ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION

Here is a fun game to play when reading news items about Ammosexuals. Read about or watch them marching around in public with semi-automatic rifles slung over their shoulders and imagine how the police (and public, for that matter) would react if the proud Second Amendment Patriots were black males. Laugh yourself silly as the police, if they bother to show up at all, treat the gun-toting white people with kid gloves and picture the same scene if a bunch of heavily tattooed black guys with sleeveless shirts and high powered rifles decided to congregate in the main shopping district.

Here's a hilarious video of a somewhat-deranged Patriot exercising his Second Amendment rights as he imagines them:

OK, clearly he's not All There in the head or perhaps this was some sort of stunt designed to get arrested. But watch the police indulge this asshole for almost ten full minutes as he waves around a loaded rifle. A black male with a Fantasy Gun (the type that holds money or makes phone calls) gets about two seconds of benefit-of-doubt from the average cop white a middle aged white male with an Actual Gun (the type that fires bullets) will be talked to until he is good and ready to let the police arrest him. Or in the case of Cliven Bundy and his merry militimen, the police just agree to leave them alone altogether. That works out well for everyone!

The next time you snort dismissively at the idea of white privilege, ask yourself how long the police would hold on to their tasers and pepper spray and live ammo if the 9-1-1 calls started pouring in about a group of angry looking black men with rifles congregating at the Burger King.

Be Sociable, Share!

32 Responses to “ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION”

  1. Freeportguy Says:

    All it took was a picture of all but TWO black guys to keep hearing non-stop about the "New Black Panthers"!!!

  2. Nick G. Says:

    People who open carry are assholes. To put it as simply as possible, I don't believe gun rights and gun control are mutually exclusive. Here's an interesting take on the issue of guns and racism from the gun nut propaganda mill known as "gunblr": http://38.media.tumblr.com/f7aaf6f59e747d88d38561600aee90bd/tumblr_n7qcyajR3R1t7y7jho1_500.png

  3. Dbp Says:

    It's hilarious how all the people in the gunblr comic calling for disarming a minority group are white. And in reality those whites were calling for greater armament for themselves for protection against that minority they are disarming.
    The comic equates
    "We need to arm ourselves better to kill unarmed injuns/black people" and "let's not have anyone armed"
    And somehow manages to do so without irony. But that is typical conservatism. Always trying to place themselves on the highest peak of amount Victimhood.
    It's also worth noting that it is pretty mainstream conservative to claim that none of those anti-weapon oppressors in the comic were really ALL THAT bad. How many times have we heard politicians say "come onnnnnnnn. Slavery was so much better for black people than Obama?" Conveniently slavery was super totes evil whenever they need to try to paint themselves as a victim but is definitely a thing those blah people need to just get over already.

  4. Scepticus Says:

    This English professor certainly didn't receive this degree of deference from the law enforcement "professional": http://www.azfamily.com/news/local/ASU-professor-arrested-on-campus-accusing-officer-of-excessive-force-264991871.html

  5. Nick G. Says:

    Dbp, some of the most vocal and popular gunblr people are anarchists who see any and all gun control as being inherently racist, among other things. They take the common ultra-liberal assumption that only white people are for gun rights to be blatantly racist, and that does have a shadow of a point to it.

    Of course, more specifically they're usually "anarcho-capitalists" who don't see the irony in that label much less so when citing the 2nd Amendment as to why they should be able to own an RPG launcher.

    My own views on the subject of gun rights/gun control seem to piss off everyone, but lately I've been having fun with the AnCaps.

    I basically think that in the US, the combination of our legal precedents, culture, and presence of roughly 300 million firearms means that the rights for civilians to own and carry firearms should be respected. Anyone who seriously thinks we should simply get rid of all guns is about on the same level as someone who thinks we should deport all undocumented citizens. But considering that firearms *are* weapons, and uniquely dangerous weapons at that, anyone who wants to own one should be able to pass Federal background checks that are more extensive than those currently used, as well as undergo safety training that's far more extensive than anything provided at the state level. I think if we're really serious this should be offered for free. Considering the levels of paranoia in some gun owners, I think the Federal government should take initiative in letting them know they're really on their side.

    Of course, to many that is an inexcusable tyranny. They'd rather keep training an informal and inconsistent practice left to "States' Rights" and talks from dad at the range. I do see gun control that is aimed to deter crime to be ineffective at best and full-retard at worst (see: "Assault Weapons Bans" of 1994 and 2013).

    Oh, and one more thing I simply can't agree with that most gun nuts take as Gospel is the belief that society would be safer if everyone was armed. I think they're out to fucking lunch on that one. There are *many* people who should NEVER handle a gun!!

