The Black Panthers were a radical group who were active in the 1960's. Their reaction to the condition of Blacks in America was to turn to Thomas Jefferson's words in the Declaration of Independence (which they explicitly took to be their founding document): People have inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and "if any government is destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it."
They called for taking up arms and starting a Black Revolution. They called for establishing a separate Black State. "Black Power!" "Death to Whitey!"
In response to this, guess who lobbied for STRICTER gun control laws (such as California's Mulford Act of 1967 and the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968), in order to protect decent law-abiding citizens from anti-government groups? The National Rifle Association. And in the case of the California bill, Governor Ronald Reagan pushed for its passage.
This is the same argument used nowadays, but from the right: if government suppresses the rights of the first amendment, the second amendment guarantees that we can protect ourselves from the government.
Back then, the Black Panthers responded by showing up, armed, at rallies demanding the right to bear arms.
If a black American wants to legally carry a legal weapon around safely , good for him . Once he starts chanting “ death to whitey “ while armed , that is felony menacing . Not a wise choice of things to do
The original Black Panthers were very much about empowerment in the black community. When they began taking up arms in self defense, whites wanted to take away their 2nd Amendment rights.
[quote] They called for establishing a separate Black State. "Black Power!" "Death to Whitey!"[/quote] Respectfully, I think you have the original Black Panthers confused with Nation of Islam—[b]they[/b] wanted a separate state and considered whites “the devil”. The original Black Panthers had white allies (I used to see them at Panther food drives as a school kid in the City and over in Oakland). Their initial goal was dealing with the OPD; they would patrol the streets where police would stop people and rough them up for “looking suspicious”. The BPP had the same goal of BLM now—to curb police brutality, which was just as prevalent back then.
Indeed. good Dr. these are perilous times. i regularly stand with the down trodden, the underdog. but there is a great difference. between these two groups
The Right pushes for gun control? I don’t think so. I can’t make out what point you’re trying to make. A picture of black supposedly Black Panthers, and a picture of some armed White guys. What is your point?
@Carissimi But they did. The words "right" and "left" had different connotations back then. In the height of the cold war, to be conservative meant to take a hard line on Communism and the USSR. And, by some perverse logic, since Communism was the supreme evil, it followed that anything wrong in American society MUST be the fault of Communists. In particular, any form of civil unrest, any protests against the status quo, were met with the knee-jerk response that "communist agitators" were responsible.
So it was perfectly consistent for conservatives to want to restrict guns as a response to this particular situation.
(By the way, the NRA was originally a gun safety and education group. It did not always have the political leanings that it has nowadays. There was a rather dramatic turnover in its leadership that transformed it into the organization it is now, but that happened much later on.)
uhh... I actually am impressed that BLM could also spell out "Black Liberation Movement"
and yes that did exist to some extent in the (what now is) olden days...
Also I was just thinking of this point before I saw this...ie: Democrats were once for slavery, now they oppose any such oppression.
It's ok, confusion or not, the principles remain, without more equality there will be protest with that in mind. Most people get it.
"Neoliberal" is also not about a rebirth of freedom, its the suppression of it. "Liberal" is and was a party of people some of whom loved freedom for all.
Remember what Chomsky and Orwell and so many others taught us..language is a tool of reality and can be used...as we can be.
I like a couple others don’t seem to grasp your point here. This was in the last month:
If an American citizen is legally allowed to possess and carry a firearm I support that 100%. No matter their race, gender or political affiliation. But carry responsibly, no threatening movements or language. These are not toys.
@DrWatson I’ve been a member for over 25 years and I cannot remember a time where they supported “gun control” at all. They have always advocated legal and responsible gun ownership and fought against those who aimed to take away out constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Policies and positions evolve over time given the climate, but they have always been the voice of the 2nd Amendment.
@DrWatson I am well aware of history of both our country and the NRA. The photo you presented from “then” was an armed group making threatening statements as they protested. As soon as you are making these threatening statements, then or now, you are no longer legally carrying your weapon. You are committing what is known, in Texas, as Terroristic Threat. Other states may have different offense titles.
