Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Love Your Gun? Thank the Black Panthers

  1. #1
    Regular Member Repeater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,519

    Love Your Gun? Thank the Black Panthers

    Adam Winkler has written a new book, “Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America.” In-depth discussion of the Black Pathers open-carrying rifles:
    Last night, publisher and real-estate mogul Mort Zuckerman feted law professor Adam Winkler for the release of Winkler’s new book, “Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America.”

    The book explores the centuries-long debate over gun control and the right to bear arms in the U.S. “I really wanted to write a book about guns that would be of interest to people who have no interest in guns,” said Winkler, a constitutional law scholar and UCLA professor.

    His academic research revealed remarkable stories that he wanted to share. He looked at not only the Founding Fathers but also the Wild West – which he said had the most restrictive gun-control laws in the nation. “The heart of America’s gun control actually was cities like Tombstone and Deadwood, where you’re not allowed to carry guns when you’re in these cities. Our image of the Wild West is totally wrong.”
    His article in The Atlantic reveals the fact that Ronald Reagan, as Governor, supoported a variety of gun control laws. consider this account of Booby Seale and Huey Newton:
    The Panthers, however, took it to an extreme, carrying their guns in public, displaying them for everyone—especially the police—to see. Newton had discovered, during classes at San Francisco Law School, that California law allowed people to carry guns in public so long as they were visible, and not pointed at anyone in a threatening way.

    In February of 1967, Oakland police officers stopped a car carrying Newton, Seale, and several other Panthers with rifles and handguns. When one officer asked to see one of the guns, Newton refused. “I don’t have to give you anything but my identification, name, and address,” he insisted. This, too, he had learned in law school.

    “Who in the hell do you think you are?” an officer responded.

    “Who in the hell do you think you are?,” Newton replied indignantly. He told the officer that he and his friends had a legal right to have their firearms.

    Newton got out of the car, still holding his rifle.

    “What are you going to do with that gun?” asked one of the stunned policemen.

    “What are you going to do with your gun?,” Newton replied.

    By this time, the scene had drawn a crowd of onlookers. An officer told the bystanders to move on, but Newton shouted at them to stay. California law, he yelled, gave civilians a right to observe a police officer making an arrest, so long as they didn’t interfere. Newton played it up for the crowd. In a loud voice, he told the police officers, “If you try to shoot at me or if you try to take this gun, I’m going to shoot back at you, swine.” Although normally a black man with Newton’s attitude would quickly find himself handcuffed in the back of a police car, enough people had gathered on the street to discourage the officers from doing anything rash. Because they hadn’t committed any crime, the Panthers were allowed to go on their way.

    The people who’d witnessed the scene were dumbstruck. Not even Bobby Seale could believe it. Right then, he said, he knew that Newton was the “baddest M-F'er in the world.” Newton’s message was clear: “The gun is where it’s at and about and in.” After the February incident, the Panthers began a regular practice of policing the police. Thanks to an army of new recruits inspired to join up when they heard about Newton’s bravado, groups of armed Panthers would drive around following police cars. When the police stopped a black person, the Panthers would stand off to the side and shout out legal advice.
    How did politicians respond?
    Don Mulford, a conservative Republican state assemblyman from Alameda County, which includes Oakland, was determined to end the Panthers’ police patrols. To disarm the Panthers, he proposed a law that would prohibit the carrying of a loaded weapon in any California city.
    And the Panthers?
    When Newton found out about this, he told Seale, “You know what we’re going to do? We’re going to the Capitol.” Seale was incredulous. “The Capitol?” Newton explained: “Mulford’s there, and they’re trying to pass a law against our guns, and we’re going to the Capitol steps.” Newton’s plan was to take a select group of Panthers “loaded down to the gills,” to send a message to California lawmakers about the group’s opposition to any new gun control.

    The Panthers’ methods provoked an immediate backlash. The day of their statehouse protest, lawmakers said the incident would speed enactment of Mulford’s gun-control proposal. Mulford himself pledged to make his bill even tougher, and he added a provision barring anyone but law enforcement from bringing a loaded firearm into the state capitol.

    Republicans in California eagerly supported increased gun control. Governor Reagan told reporters that afternoon that he saw “no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons.” He called guns a “ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will.” In a later press conference, Reagan said he didn’t “know of any sportsman who leaves his home with a gun to go out into the field to hunt or for target shooting who carries that gun loaded.” The Mulford Act, he said, “would work no hardship on the honest citizen.”