  6. Middle Seaman Says:

    In cow-land, a militia amendment is taken to be the right to sell arms, health care as an opportunity for insurance companies to tax us at 15% health tax, the Fed prints money to give it to the rich and we elect a president who represent Wall Street. Only in America.

  7. Anonymouse Says:

    @Scepticus; I was going to bring up that article, but you beat me to it. Yes, a college professor had the supreme bad taste to cross the street while black and was thrown to the ground and arrested for jaywalking (while white people jaywalked all around her).

  8. anotherbozo Says:

    Scepticus and Anonymouse, likewise the Arizona professor and her "Henry Louis Gates" moment. Police are very good at using a citizen's abused sense of dignity against him/her. The cop knew full well that an ounce of courtesy would have made for a compliant citizen, but what he wanted was a resistant one, one that he could "slam her to the ground" and cuff. Just as the Gates incident involved getting Gates outside, on his own porch, so that an arrest could legally (technically) be made, the police early on learn all the tricks.

    With blacks in open carry, however, no such tactics would be needed. Shoot first, ask questions later. You can always say they were pointing their weapons in a "threatening manner." Or acting "aggressively." Or looking "dangerous." Or frowning. Something. 50 rounds later, there will be no one to debate the issue and you can make up any damn scenario you want.

    Wasn't there a case of police shooting down an old grandmother carrying a knife? Or was it a grandfather? There are so many of these, I get confused.

  9. JD Says:

    That gunblr comic so far into the realm of fiction as to discredit the people trying to make the argument. We're there really calls for gun control in the days of slavery because people were concerned slaves would have guns? If that's the best they have, it says something about the strength of the rest of their case.

  10. Xynzee Says:

    Ammosexual: love it!

    As I feel uncomfortable around anyone "randomly" carrying—if they're going hunting or to a gun range I'm less concerned—that answers that question.

    No pro-shoot first supporter (read stand your ground) has yet to answer my question, "Couldn't Trayvon's actions be interpreted as "standing his ground"?"
    If Jordan Davis or one of his friends had shot Dunn first, would you give them the same consideration of "standing their ground"?

    I'm all for gun laws, but I'm hesitant to have laws that specially make it harder for inner-city dwellers to own than it is in the 'burbs. For the specific reason that blacks primarily live in the inner-city areas, thus denying them full access to their Constitutional Rights.

  11. Xynzee Says:

    As a thought: what if a "charitable" organisation were to give cash to eligible members of minority groups to purchase a firearm so that they could exercise their 2nd Amendment Right?

    Of course if the NRA really is all about the free and unfettered exercise of the 2nd Amendment, I don't see why they aren't setting up a "gun gifting" program, to allow eligible disadvantaged minority citizens the opportunity to have a firearm of their very own. It would certainly keep inner-city crime rates down. It would wouldn't it? That's what they keep telling us, more guns = less crime.

  12. John Danley Says:

    The word dementia and the word militia are on parallel continuums.

    "We'll cause a diversion over here … cut holes in the wire here, fire on all these machine gun positions. The B-Group comes across this area in a flanking maneuver … and when you reach this bunker, you lay down grazing fire on this defilade. I think that's pretty simple. Anybody got any questions so far?" — Col. Andy Tanner

  13. Benny Lava Says:

    That is a spot on argument. Sadly.

  14. democommie Says:

    "They take the common ultra-liberal assumption that only white people are for gun rights to be blatantly racist, and that does have a shadow of a point to it."

    Liberalism does not equal anarchism. Anarcho capitalists (you're right, the label is an oxymoron) are people who don't want THEIR activities regulated. That's pretty much all that they give a shit about.

    "I basically think that in the US, the combination of our legal precedents, culture, and presence of roughly 300 million firearms means that the rights for civilians to own and carry firearms should be respected."

    And I basically think that in a country where thousands are killed and many thousands more are injured (a country which has the most powerful military on the planet by most measures) there are far too many weapons in the hands of MILLIONS of people who have no intention of defending the country or anything but their own property. There is, unfortunately, some number of those millions who are delusional, violent people who have poor or no impulse control.

    The recent (last 30-40 years) militancy of the NRA and the various gunzloonz groups that have sprung up everywhere is a PREEMPTIVE response to a NON-EXISTENT threat to their ownership of weapons. There has not been any action that I'm aware of to craft laws at any level of government in the U.S. to confiscate ANYBODY"S legally owned firearms. There has certainly been plenty of talk about confiscation by people who are in no position to craft, pass or sign into law AND by the fear mongers of the NRA and their partners in crime.

    ALEC has "assisted" many state legislatures in the crafting of "Right to kill" laws (You might call them, "Stand your ground") laws. They seem to have worked to good effect, since the dead cannot testify as to what was actually happening when they were shot.

    Gunzloonz are assholes,open carry, concealed carry, cop/soldier wannabes, stone nucking futz or whatever. I don't want assholes having the ability to snuff out someone's life with impunity.

    Re: the OP.

    I posited elsewhere, a few weeks back, that if a group of muslims/afro-americans/Asian-americans/Hispanics were to hold a three day shootem up some targets, trade show and swap meet in teh ghetto that there would be enough cops there to skew the curve for Dunkin' Donuts in that area.

  15. Major Kong Says:

    A gun is a tool. You would look equally silly (although a lot less dangerous) wandering around downtown carrying a circular saw.

  16. Xynzee Says:

    @Mjr: unless the guy had the circular saw slung low, or in shoulder rig—dragging several meters of extension cord and plugged in—and wearing t-shirt saying "Saws don't kill people!" I'd assume they were going to a build site.

  17. democommie Says:

    @Xynzee:

    I can assure you, from personal experience, that carrying a hammer or other striking tool into a bar or retail establishment might bring the gendermarie a'runnin'.

    What I've never run into is somebody carrying a claymore, rapier, foil, assegai, katana, kukhri, machete or broadsword (among the many deadly edge or piercing weapons out there) into a Starbucks and laying it on his table or leaning against the wall–ready to hand–as he drinks his doubletallskinny. I wonder, why is that?

  18. c u n d gulag Says:

    If you want to openly carry your gun, in a sane society, that should be enough proof to make sure you never get near one.

  19. Tony P Says:

    Thanks for drawing light to the racial disparity in gun law enforcement. The first wave of modern gun control came out of California in response to Black Panthers operating armed police patrols to monitor officers, inform citizens of their rights and get the identification of anyone being taken in to police custody so they didn't disappear in the system. An era of mass incarceration of black Americans on trumped up charges has left many black people denied the opportunity to exercise their right to gun ownership due to a criminal record. We have the technology available now to ensure that police are behaving within the boundaries our dumb legal system without having to tail them. The least we can do is apply the technologies we have to provide body mounted camera monitoring of on-duty police to deter the corruption and murder that has continued unabated since the days of the Panther patrols.

  20. GuyFromMtl Says:

    @Scepticus

    After seeing that video, it dawned on me that it certainly must be part of standard police training now to repeatedly yell "Stop resisting !" while violently trashing around the person that's being put under arrest. It certainly convinced me that she was "violently" resisting arrest…

  21. Eliasqfuntybunt Says:

    Speaking as a British guy with a morbid fascination for the balls to the wall clusterfuck that is the US political sphere, the complete insanity of the American gun movement is just a new and exciting voyage each and every day I hear more about people who are, frankly, complete fucking morons but are loudly asserting their God given right to carry things that are solely and entirely devoted to the purpose of killing people for absolutely no reason.

    Well there is a reason, to be fair – spite. The guy in the video, after I watched all ten horrifying minutes of this proud Hoveround-American didn't actually need his gun out, he wasn't in fear of anything (or at least not in fear of anything rational – it is conceivable he was worried about being picked up to be transported to a FEMA reeducation gulag or something similarly bugfuck mental), he just wanted to carry around a loaded weapon to scare the shit out of people and to prove some kind of point that he can and therefore suck it libs. I also got the sense that he was trying to provoke the police into some sort of armed conflict, perhaps hoping to be the People of Walmart equivalent of the guy that self-immolated and kicked off the Arab spring. Whatever it was, his insane, delusional convictions are held with the utmost seriousness. And there are thousands, maybe millions more like him. And they have political clout over the world's last remaining superpower.

    Here, if someone decided to walk up and down the street holding a loaded rifle, the police would cap the motherfucker for being the dangerous lunatic he clearly is. In the US they're proud patriots exercising their constitutional rights. That is terrifying.

  22. Nick G. Says:

    "The recent (last 30-40 years) militancy of the NRA and the various gunzloonz groups that have sprung up everywhere is a PREEMPTIVE response to a NON-EXISTENT threat to their ownership of weapons."

    That's absolutely correct. No one with actual political power has the desire to take away civilian gun rights. You're probably already aware that less than 1% of American gun owners are members of the NRA, too. I think it was Ed who said that the NRA exists to represent gun manufacturers, not owners, and that is spot on.

    "Gunzloonz are assholes,open carry, concealed carry, cop/soldier wannabes, stone nucking futz or whatever. I don't want assholes having the ability to snuff out someone's life with impunity."

    So you're one of the many without political power who DO want to abolish civilian gun rights? Please correct me if I misread that.

    This might be hard for you to believe, but most gun owners go their whole lives without ever killing anyone. Perhaps you see no reason to own a gun, and that's just fine. I myself only use mine to shoot targets at a range. I keep all my guns secured in a safe, and I have no worries that I'll ever have to use them in my house, unlike some who worry about this a lot and therefore keep them unsecured, see: child shooting self in face.

    I don't have a concealed carry license, but that's only because the sheriff where I live refuses to grant them, even though it's legal. Needless to say, I voted for the other gal. Even then, I wouldn't take a gun with me unless I knew I was going to be in a legitimately bad neighborhood.

    I'll reiterate that I believe in Federal gun control in the form of mandatory background checks and training, both of which I think should be far more extensive (and standardized, hence Federal) than anything currently at a state level. The recent toddler-killing-self incidents and other highly preventable dumbfuckery being only a few reasons why.

  23. democommie Says:

    "This might be hard for you to believe, but most gun owners go their whole lives without ever killing anyone."

    "So you're one of the many without political power who DO want to abolish civilian gun rights? Please correct me if I misread that."

    Do you look for reasons to disagree with people. I've been abundantly clear, here and elsewhere that I am not interested in taking away people's guns. I would be okay with having EVERY FUCKING ONE OF THEM registered. I would also be okay with assholes who insist on carrying guns to make them feel powerful being given the same treatment as people who insist on driving cars–made to buy insurance for the inevitable stupidents that happen with gunz.

    "toddler-killing-self incidents" amount to a tiny %age of the purposeful and negligent shooting of many thousands of people in the U.S. every year. Since the NRA has made it difficult to compile and collate statistics on gunshot deaths and injuries, we have to rely on incomplete data sets. It is apparent, however, from the data that IS available that domestic violence accounts for a large %age of gunshot deaths and wounding.

    You are correct in thinking that I don't need a gun. Neither do the vast majority of people that have them. I don't care if they have them. I care a great deal that a substantial minority of them prove, day in and day out, that they have no business owning one.

  24. Nick G. Says:

    Yup, I also agree that all guns should be registered, and have no objection to having insurance for carrying them. Domestic violence accounts for most violent crime, regardless of whether or not a gun is involved.

    And I've made it clear that I agree with you that many people should never be around, much less handle a gun.

    We've come full-circle. Sorry for any poor writing or other miscommunications on my part.

    Cheers.

  25. Xynzee Says:

    @CU: your critical error is assuming that the US is sane.

  26. Major Kong Says:

    "This might be hard for you to believe, but most gun owners go their whole lives without ever killing anyone."

    Hay, 9/11 only killed 3000 people give or take and we turned the entire country world upside-down because of it. We kill a lot more people than that every year with guns.

  27. SamInMpls Says:

    Yes, yes, to all of this but I still want someone to explain why ammosexuals are so goddamned pedantic. If you refer to a magazine as a clip most of them completely lose their shit.

  28. Nick G. Says:

    SamInMpls: The reason they lose their shit is because St. Reagan actually commanded them to do so in the event that someone refers to a magazine as clip. Nevermind that both of them store live ammunition; dammit, this is worth evacuating one's bowels over!! Cuz Ronnie says so!! This was paragraph 9, section 5.8 of his last will and testament, which all ammosexuals are well versed on.

    Also, FEMA internment camps!!!!oneone

    That's all you need to know. Now please allow me to pass out for at least five hours before I find the Newcastle stash again.

  29. democommie Says:

    Nick G:

    My apologies, I should have been more clear as well.

    "Gunzloon" is a term I use, like "KKKristian" when I'm speaking of those who are the opposite of sane and reasonable on the subject of firearms or the right of their religious beliefs v my rights. I know plenty of good, decent Christians and lots of people who own all sorts of firearms. We all get along quite well.

  30. Buy Elite Test Says:

    When I originally commented I clicked the "Notify me when new comments are added" checkbox
    and now each time a comment is added I get three emails with the same comment.
    Is there any way you can remove me from that service?
    Thanks a lot!

    Here is my web-site – Buy Elite Test

  31. Ryan Says:

    It's hard to find your page in google. I found it on 22 spot, you should build quality backlinks ,
    it will help you to get more visitors. I know how to help you,
    just search in google – k2 seo tips and tricks

  32. how long is extacy detectable in urine Says:

    does vinegar kill weeds in flower beds

Leave a Reply