Why aren't they?

[rocket88]

Posted here, to promote discussion:

 

[MaggieD]

Posted here, to promote discussion:

"Another (stupid) message brought to you by the folks at . . . Occupy!!!"

Maybe it's because the NRA believes that Zimmerman was only defending himself? Just a WAG, of course.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

What Maggie said.

 

[CanadaJohn]

What Sawyer said Maggie said.

Besides, telling young black men to arm themselves is like telling obese people to eat donuts - kinda redundant.

 

[Fiddytree]

Probably this.

 

[specklebang]

What about those few black men that aren't criminals, dress like humans, don't have that silly accent and graduated college with a degree in engineering. There must be at least one. Should they arm themselves?

Before anyone misreads my purpose, I'll restate my position on guns that has been unwavering. It's too late to confiscate guns. It's pointless to make a fuss about it. We don't need the diviseveness, please work on something more useful. I don't own a gun but I'm perfectly comfortable with you owning as many of whatever type you want. Use them wisely.

But my question is real.

What Sawyer said Maggie said.

Besides, telling young black men to arm themselves is like telling obese people to eat donuts - kinda redundant.

 

[rocket88]

"Another (stupid) message brought to you by the folks at . . . Occupy!!!"

Maybe it's because the NRA believes that Zimmerman was only defending himself? Just a WAG, of course.

Ah, but why shouldn't they be defending themselves?

 

[CanadaJohn]

What about those few black men that aren't criminals, dress like humans, don't have that silly accent and graduated college with a degree in engineering. There must be at least one. Should they arm themselves?

Before anyone misreads my purpose, I'll restate my position on guns that has been unwavering. It's too late to confiscate guns. It's pointless to make a fuss about it. We don't need the diviseveness, please work on something more useful. I don't own a gun but I'm perfectly comfortable with you owning as many of whatever type you want. Use them wisely.

But my question is real.

In all honesty, I'd say they have nothing to fear from the Trayvon Martin tragedy, as suggested in the OP poster. I fully appreciate that there are many fine young black men, as you suggest. My comment, perhaps not clear enough, was that young black men behaving like Trayvon Martin are to a large extent already armed.

 

[Fisher]

What about those few black men that aren't criminals, dress like humans, don't have that silly accent and graduated college with a degree in engineering. There must be at least one. Should they arm themselves?

Ask Bill Cosby's son....oops. Too late.

A young black man should not carry in public no matter how legal it is for him unless he wants to be shot, but he probably should have one at home if he lives in a bad area is involved in suspect circles. A early 30's ish or older black man who doesn't look/act thuggy can carry a bazooka and be fine.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Maybe the lesson here is for young black thugs not to try to give someone an "ass Whoopin", just get a gun and shoot the guy before he shoots you. :roll:

 

[jamesrage]

Posted here, to promote discussion:

1.Perhaps the NRA knows Zimmerman was justified in using lethal force to stop someone who was beating his head into the pavement.

2.The NRA is a pro-2nd amendment rights group regardless of race.So it is redundant to go telling different racial groups to arm themselves.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Posted here, to promote discussion:

Perhaps because Martin was only 17, possibly stoned and showed a propensity to attack folks that "eyed" him, but that is just a guess.

 

[specklebang]

If Martin had been armed, the outcome might have been different.

My default assumption is that everyone is armed so I'm just real polite to everyone. So far, things have worked out.

Maybe the lesson here is for young black thugs not to try to give someone an "ass Whoopin", just get a gun and shoot the guy before he shoots you. :roll:

 

[ttwtt78640]

What about those few black men that aren't criminals, dress like humans, don't have that silly accent and graduated college with a degree in engineering. There must be at least one. Should they arm themselves?

Before anyone misreads my purpose, I'll restate my position on guns that has been unwavering. It's too late to confiscate guns. It's pointless to make a fuss about it. We don't need the diviseveness, please work on something more useful. I don't own a gun but I'm perfectly comfortable with you owning as many of whatever type you want. Use them wisely.

But my question is real.

That sounds like what the liberals would call racist unless, of course, Joe Biden says it.

"I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy," Biden said. "I mean, that's a storybook, man."

Biden's description of Obama draws scrutiny - CNN.com

 

[head of joaquin]

"Another (stupid) message brought to you by the folks at . . . Occupy!!!"

Maybe it's because the NRA believes that Zimmerman was only defending himself? Just a WAG, of course.

Defensive, aren't you.

I think we all know why the NRA doesn't want black people armed.

 

[head of joaquin]

Perhaps because Martin was only 17, possibly stoned and showed a propensity to attack folks that "eyed" him, but that is just a guess.

So are you claiming that all black people are 17 years old stoner thugs?

I think we have our answer about the delusional racist core that is the NRA

 

[head of joaquin]

1.Perhaps the NRA knows Zimmerman was justified in using lethal force to stop someone who was beating his head into the pavement.

Yep, an unarmed teen walking home with groceries got the better of armed wussy stalking him. Too bad Martin didn't wrestle the gun away and give the girlyman a good pistol whipping to boot!

A guess the lesson is an unarmed black teen getting groceries is tougher than a fully armed gun nut with a cell phone screaming for help.

 

[ttwtt78640]

So are you claiming that all black people are 17 years old stoner thugs?

I think we have our answer about the delusional racist core that is the NRA

Who exactly was unarmed and involved in the Trayvon Martin tragedy, other than a single 17 year old (now deceased) that decided to bring Skittles and an attitude to a gunfight?

 

[MaggieD]

Defensive, aren't you.

I think we all know why the NRA doesn't want black people armed.

If Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson said, "I think we all know why the NRA doesn't want black people armed," I'd chalk it up to race baiting. What should I think when you say it?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Defensive, aren't you.

I think we all know why the NRA doesn't want black people armed.

What evidence is there that the NRA doesn't defend the rights of black people as well as whites or any other race to keep and bear arms?

It is well worth pointing out that most of the early gun control laws were blatantly racist; that they specifically sought to disarm black people; and it was in that frame that the NRA first turned from simply a shooting-interest group to a political activist group to defend this right which, at the time, was specifically being attacked on the basis of race.

 

[head of joaquin]

Who exactly was unarmed and involved in the Trayvon Martin tragedy, other than a single 17 year old (now deceased) that decided to bring Skittles and an attitude to a gunfight?

Yep, Martin was unarmed, and still the gun toting girlyman Zimmerman was squealing like a pig for the authorities to help him.

I think that about sums up the nature of the NRA, and why they don't want superior black males to be armed.

 

[head of joaquin]

What evidence is there that the NRA doesn't defend the rights of black people as well as whites or any other race to keep and bear arms?

It is well worth pointing out that most of the early gun control laws were blatantly racist; that they specifically sought to disarm black people; and it was in that frame that the NRA first turned from simply a shooting-interest group to a political activist group to defend this right which, at the time, was specifically being attacked on the basis of race.

Go back to the OP and let us know.

I'd note that the NRA was quite happy with the Bull Connor attacking unarmed black protestors. The NRA never lifted a finger to defend black folk from government action at the time, despite all their talk about how militias are for protecting our rights against government oppression. I wonder why that was?

http://www.theroot.com/views/fear-black-gun-owner

http://www.thenation.com/blog/17212...tion-aspiring-vigilantes-part-2#axzz2aD43bt3j

Now, let's watch how you dodge that issue!

 

[ttwtt78640]

Yep, Martin was unarmed, and still the gun toting girlyman Zimmerman was squealing like a pig for the authorities to help him.

I think that about sums up the nature of the NRA, and why they don't want superior black males to be armed.

US gun ownership is 27% for blacks and 44% for whites. Membership in the NRA is not required to enjoy one's 2A rights, although they surely would like it to be. I am 59 and a gun owner yet will not become a member of ARRP, the NRA or many other organizations that support political ideas that I do not. We can probably thank Obama and his gun control wishes for the NRA membership rising from about 2 million in 2001 to about 5 million now. I still oppose the NRA as it advocates for CCW permits - constitutinal rights rental agreements at the state level.

 

[jamesrage]

Yep, an unarmed teen walking home with groceries got the better of armed wussy stalking him. Too bad Martin didn't wrestle the gun away and give the girlyman a good pistol whipping to boot!

A guess the lesson is an unarmed black teen getting groceries is tougher than a fully armed gun nut with a cell phone screaming for help.

I see you are talking out of your ass again.