    The fear inspired by black people with guns also led the United States Congress to consider new gun restrictions, after the summer of 1967 brought what the historian Harvard Sitkoff called the “most intense and destructive wave of racial violence the nation had ever witnessed.” Devastating riots engulfed Detroit and Newark. Police and National Guardsmen who tried to help restore order were greeted with sniper fire.

    A 1968 federal report blamed the unrest at least partly on the easy availability of guns.
    The article seems scholarly and, for the most part, well-written. The one problem, I think, is this passage:
    (For years, the NRA has demonized government agents, like those in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the federal agency that enforces gun laws, as “jack-booted government thugs.” Wayne LaPierre, the current executive vice president, warned members in 1995 that anyone who wears a badge has “the government’s go-ahead to harass, intimidate, even murder law-abiding citizens.”)
    Sure, Wayne said "jack-booted government thugs." but he paraphrased without attribution what John Dingell actually said: "They are detested, and I have described them properly as jackbooted American fascists. They have shown no concern over the rights of ordinary citizens or their property." (Congressional Record, 02/08/1995)

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by Repeater View Post
    Adam Winkler has written a new book, “Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America.” In-depth discussion of the Black Pathers open-carrying rifles:


    His article in The Atlantic reveals the fact that Ronald Reagan, as Governor, supoported a variety of gun control laws. consider this account of Booby Seale and Huey Newton:


    How did politicians respond?


    And the Panthers?


    The article seems scholarly and, for the most part, well-written. The one problem, I think, is this passage:


    Sure, Wayne said "jack-booted government thugs." but he paraphrased without attribution what John Dingell actually said: "They are detested, and I have described them properly as jackbooted American fascists. They have shown no concern over the rights of ordinary citizens or their property." (Congressional Record, 02/08/1995)

    awesome post man

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,201
    Thanks Repeater. I read that article with great interest a day or two back. It helps to further confirm the fact that many of the "gun control" laws established here in the US were as a result of an attempt to prevent non-whites from protecting themselves and ensuring that their civil rights are not trampled upon.
    Last edited by jmelvin; 10-06-2011 at 02:01 PM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member glockluva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Montgomery county
    Posts
    18
    nice, i'll try and stop be barnes & noble to get a copy of this book... i love reading about history!

  5. #5
    Regular Member carry for myself's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    546
    so is this article PRO black panther? or not? either way. personally i cannot stand them. their ideals and violence towards anyone but african americans makes the the exact same things as the KKK and white superamisist groups. one leader even stated in an interview that the way to peace for america was to "exterminate white people"........in my book they are scum, much as the kkk and neo nazi's. i wouldnt thank them for breathing personally.
    i would rather run out of blood, breath and life. and die fighting. than run out of ammo , and die with my pants down -Tom Scantas

  6. #6
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Citizens actually using guns for the very purpose the 2A was written for and the governments response is gun control.

    Bad government bad!
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Urban Skeet City, Alabama
    Posts
    897
    We're still stuck with Code of Alabama of 1975 13A-11-59 because someone got mad that certain people were marching around with firearms... because certain other people were attacking them with police dogs and fire hoses.
    Last edited by Kirbinator; 10-10-2011 at 04:05 PM.
    It takes a village to raise an idiot.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    Quote Originally Posted by jmelvin View Post
    Thanks Repeater. I read that article with great interest a day or two back. It helps to further confirm the fact that many of the "gun control" laws established here in the US were as a result of an attempt to prevent non-whites from protecting themselves and ensuring that their civil rights are not trampled upon.
    Actually, it's not "many" of the "gun control" laws that stemmed from racism and classism--ALL of them have.

    Every single law enacted by Municipality, State, and Federal governments in the history of the US have been prompted by the actions of blacks and hispanics who DARED to attempt to exercise their 2A rights in public.

    If anyone can point out a SINGLE gun control law on the books ANYWHERE in the US that WASN'T predicated on "keeping guns out of the hands of the wrong kinds of people" (meaning blacks, hispanics, and the poor) I'd be surprised...

