no problem pointing out race, in stead of focusing on results.

Many people do not see race when it comes to societal injustice.  If they don't see it it's not happening, and thus no need to fix it.  Like an overweight diabetic, there are a great many things they can blame for their problems other than the obvious one - because to acknowledge the obvious one would then put the onus on them to fix it.  Thus we hear "black people shoot black people" "Trayvon Martin was no choir boy" "Floyd  was on drugs; what do you expect?"  "Race had nothing to do with those shootings."

However, when race can be used to win an argument, it gets run up the flagpole just as fast as they can manage.

[winsor 236]

4 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

You already suggested that you don't really care about gun deaths amongst the black population since it is for a large part black on black violence.

Which is interesting, considering you generally say you don't see race but only results. In this case you seem to have no problem pointing out race, in stead of focusing on results.

Another example of you being nowhere near as principled as you claim to be. Your statements on this subject continue to be of the "I can't be a racist cause I have a black friend" variety.

Ah yes, ignore the message and attack the messenger.  That's the ticket!

Your paraphrasing what you think I said makes clear that you had no idea what I said in the first place.  Given that you do so consistently, I suspect it is willful.

 

 

[SkyDekker 1,465]

50 minutes ago, winsor said:

Ah yes, ignore the message and attack the messenger.  That's the ticket!

Your paraphrasing what you think I said makes clear that you had no idea what I said in the first place.  Given that you do so consistently, I suspect it is willful.

Well, you said race doesn't factor into your decisions.

You also expressed your opinion (a decision) that "black lives matter" would be more convincing if black's being shot weren't being shot overwhelming by other blacks.

So in this case, the message from the messenger is conflicting. 

[brenthutch 444]

1 hour ago, SkyDekker said:

Well, you said race doesn't factor into your decisions.

You also expressed your opinion (a decision) that "black lives matter" would be more convincing if black's being shot weren't being shot overwhelming by other blacks.

It would be more convincing if BLM gave a toss at black on black killings.  Hundreds of African Americans are killed in a month by other blacks…. Not a peep from the left and BLM 

[SkyDekker 1,465]

12 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

It would be more convincing if BLM gave a toss at black on black killings.

Sure if you think blacks are killing blacks because they are black. Otherwise it is just deflecting from the actual issue.

[brenthutch 444]

30 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Sure if you think blacks are killing blacks because they are black. Otherwise it is just deflecting from the actual issue.

I think anyone killing anyone is wrong, it is only the left that gives intra-racial homicide a pass

Edited February 3, 2022 by brenthutch

[brenthutch 444]

On 3/23/2021 at 2:14 PM, kallend said:

The murder weapon according to Boulder police:
 

https://ruger.com/products/ar556/models.html

Just bought the MPR version of it.  Match grade two stage trigger, 5R rifling, full float hand guard, radial port muzzle break, rifle length gas tube, Magpul furniture, Vortex 1x8 LPVO.  Sub MOA tack driver

 

Edited February 3, 2022 by brenthutch

[billvon 3,063]

3 hours ago, brenthutch said:

It would be more convincing if BLM gave a toss at black on black killings.

Ah.  So republicans might be credible if they cared one bit about the murder of abortion doctors?  Capital idea!  Get right on that, and let us know when we can take them seriously.

[brenthutch 444]

9 hours ago, billvon said:

Ah.  So republicans might be credible if they cared one bit about the murder of abortion doctors?  Capital idea!  Get right on that, and let us know when we can take them seriously.

When was the last time an abortion doctor was murdered?