Deborah Mathis and her gun-control beef.
Actually, I belong in a special category because the gun control I propose would be total and absolute. Under my plan, the number of Americans with legal possession of guns would be reduced to a few thousand, if that.
The truth is, I despise the guns and, increasingly, the people who defend their accessibility. Not even the “just for hunting†and “just for sport†arguments sway me. As a citizen of the most homicidal country on the planet –- and, not coincidentally, the highest per capita ownership of firearms –- how can I justify the human tragedies as a fair trade-off for the right to stalk game or shoot at targets?
As usual, I have much to say (especially on this topic). I will do my best to keep it short. I’ll let her continue…
Despair, rejection and aimlessness may be the motivation behind the black-on-black killing spree that has bedeviled black America since the 1980s, but, too often, guns have been the implement with which to carry out the anger, revenge and fear that flow from those deprivations.
You see how she associates every black on black murder with a gun with “Despair, rejection, and aimlessness”?
Naw sis. For starters, I would not categorize both killings of Biggie and Tupac as acts of despair, rejection, or certainly not aimless. I am only using the Biggie/Tupac case because it got the most media attention. There are thousands of cases like that one that happen every year. Mentioning the shooting of Jerome and Keith will not be of significance here because most people do not know them.
Without providing you with all of the sad statistics, I think it is fair to say that most black on black killings with a gun are not done on accident. Sure, there are the cases where a firearm was dropped or discharged by a small child who did not know any better; however, we have to admit that the greatest culprit here is immaturity (which falls back on family structure–not government rules).
Mathis goes on to make the following comment:
“The NRA claims gun ownership is not only a right but, to some degree, a responsibility.” (emphasis mine)
Naw sis, they (gun rights advocates) are not claiming anything here. They are simply stating the Second Amendment:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
If you want to read the rest of Mathis’ rant, click here.
If you have not guessed by now, I am pro gun rights. Not only that, I am just pro- Bill of Rights, Constitution, and any other founding document of this country.
Just recently, I did a search online for convicted child molesters in my community (check for the Megan’s law website for your state) and I shocked to see just how many there were WITHIN A BLOCK FROM EACH OTHER!!!!
Now I am not saying that we need to shoot down every molester that we know about in the name of “purifying” the city. That would be way out of line and unlawful. On the other hand, if I am awakened in the middle of the night by the muffled screams of one of my children and I later discover that some creep is in their room trying to stick his nasty penis inside them (just keepin’ it real ya’ll)–the gun will be used, PERIOD!!
People like Mathis want to take my RIGHT to bear arms to protect away while at the same time call for more police in the city WHILE at the same time be one of the first to call the same police officers racist if one of these police officers (who may be white) enforces the law or in cases where a cop (again, only the white cops. How many times have you seen activists raise hell about black cops who do the same thing?) has been charged with using excessive force on a black person (something that does not happen everyday as some would have us to believe).
Guns are not the problem, it is the people that use them improperly. Why should a man in a state like Wyoming have his RIGHT to carry a gun taken away from him that he uses for sport (gaming) if Jamaal of East Orange, NJ decided to use his illegally purchased gun to take someone down because of an argument? What Mathis and people who share her view refuse to acknowledge is that most guns used in black on black crimes are non-registered. That means that they were purchased illegally! Why should the people who are following the law suffer?
If Mathis and the gang wants to blot out a right of the people, then I will have no problem with the 6th Amendment being done away with as well (…the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury). While were at it, let’s just bring back the Jim Crow laws. Removing one of these rights invalidates the entire founding document. We cannot pick and choose which laws we deem appropriate.
Back in the day, black on black crime was almost unheard of. Today it is commonplace. Are we to blame founding law (which generally does not change) with cultural trends?
Mathis says something else that takes this whole issue way over the top:
In return, I asked him what the NRA was doing to help black Americans secure their right to bear arms with proper maintenance and training. He had no answer. Appropriately so, since the NRA has no such program, no such outreach and, I dare say, no such passion about “educating†the black community and improving our marksmanship.
I guess this was supposed to me a low-blow question. oooooooooooh.
Earth to Mathis: NEGROES DO NOT NEED TO BE EDUCATED ON HOW TO HANDLE A GUN. Just pick up a newspaper to see the reality. First we need someone to hand-hold us through the election process, now we need “the system” to show us how to use a gun…
Just another example of how Liberal Negroes are playing into the hands of those that want to make the US a Socialist state (Think China, the former Soviet Union, Cuba, etc.)
When it comes to gun control, your position is similar to mines.
Comment by Cynthia | April 18, 2005
Solid post!
Comment by Mark La Roi | April 18, 2005
Trackback by Liberty1st Blog: Red meat for a blue state. | April 18, 2005
Scales,
This is why I do not respond to most comments like yours. It is like debating a wall.
For starters, Negroes that commit crimes involving guns do not go to their local Wal-Mart to purchase them!
As a result, in those countries, there are LOW violent crime rates with guns (in some cases, almost non-existent). Therefore, your Gun Control equal Socialist state is a misnomer. You need to read a little be more on the subject.
Maybe it is because they have stiffer penalties than the US if you commit a crime with a gun AND they do not have a group like the ACLU bailing them out in the name of injustice.
I see how you avoided addressing the basic point that back in the day black folks not only carried guns, but knew how to handle them. Why should law accomedate our current bad behavior in this area?
Second, the fact that you consistently call for more government hand-holding because we po’ blackfolks can’t control ourselves with those mean guns show demonstrates how your ideology resembles that of a communist nation.
Please tell me how your view of protecting oneself is different than that of what communism preaches (let the state handle it). And please stick to the point. I see how you also completely avoided the point I raised about what to do if a predator was in your house.
I guess you would be one of those that would watch the creep do his thing while you call the police…oh, the police are racist too (I forgot about that one). If you have kids, God have mercy on them!!
Comment by Duane | April 20, 2005
This is why I do not respond to most comments like yours. It is like debating a wall.
For starters, Negroes that commit crimes involving guns do not go to their local Wal-Mart to purchase them!
I guess you did not comprehend what I wrote. I said access to gun both “illegally and not.†The point being there is flood of guns that is uncontrollable in both areas. Let me ask you this; are the guns you call illegal, once legal? They belonged to someone legally at one point; therefore, control of the gun was lost. Consequently, gun makers and distributors have a direct affect on gun circulation in the community and America in general.
Note to Duane: these guns weren’t manufactured by “Negroes.â€Â
As a result, in those countries, there are LOW violent crime rates with guns (in some cases, almost non-existent). Therefore, your Gun Control equal Socialist state is a misnomer. You need to read a little be more on the subject.
Maybe it is because they have stiffer penalties than the US if you commit a crime with a gun AND they do not have a group like the ACLU bailing them out in the name of injustice.
Do more reading Bruh!!!
Those other countries do not rear gun worshipers like this one does. Also, America has STIFFER gun usage penalties than a number of those countries. Simply, those countries (specifically, the societies) believe the access to guns is a Privilege and not a Right.
Now you are taking shots at the ACLU (a typical Neo-Con move). I will not go into an ACLU defense argument but I will support any organization that goes into action when they strongly believe someone’s Civil Rights have been violated. I will hedge my bets on innocence, rather than guilt until proven otherwise (isn’t the in the Bill of Rights somewhere). Bush and Company (including Neo-Cons) doesn’t exactly follow that doctrine.
I see how you avoided addressing the basic point that back in the day black folks not only carried guns, but knew how to handle them. Why should law accomedate our current bad behavior in this area?
Back is what day: the 1800’s, the old west. When I grew up in the ‘60’s and ‘70’s, the want for guns was non-existent. Plus, the glamorization of guns was not as prevalent. When gang violence of the 70’s and ‘80’s came to fore-front, Gun Control organization came into existence to help limit access for those reasons. But organizations like the NRA fought against because the industry’s gun makers, distributors and resellers (the NRA supports) knew it would affect their bottom-line economically. Therefore, economic decisions drove death and destruction.
Also, to answer your question, this is not about a simple question of “bad behaviorâ€Â, it is about survival. Access to guns (even more guns), legal or otherwise, does not make you, your family and American in general that much safer. The murder rate in America proves that. This situation is a mindset, no more, no less. The lack of gun control breeds crime and violence. It is indicative of a society that has is sense of community and right & wrong mixed up.
Do this; think logically, do more guns purports you are safer or do fewer guns mean you are less safe? Logic dictates that a less armed society is allot safer than a community armed to the “teeth†– Japan and the other countries that I’ve mentioned before proved that point. The previous point is contrary to the illogic of being well armed making the Country safer – think USA, the whole of the Middle East (civil wars or not).
Second, the fact that you consistently call for more government hand-holding because we po’ blackfolks can’t control ourselves with those mean guns show demonstrates how your ideology resembles that of a communist nation.
That whole statement was obtuse on multiple levels — the main level being the implication is crazy. Access to guns at Gun Shows has more ramifications to it than just (using your vernacular) “po’ blackfolks†controlling themselves. It has to do with creating loopholes in the system where access to guns can be gained by Terrorist. Basically, because of the lack of control and oversight, anyone can secure access to weapons without the normal checks and inspections. Illegal guns can enter the community is the same fashion. The following article discusses it in some detail;
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/2001-12-13-nceditf.htm
The NRA fights for issues that are so ludicrous with anti-social relevance, it make them seem extremely out of touch. But folks like you are so indoctrinated that you accept their philosophy without critically thinking it through.
Also, how is my position Communistic? Do you even understand what the concept connotes? Communism is just a “buzz†word for or to you. Calling you a Bush Backing Extremist has more relevance. Neo-Cons, like you, will scream and holler about their rights being taken away when Gun Control is discussed but when Civil Liberties are threatened, not a word from you. That’s hypocritical.
Please tell me how your view of protecting oneself is different than that of what communism preaches (let the state handle it). And please stick to the point. I see how you also completely avoided the point I raised about what to do if a predator was in your house.
I did not try to avoid anything. When tied to post my entire response all at once to your blog, it would not accept it. That is why you see my response in section and I left out some portions of the message in doing so.
First, what you are saying is illogical. The state, as you call it, (i.e. police) is a community mandated and funded organization that was/is designed to project its citizenry from harm. How is that Communistic? Civil protection is a tenet of a civilized society. Second, Gun Control mandates wants to control the unconstrained and/or unimpeded proliferation of gun needlessly into the community. It has nothing to do with self protection. You are trying to equate the both of them but it is not working. Also, under the banner of self protection, from referenced material, “every gun owner needs to know that a gun in the home is 22 times more likely to be used to kill a family member or friend than to kill in self-defense.†Subsequently, how is that protection?
I guess you would be one of those that would watch the creep do his thing while you call the police…oh, the police are racist too (I forgot about that one). If you have kids, God have mercy on them!!
That’s a sick analogy but I will pray for you bruh. You are the archetypal lost soul (Black Neo-Con) that believes anything and everything the NRA and other extremist tells you. One day, hopefully, you will wake up from your self induced siesta/slumber and face reality. The world is round and it spins on it axis. What’s more, guns kill people; people only point them.
Also, don’t you worry about my kids, my family’s kids, my neighborhood kids and so on; just worry about the folks you want to keep well armed. They make America and my family less safe everyday.
By the way, why no comment about my Second Amendment response? Hmmm.. Maybe you were just dead wrong about it. Yeah, that’s it.
Comment by D. Scales | April 21, 2005
Whew!
I rest my case. Thanks for proving my point!
Comment by Duane | April 21, 2005
Nah bro…
The only point you substantiated was that you are a Lemming for the Neo-Con Extremists. I am sure the sleaze bag Tom Delay was smiling at you and giving you the “thumbs-up Negro†sign at that NRA club meeting last week.
I bet he was thinking that some of us po’ blackfolk believe loading the ‘hood with guns will make the ‘hood safer. No doubt he had his Klan robes while he was cogitating it.
Black Neo-Con… What a trip!!!!
Comment by D. Scales | April 21, 2005