    In fact, it is the actions of the Black Panthers and other groups of black civil rights activists who DARED to protect themselves, their families, and their neighborhoods during the riots of the late 1960s that caused Maryland to go COMPLETELY round the bend with their prohibitive gun laws. MD used to be an Open Carry state, before those troublesome civil rights folks started standing on their porches and marching to City Hall in Baltimore toting shotguns on their shoulders.

    And everyone knows that the good (white) citizens of MD just won't stand for THAT sort of uppity behavior among "the help"...

    <sarcasm OFF>
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Citation: "The Secret History of Guns," Adam Winkler, pp. 80-87, The Atlantic, September 2011, Vol. 308 No. 2.

    Most local libraries carry The Atlantic.

    Couple of quotes:

    Introduction to the article: "The Ku Klux Klan, Ronald Reagan, and the NRA all worked to control guns. The Black Panthers were the true pioneers of the pro-gun movement. In the battle over gun rights, both sides have distorted history and the law, and no resolution is in sight."

    About the author: "Adam Winkler is a professor of constitutional law at UCLA law school. This article is adapted from his forthcoming book, Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America, to be published by W. W. Norton in September."

    I found the article to be both objective and informative. The author's reasoning and conclusion concerning Justice Scalia's embracing of the "living Constitution" farce is impeccable.

    Dreamer, he goes into some detail about how gun-control measures often had a racial motive. But he also makes the case that it's certainly not the only reason.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  10. #10
    Regular Member sraacke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Saint Gabriel, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    1,222
    I thank the OP for posting the excerpts and would like to point to them as a cautionary warning of how standing up for your rights and exercising them can sometimes result in public backlash and political restrictions of those rights. Newton did much like many of us are doing today. We are asking LEOs why we are being detained and refusing to submit to illegal searches and detainments. They were holding LEOs accountable just as many watchdog groups do today. The LEOs and the politicians fought back and we see the results today. The OC movement is very much about the winning of hearts and minds. Keep these lessons in mind.

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    @ yale: Wow! Astounding recap. Good for you!
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  12. #12
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Yuma, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    923

    What Winkler does not say is that Gun Control was What The Panthers Wanted

    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    @ yale: Wow! Astounding recap. Good for you!
    This was classic Alynski tactics by the Black Panthers. "Make the Opposition follow their rules". The Panther's, ideologically, were basically Communists. The idea was to push the government into being more repressive, to start a race war. They were successful in pushing the government far enough to get more gun control passed in California.

    I recall reading, (will see if I can find the source), that when the bill was coming up for a vote, the panthers showed up at the legislature with loaded shotguns and carbines.

    What seemed problematic was now a certainty. The law passed with plenty of votes.
    Last edited by ccwinstructor; 01-12-2014 at 09:06 PM. Reason: syntax

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    why?
    Posts
    432

    Question Reagan 2A Friend or Enemy

    Quote Originally Posted by Repeater View Post

    And the Panthers?

    Republicans in California eagerly supported increased gun control. Governor Reagan told reporters that afternoon that he saw “no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons.” He called guns a “ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will.” In a later press conference, Reagan said he didn’t “know of any sportsman who leaves his home with a gun to go out into the field to hunt or for target shooting who carries that gun loaded.” The Mulford Act, he said, “would work no hardship on the honest citizen.”
    "President Ronald Reagan will forever be remembered fondly by Second Amendment supporters, many of who are among the American conservatives who consider Reagan a poster child of modern conservatism. But words and actions of Reagan, the 40th President of the United States, left behind a mixed record on gun rights.

    The lone piece of significant legislation related to gun rights during the Reagan administration was the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986. Signed into law by Reagan on May 19, 1986, the legislation amended the Gun Control Act of 1968 by repealing parts of the original act that were deemed by studies to be unconstitutional.

    However, the act also contained a provision banning the ownership of any fully automatic firearms not registered by May 19, 1986. That provision was slipped into the legislation as an 11th hour amendment by Rep. William J. Hughes, a New Jersey Democrat. Reagan has been criticized by some gun owners for signing legislation containing the Hughes amendment.

    Before Reagan left office in January 1989, efforts were afoot in Congress to pass legislation creating a national background check and mandatory waiting period for handgun purchases. The Brady Bill, as the legislation was named, had the backing of Sarah Brady, the wife of former Reagan press secretary Jim Brady, who was wounded in a 1981 assassination attempt on the president.

