Police officer cleared in Minneapolis shooting.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-06-2017, 01:50 PM
RE: Police officer cleared in Minneapolis shooting.
(27-06-2017 07:01 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  I am startled that the NRA hasn't said anything. A law-abiding gun-owner was shot and killed because he fulfilled his legal obligation to notify LE on being stopped of his permit and carriage. They should be all over this as a gun-rights issue ... but they're oddly silent.

Maybe Philando wasn't an NRA member? Or maybe he was just too black for them, too?

I have wondered about that myself. A year ago the NRA stated that they would have more to say once all the facts are known.

Well, the facts are known, but the NRA still doesn't seem to have much to say.

--
Dr H

"So, I became an anarchist, and all I got was this lousy T-shirt."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Dr H's post
27-06-2017, 01:51 PM
RE: Police officer cleared in Minneapolis shooting.
(27-06-2017 12:27 PM)adey67 Wrote:  
(27-06-2017 10:22 AM)tomilay Wrote:  If they never said anything about the shooting of Jermaine McBean, they aren't going to say anything about Philando. They are for law and order in the tried and tested meaning of the term.

So what exactly are you saying ? Do you support the cop ? Do you support Philandro ? I'm not getting your point.
Are you a cops are always right lets go easy on them type of guy or are you as appalled as even the avid gun owners on here are ?

Sorry I wasn't clear. The NRA see themselves as law and order types. That means they oppose restraints on police actions that have a disproportionate impact on blacks because it would make their work riskier. Philando is black. So they are more likely to view the police action in terms of maintenance of order as opposed to 2nd amendment rights.

We have to remember that what we observe is not nature herself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning ~ Werner Heisenberg
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like tomilay's post
27-06-2017, 03:08 PM
RE: Police officer cleared in Minneapolis shooting.
(27-06-2017 01:51 PM)tomilay Wrote:  
(27-06-2017 12:27 PM)adey67 Wrote:  So what exactly are you saying ? Do you support the cop ? Do you support Philandro ? I'm not getting your point.
Are you a cops are always right lets go easy on them type of guy or are you as appalled as even the avid gun owners on here are ?

Sorry I wasn't clear. The NRA see themselves as law and order types. That means they oppose restraints on police actions that have a disproportionate impact on blacks because it would make their work riskier. Philando is black. So they are more likely to view the police action in terms of maintenance of order as opposed to 2nd amendment rights.

And I'm sorry I misinterpreted your post my friend.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-06-2017, 05:45 PM
RE: Police officer cleared in Minneapolis shooting.
(27-06-2017 01:51 PM)tomilay Wrote:  
(27-06-2017 12:27 PM)adey67 Wrote:  So what exactly are you saying ? Do you support the cop ? Do you support Philandro ? I'm not getting your point.
Are you a cops are always right lets go easy on them type of guy or are you as appalled as even the avid gun owners on here are ?

Sorry I wasn't clear. The NRA see themselves as law and order types. That means they oppose restraints on police actions that have a disproportionate impact on blacks because it would make their work riskier. Philando is black. So they are more likely to view the police action in terms of maintenance of order as opposed to 2nd amendment rights.

That's pretty much my reading on it, which was the point of my first post here -- that talking points notwithstanding, their agenda is not solely gun rights. Because this incident would seem to me to be as much about gun rights as anything else: The right to legally carry a firearm without being shot by the police for no other reason than carrying.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
27-06-2017, 07:44 PM
RE: Police officer cleared in Minneapolis shooting.
Here is an NRA response. Well, sort of. Watch it if you want to.



Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2017, 04:54 PM
RE: Police officer cleared in Minneapolis shooting.
Out of high-speed data right now ... I'll watch later. Thanks for posting it and I hope it's worthwhile.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2017, 06:27 PM
RE: Police officer cleared in Minneapolis shooting.
(27-06-2017 07:44 PM)KUSA Wrote:  Here is an NRA response. Well, sort of. Watch it if you want to.

Well... he has an interesting version of "history".

There was no "gun control" as such implemented after the Civil Way until the National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934. Immediately after the war the second amendment was addressed only in the broader context of whether the Bill of Rights imposed limitations on state governments under the newly passed 14th amendment. The judgment that it did not was imposed not by "the democratic party", but by the Supreme Court.

Several southern states adopted "black codes" designed to limit the rights of freed slaves, but you can hardly blame these on the "democratic party", since they have a history and precedent going back not only to the founding of the Republic, but to colonial days -- close to two centuries before the democratic party existed.

The first serious attempt at any sort of national gun control came with the aforementioned NFA of 1934, and that was aimed primarily at curbing the gun violence of Prohibition era organized crime factions. The NRA, BTW, enthusiastically supported the NFA.

The next major inroad in to national gun control was the Gun Control Act of 1968, passed in response to the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, and Robert Kennedy. To be fair, that one was signed into law by a democratic president -- LBJ -- with the enthusiastic support of the NRA.

As to the name-dropping:

Shaneen Allen brought a gun with her from Pennsylvania, in violation of New Jersey state gun laws that require guns to be stored unloaded and locked in the trunk. She spent 40 days in jail before being pardoned by the governor.
She was lucky: she could have gotten up to 10 years in prison, basically for being an irresponsible gun owner and not checking ahead on the state laws before traveling with her gun (had she been busted in NY she would have gotten a mandatory minmum of one year in the slammer.) She didn't get wide media coverage because it was basically local news, and pretty common local news at that.
I have no sympathy for the irresponsible, nor for dumbasses.

Josephine Byrd challenged a provision in her (Delaware) apartment lease which stated, "Tenant is not permitted to display or use any firearms, BB guns, pellet guns, slingshots, or other weapons on the premises." Interestingly, although this provision did not in any way infringe on her right to possess a gun or guns, she chose to take the rental company to court. She won, the Delaware Supreme Court deciding that the lease provision conflicted with an article in the state's constitution.
Hoo hah.

Otis McDonald I daresay a fair number of people have heard of, since his SCOTUS case -- McDonald v. Chicago -- basically overturned a significant portion of the earlier-cited post-Civil War United States v. Cruikshank case, and affirmed that the bill of Rights does impose some limits on state governments under the 14th amendment. This one, at least, is an important case, and should be familiar to anyone interested in gun legislation in the US.

However... It's not entirely accurate for our annoyed NRA spokesperson say that the media "ignored" this story, seeing as it was covered by the top ten newspapers in the country, including: NY times; LA Times; Wall Street Journal; USA today; Washington Post; and the Chicago Tribune; and also by CBS News; NBC News; CNN; NPR; Fox News; BBC World Report; and even Al Jazeera; and also in magazines like The New Yorker; The Economist; Time; and dozens of others; and is the subject of at least two dozen youtube videos, most posted immediately after the Court announced its decision.

I'm not sure exactly how much media coverage he thought this event ought to get, but I admit I didn't hear it mentioned on Limbaugh, nor by Michael Savage, so if those are his main media sources it's quite possible he missed it, too.


My take-away: If this guy is intended to be an official spokesman for the NRA, they need a new spokesman.
One who actually knows their own history might be nice, for starters.

--
Dr H

"So, I became an anarchist, and all I got was this lousy T-shirt."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Dr H's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: