Page 1 of 1 pages
Go to http://essentials.baltimoresun.com/micro_sun/homicides/?range=none&district=all&zipcode=all&age=all&gender;=
all&race=all&cause=all&article=all&show_results=Show+Results
Sort it by black, then by white.
Then tell me that more minorities are in jail just because of police bias…
Then tell me that a person previously convicted of a violent crime should continue to be able to carry a gun.
It isn’t racism that causes minorities to commit a disproportionate amount of crime.
Blame it on culture, demographics or whatever else you want, but the cold facts remain.
As long as the laws don’t target people based on race, there are no grounds to claim that the justice system is targeting people based on race.
These are murders, rapes and assaults we’re talking about here not traffic citations. Just as they loose many other freedoms as a result of crimes committed, the right to carry weapons of self defense is forfeited when they misuse that freedom to harm another - irregardless of what race they may be.
Posted by ejackson on Aug 21, 2008 at 1:43 PM
The authors are absolutely correct about the racist nature of gun control. What they miss, and what is often missed in discussions of racism, is that there are two very distinct and opposite racist centers: Fear and/or Hate-based Racism, and Paternal Racism. When it comes to institutional and legislative racism, the “Fearful Haters” long ago took a back seat to the “Paternalistic Nannies” in this nation.
There is no doubt that fear and ignorance, and to a much lesser degree hatred, still motivates some individuals to racist thoughts and actions, but it is the paternalistic approach which drives the racist policies of city, state, and federal legislation. Paternalistic racism is exemplified by politician efforts to “protect people from themselves.” And just as there were Blacks holding guns and whips to keep other slaves in line, there are Blacks in the vanguard of paternalistic racism.
Congressman John Conyers of Michigan once accused my father of being racist for advocating against sweeping controls on handguns. Conyers said Dad wanted young Black men to have access to guns because Dad knew, “If you let them have guns, they’ll just use them to kill each other, and that’s what you want.” Conyers went on to write a guest editorial for the Washington Post in which he elaborated on that sentiment saying that guns must be kept away from troubled Black youths who are using them against one another and that the only way to accomplish that is by restricting guns to everyone. He suggested that this was a sacrifice that everyone should make in order to save these Black youths. In other words, young Black men cannot be trusted and should not be allow to have guns, but passing a law to that effect would be racist so instead lets pass a law that restricts guns from everyone so young Black men won’t get them. Anyone who opposes the plan must be a racist who obviously doesn’t care about the plight of troubled Black youths and actually wants them to kill each other.
This is paternalistic racism at its worst. The idea that people of color are somehow less trustworthy, less responsible, and more prone to abuse their right to arms than are Whites is an outrage. Rather than address the core issues which remove hope and encourage violence and crime within certain segments of the Black community - just as they do within certain segments of the White community - they play nanny and try to take the guns away as a Second-Grade teacher might bar sharp scissors from her class for fear someone might cut themselves.
Paternalism isn’t only limited to racist motivations. Any time a politician, bureaucrat, or other person in a position of power assumes that the people they “serve” are less intelligent, less responsible, or less trustworthy than themselves, they will introduce laws, policies, or procedures which will reflect that lack of faith. Gun control in general is paternalistic and it is often very obviously racist. And “paternal racists” often rely on the support of “fearful racists” to get their plans enacted.
The DC City Council is an excellent example of a paternalistically racist government body. When the Supreme Court told them that they must repeal their gun ban, they replaced it with a procedure intended to be too complicated and expensive for low-income citizens to participate, thus keeping guns out of the reach of their poor, misguided, irresponsible Black subjects.
Do-gooders who enact racially biased laws to protect their beloved minority brothers are just as guilty of racism as those who are motivated by fear and hate.
Gun control is not about guns it’s about control.
Gun rights protect all rights.
I invite readers to visit my web site at www.FirearmsCoalition.org to learn more about this issue.
Jeff Knox
Director, The Firearms Coalition
Posted by JeffKnox on Aug 21, 2008 at 1:46 PM
Claiming that something is biased against blacks on the basis that it is complicated speaks volumes…
The way I see it, gun licenses are cumbersomely crafted to deter all but the most determined from doing the leg work. I see no indication that the gun control in DC is racially motivated. It is an ELITIST way of thumbing their nose as the SCOTUS. If you noticed, they are also banning semi auto pistols since they are clearly not handguns. That leaves revolvers, which tend to be cheaper and equally suited for crime, but less functional for self defense.
Posted by ejackson on Aug 21, 2008 at 5:02 PM
What stands out here seems to be that when the Supreme Court hands down a decision which is obviously biased for or against a particular segment of society, it can be corrected by a later court which applies the precepts of our Constitution as the only measure of justice.
Why we should never try to redo the foundations of our nation. It may not be perfect, but I wouldn’t trust anyone to try to improve it.
Posted by whattheheck on Aug 22, 2008 at 9:46 AM
What the supreme court did was the only measure of justice for those of us who feel that we have a right to defense, but submit to unconstitutional laws for fear of having to serve jail time. Criminals could care less since the weapons charge is a drop in the bucket if they get caught.
All the problems with gun control stem back to the I can but you can’t elitism attitudes. First it was whites vs minorities, now it’s government vs civilians. It was wrong and caused long term problems then, and it is wrong and is laying the foundation for long term problems now.
The violence that is prevalent in society is only the beginning if people won’t wake up and realize that guns won’t just disappear, criminals will continue to acquire and use them by any means, and the government is incapable of defending every individual.