    Three years later, Congress had passed the Brady Bill and was working on another piece of gun control legislation, a ban on assault weapons. Reagan joined former Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter in a letter published in the Boston Globe that called on Congress to pass a ban on assault weapons. Later, in a letter to Rep. Scott Klug, a Wisconsin Republican, Reagan said the limitations proposed by the Assault Weapon Ban “are absolutely necessary” and that it “must be passed.” Klug voted in favor of the ban.

    The Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 will be remembered as an important piece of legislation for gun rights. However, Reagan also cast his support behind the two most controversial pieces of gun control legislation of the past 30 years. His support of the Assault Weapons Ban in 1994 may have directly led to the ban winning the approval of Congress. Congress passed the ban by a vote of 216-214. In addition to Klug voting for the ban after Reagan’s last minute plea, Rep. Dick Swett, D-N.H., also credited Reagan’s support of the bill for helping him decide to cast a favorable vote.

    A more lasting impact of Reagan’s policy on guns was the nomination of several Supreme Court justices.
    Of the four justices nominated by Reagan — Sandra Day O’Connor, William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and Anthony Kennedy — the latter two were still on the bench for a pair of important Supreme Court rulings on gun rights in the 2000s: District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008 and McDonald v. Chicago in 2010. Both sided with a narrow, 4-3 majority in striking down gun bans in Washington D.C. and Chicago while ruling that the Second Amendment applies to individuals and the states."

    source, http://civilliberty.about.com/od/gun...ald-Reagan.htm

    I am not a historian regarding this issue, so I am totally open to any and all "Logical" discussion on these *Apparent* Facts which are presented here.

    ,,, just don't shoot the *Piano Player* = relayer of information,,,

  14. #14
    Regular Member HPmatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    1,597
    Quote Originally Posted by scott58dh View Post
    ...
    Before Reagan left office in January 1989, efforts were afoot in Congress to pass legislation creating a national background check and mandatory waiting period for handgun purchases. The Brady Bill, as the legislation was named, had the backing of Sarah Brady, the wife of former Reagan press secretary Jim Brady, who was wounded in a 1981 assassination attempt on the president.

    Three years later, Congress had passed the Brady Bill and was working on another piece of gun control legislation, a ban on assault weapons. Reagan joined former Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter in a letter published in the Boston Globe that called on Congress to pass a ban on assault weapons. Later, in a letter to Rep. Scott Klug, a Wisconsin Republican, Reagan said the limitations proposed by the Assault Weapon Ban “are absolutely necessary” and that it “must be passed.” Klug voted in favor of the ban.

    The Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986 will be remembered as an important piece of legislation for gun rights. However, Reagan also cast his support behind the two most controversial pieces of gun control legislation of the past 30 years. His support of the Assault Weapons Ban in 1994 may have directly led to the ban winning the approval of Congress. Congress passed the ban by a vote of 216-214. In addition to Klug voting for the ban after Reagan’s last minute plea, Rep. Dick Swett, D-N.H., also credited Reagan’s support of the bill for helping him decide to cast a favorable vote.
    I want to say that Reagan pretty much was out of the spotlight after he left office. After 1992 when his Alzheimer's was becoming more pronounced he only appeared in controlled environments that Nancy was okay with. Don't recall him supporting much of anything after he was out of office and the '41' 'read-my-hips' RINO GHW Bush took over.
    “Men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them"
    -Thomas Hobbes 1651

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    why?
    Posts
    432
    Quote Originally Posted by HPmatt View Post
    I want to say that Reagan pretty much was out of the spotlight after he left office. After 1992 when his Alzheimer's was becoming more pronounced he only appeared in controlled environments that Nancy was okay with. Don't recall him supporting much of anything after he was out of office and the '41' 'read-my-hips' RINO GHW Bush took over.
    IMHO, he did start the ball rolling & he was still however so slightly still involved in this issue.

    From Wikipedia about Pres. Reagan,,,

    "Alzheimer's disease
    Announcement and reaction

    In August 1994, at the age of 83, Reagan was diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease,[280] an incurable neurological disorder which destroys brain cells and ultimately causes death.[280][281] In November he informed the nation through a handwritten letter,[280] writing in part:

    I have recently been told that I am one of the millions of Americans who will be afflicted with Alzheimer's Disease... At the moment I feel just fine. I intend to live the remainder of the years God gives me on this earth doing the things I have always done... I now begin the journey that will lead me into the sunset of my life. I know that for America there will always be a bright dawn ahead. Thank you, my friends. May God always bless you.

