As a matter of fact, above all other reasons, killing black people has been the greatest reason for its existence.

What's happening this very moment is merely an extension of what has always been.

Just call them all racists! That's the ticket!

Gun rights are civil rights. Deal with it.

Controllers get upset pretty easy. I suppose it's a good thing they don't have guns (or so they say).

might call having a gun or two a Constitutional right, but it's not a "civil right." In fact, gunners attempts to equate guns to the real Civil Rights Movement is another reason they tick me off at times.

There are many reasons a person can be prevented from having or carrying a gun, thus it is not a "civil right" that cannot be taken away.


You ought to read articles like this one next time you start calling guns a "civil right."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/5/21/1210507/-Civil-Rights-and-Gun-Rights

"not a definition, per se"

As to your claim that civil rights cannot be taken away: You are correct. Rights exist independent of the law.

That is why gun control laws that infringe upon the right to self defense are unjust. A person whose life is being unjustly threatened has the right to defend themselves.

Law, when it serves it's highest virtue, protects rights. However, the law can also be used to abrogate rights such as when a person is convicted of a crime and thus denied their rights to freedom of movement and privacy or even their right to life. The law can also be misused to abuse rights such as the provocation of the Battle of Lexington. Yet, in both instances the right still exists.

You don't know what you're talking about. You're just throwing crap at the wall and seeing what sticks.

In fact the case for gun ownership as a civil right under our Constitution is stronger than that for voting as a civil right.

And you can lose the right to do both. Say you got convicted of some felony- maybe felony robbery for example- you will lose the right to own a firearm and in many states also lose the right to vote either temporarily or permanently.

But your probably already well aware of that.

the Constitution is the basis of all our rights.

Changed my mind after reading the post. I think your observation is on the mark.

Same with used guns...just thought some old white guy got bored and wanted something new.

People like to own guns cause they kill black people...got it.



Thanks though...now I know the 50 people shot in Chicago over the weekend is because I bought an M1 a few years back.

Is this culture you speak of that 3% that own 50% of the guns that was spoken of recently or are you simply including all gun owners in this group?

Good luck selling that narrative.

When it fails, and it will, is your next target going to be freedom of speech?

I believe that is the intent of the ironically-name "trigger warnings."

IF you can prove to me that guns used by whites against blacks are greater than black on white or black on black, your OP will make sense.

Really progressive policies should be based on facts, not imaginary grievances.

(the Charlotte policeman was black, but protesters hold signs blaming .. whites ..)

And I doubt it will be allowed to stand. I'd rather see the issue argued to a conclusion but some people can't allow for open speech if their agenda is to survive.

If it was not the case, what would be the difference with the fantasy world of Donald J.?

Now that Trump has proposed a nationwide extension of Bloomberg's stop-and-frisk policy it leaves them in an awkward dilemma. They want to claim the mere presence of guns is killing POC but here is a gun control proposal that will effectively get guns off the street but is obviously and historically weighted against POC.

The OP makes claims which are not backed by facts, but I suppose they make sense if viewed as the conclusion of a long debate which I obviously missed.

Still, wrong assumptions do not lead to correct -or progressive- conclusions.

Black Lives Matters is not protesting just the deaths of unarmed black people at the hands of police, they are protesting the treatment of black people by police in general in the US.

Gun violence is also related to poverty, so measuring it strictly by race will not provide a reason for these deaths.

Also, black cops shoot black civilians, too, not accounted for in this graphic.

Affirms everything I believe about why firearms must be readily available to the public, and ahle to be used to protect private property. Without their GUNZZZZZZX these people would have been injured, possibly killed, humiliated, and their property destroyed, and most of all, forced to live in fear with a boot on their throat.

These guys are my new heros!

I mean their Second Amendment Rights to carry guns are are being infringed. I guess once you buy the gun, then you're on your own. Kind of like the "Pro-life" people. Once born, you're on your own,

None are dead, but several have protected themselves or family with a firearm since.

The possibly of a gun didn't kill any of them, and in fact the existence of a firearm hasn't killed any of them and has protected the lives and safety of several of them.

It's time to reject the notion that firearms and self defense are not for minorities. That is the programming they want to push- it's why a lot of gun control laws in some states and on the federal level were written in ways that targeted minorities- and people going around repeating the racist narrative that minorities don't deserve or can't exercise their rights is just how the racists want you to think.

Is that what you believe?

Why doesn't Hillary come out and say yes I do. That would win her the election easily. Why is she treading lightly on this? It's a winning issue for majority of Americans.

As if she ever said or implied any such thing.