Posted by ejackson on Aug 23, 2008 at 12:50 PM
“The police pay disproportionate attention to people of color, so many of those people are more likely to have criminal records
Posted by Jim Sachsen on Aug 25, 2008 at 5:16 AM
Page 1 of 1 pages
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
Reader Comments
Go to http://essentials.baltimoresun.com/micro_sun/homicides/?range=none&district=all&zipcode=all&age=all&gender;=
all&race=all&cause=all&article=all&show_results=Show+Results
Sort it by black, then by white.
Then tell me that more minorities are in jail just because of police bias…
Then tell me that a person previously convicted of a violent crime should continue to be able to carry a gun.
It isn’t racism that causes minorities to commit a disproportionate amount of crime.
Blame it on culture, demographics or whatever else you want, but the cold facts remain.
As long as the laws don’t target people based on race, there are no grounds to claim that the justice system is targeting people based on race.
These are murders, rapes and assaults we’re talking about here not traffic citations. Just as they loose many other freedoms as a result of crimes committed, the right to carry weapons of self defense is forfeited when they misuse that freedom to harm another - irregardless of what race they may be.
The authors are absolutely correct about the racist nature of gun control. What they miss, and what is often missed in discussions of racism, is that there are two very distinct and opposite racist centers: Fear and/or Hate-based Racism, and Paternal Racism. When it comes to institutional and legislative racism, the “Fearful Haters” long ago took a back seat to the “Paternalistic Nannies” in this nation.
There is no doubt that fear and ignorance, and to a much lesser degree hatred, still motivates some individuals to racist thoughts and actions, but it is the paternalistic approach which drives the racist policies of city, state, and federal legislation. Paternalistic racism is exemplified by politician efforts to “protect people from themselves.” And just as there were Blacks holding guns and whips to keep other slaves in line, there are Blacks in the vanguard of paternalistic racism.
Congressman John Conyers of Michigan once accused my father of being racist for advocating against sweeping controls on handguns. Conyers said Dad wanted young Black men to have access to guns because Dad knew, “If you let them have guns, they’ll just use them to kill each other, and that’s what you want.” Conyers went on to write a guest editorial for the Washington Post in which he elaborated on that sentiment saying that guns must be kept away from troubled Black youths who are using them against one another and that the only way to accomplish that is by restricting guns to everyone. He suggested that this was a sacrifice that everyone should make in order to save these Black youths. In other words, young Black men cannot be trusted and should not be allow to have guns, but passing a law to that effect would be racist so instead lets pass a law that restricts guns from everyone so young Black men won’t get them. Anyone who opposes the plan must be a racist who obviously doesn’t care about the plight of troubled Black youths and actually wants them to kill each other.
This is paternalistic racism at its worst. The idea that people of color are somehow less trustworthy, less responsible, and more prone to abuse their right to arms than are Whites is an outrage. Rather than address the core issues which remove hope and encourage violence and crime within certain segments of the Black community - just as they do within certain segments of the White community - they play nanny and try to take the guns away as a Second-Grade teacher might bar sharp scissors from her class for fear someone might cut themselves.
Paternalism isn’t only limited to racist motivations. Any time a politician, bureaucrat, or other person in a position of power assumes that the people they “serve” are less intelligent, less responsible, or less trustworthy than themselves, they will introduce laws, policies, or procedures which will reflect that lack of faith. Gun control in general is paternalistic and it is often very obviously racist. And “paternal racists” often rely on the support of “fearful racists” to get their plans enacted.
The DC City Council is an excellent example of a paternalistically racist government body. When the Supreme Court told them that they must repeal their gun ban, they replaced it with a procedure intended to be too complicated and expensive for low-income citizens to participate, thus keeping guns out of the reach of their poor, misguided, irresponsible Black subjects.
Do-gooders who enact racially biased laws to protect their beloved minority brothers are just as guilty of racism as those who are motivated by fear and hate.
Gun control is not about guns it’s about control.
Gun rights protect all rights.
I invite readers to visit my web site at www.FirearmsCoalition.org to learn more about this issue.
Jeff Knox
Director, The Firearms Coalition
Claiming that something is biased against blacks on the basis that it is complicated speaks volumes…
The way I see it, gun licenses are cumbersomely crafted to deter all but the most determined from doing the leg work. I see no indication that the gun control in DC is racially motivated. It is an ELITIST way of thumbing their nose as the SCOTUS. If you noticed, they are also banning semi auto pistols since they are clearly not handguns. That leaves revolvers, which tend to be cheaper and equally suited for crime, but less functional for self defense.
What stands out here seems to be that when the Supreme Court hands down a decision which is obviously biased for or against a particular segment of society, it can be corrected by a later court which applies the precepts of our Constitution as the only measure of justice.
Why we should never try to redo the foundations of our nation. It may not be perfect, but I wouldn’t trust anyone to try to improve it.
What the supreme court did was the only measure of justice for those of us who feel that we have a right to defense, but submit to unconstitutional laws for fear of having to serve jail time. Criminals could care less since the weapons charge is a drop in the bucket if they get caught.
All the problems with gun control stem back to the I can but you can’t elitism attitudes. First it was whites vs minorities, now it’s government vs civilians. It was wrong and caused long term problems then, and it is wrong and is laying the foundation for long term problems now.
The violence that is prevalent in society is only the beginning if people won’t wake up and realize that guns won’t just disappear, criminals will continue to acquire and use them by any means, and the government is incapable of defending every individual.
“The police pay disproportionate attention to people of color, so many of those people are more likely to have criminal records
register a new account »Posting Security