    Reagan's doctors, however, note that he only began exhibiting overt symptoms of the illness in late 1992[288] or 1993,[286] several years after he had left office."

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by jmelvin View Post
    Thanks Repeater. I read that article with great interest a day or two back. It helps to further confirm the fact that many of the "gun control" laws established here in the US were as a result of an attempt to prevent non-whites from protecting themselves and ensuring that their civil rights are not trampled upon.
    That's exactly what Mayor Daley personally told me ... that their new "no handgun" law was specifically directed at blacks (he used the "N" word though).

    And no one ever thought of Reagan as a pro-civil rights president.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 01-13-2014 at 02:20 AM.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by ccwinstructor View Post
    This was classic Alynski tactics by the Black Panthers. "Make the Opposition follow their rules". The Panther's, ideologically, were basically Communists. The idea was to push the government into being more repressive, to start a race war. They were successful in pushing the government far enough to get more gun control passed in California.

    I recall reading, (will see if I can find the source), that when the bill was coming up for a vote, the panthers showed up at the legislature with loaded shotguns and carbines.

    What seemed problematic was now a certainty. The law passed with plenty of votes.
    Just scared white people .. instead of looking at the root of the problem. I had some sympathy for the Black Panthers after watching how the governments handled this group and others (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOVE).

    Gun control was started as a means to control the black population -- now its all the population.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Just scared white people .. instead of looking at the root of the problem. I had some sympathy for the Black Panthers after watching how the governments handled this group and others (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOVE).

    Gun control was started as a means to control the black population -- now its all the population.
    Members of the BPP were not supporters of liberty, many of their members were murders and racist. They did not simply hate white people, they hated everyone that was not black... If anything this group of murdering thugs hurt the cause of pro 2A supporters...

    My .02

    Best regards

    CCJ
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by countryclubjoe View Post
    Members of the BPP were not supporters of liberty, many of their members were murders and racist. They did not simply hate white people, they hated everyone that was not black... If anything this group of murdering thugs hurt the cause of pro 2A supporters...

    My .02

    Best regards

    CCJ
    I did not approve of everything they stood for ... but it grew from what they perceived as oppression. I don't know the % of members that were criminals but even so, the criminals must have served their time.

    I think that their actions accelerated anti-2nd legislation but it would have been coming anyway. Be glad the group is gone now ...

  20. #20
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,613
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    I did not approve of everything they stood for ... but it grew from what they perceived as oppression. I don't know the % of members that were criminals but even so, the criminals must have served their time.

    I think that their actions accelerated anti-2nd legislation but it would have been coming anyway. Be glad the group is gone now ...
    The Black Panthers are not totally gone.
    http://www.adl.org/anti-semitism/uni...arty-NBPP.html

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_Party
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    http://www.adl.org/assets/pdf/anti-s...ther-Party.pdf

    Says "new" so I don't know BUT several publicly elected officials seem to like them lol.

  22. #22
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by ccwinstructor View Post
    This was classic Alynski tactics by the Black Panthers. "Make the Opposition follow their rules". The Panther's, ideologically, were basically Communists. The idea was to push the government into being more repressive, to start a race war. They were successful in pushing the government far enough to get more gun control passed in California.

    I recall reading, (will see if I can find the source), that when the bill was coming up for a vote, the panthers showed up at the legislature with loaded shotguns and carbines.

    What seemed problematic was now a certainty. The law passed with plenty of votes.
    There is no skirt so short that it forces a rapists's hands.

  23. #23
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,613
    Quote Originally Posted by ccwinstructor View Post
    This was classic Alynski tactics by the Black Panthers. "Make the Opposition follow their rules". The Panther's, ideologically, were basically Communists. The idea was to push the government into being more repressive, to start a race war. They were successful in pushing the government far enough to get more gun control passed in California.

    I recall reading, (will see if I can find the source), that when the bill was coming up for a vote, the panthers showed up at the legislature with loaded shotguns and carbines.

    What seemed problematic was now a certainty. The law passed with plenty of votes.
    http://news.google.com/newspapers?ni...g=1072,5010951

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUQIYLQ2rbk
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •