Gun Control- the Same Old Bigotry with a Different Name
It is all done in the name of Public Safety. That is why elite white males get to have guns for self-defense and you don’t. We saw the data in California where the racial and sexual bigotry was obvious. Now, civil rights lawyer Dwight Pettit asks some tough questions about concealed carry permits in Maryland..and by extension, about who is allowed to carry a gun in the other may-issue states like New Jersey and New York. The political corruption is obvious, and the excuses are as thin as those coming from Harvey Weinstein and Matt Lauer. It is socially and politically acceptable to disarm women and minorities.
Most states either don’t require carry permits, or they issue permits to carry a concealed weapon in public on a “shall issue” basis. Shall-issue means you’re issued a permit unless you have a criminal record that makes you a prohibited person. In contrast, “may issue” states leave that decision to the discretion of bureaucrats and politicians. When given that power, the temptation for bigotry is evidently irresistible. There is always an excuse. These excuses cost lives.
Look at the victims of violent crime today. Women are a disproportionately large fraction of assault victims because criminals think they are easy prey. Minorities also make up a disproportionate number of crime victims. Because of this actual vulnerability, women and minorities should be more likely than white men to receive concealed carry permits. In fact, women and minorities are underrepresented as concealed carriers in may issue states.
The reason is obvious. Carry permits are issued as political spoils in may-issue states. Permits go to rich white men who have power rather than to the citizens with the greatest need. The excuses are endless, and public safety is the chief rationalization. We would never accept the excuse of academic safety to deny women entry into schools, or financial safety to deny blacks a home loan.
We have made progress in the last 50 years. We integrated our churches and our clubs..unless you’re a gun owner who carries for self-defense. Politicians say this modern discrimination is for public safety.. even though concealed carry holders are more law abiding than the police. Disarming women and racial minorities is bigotry even though it is widespread and legally approved. I don’t believe that disarming the victims makes us all safer..even if it is socially fashionable.
The very politician who claim to represent women are the same politicians who want women disarmed. Their claim of “public safety” goes unquestioned by mainstream journalists..which tells us a lot about the poor state of journalism today. When we read about the recent sexual scandals that embroil so many Democrat legislators, maybe the reason they want women disarmed is obvious. We read about the sexual abuse in Hollywood and the news room, and we understand why they want the victims disarmed.
A national concealed carry reciprocity bill is now in the Senate. Listen for the usual excuses as to why you should be disarmed.
SlowFacts 
The so called Main Stream Media is FULL OF IT.
LikeLike
Liberals believe only “Rich” people should have the right to defend themselves. They want the rest of us disarmed and as victims.
LikeLike
Nobody should have to have a license to exercise their rights. A lot of people don’t get it.
Could you imagine having to get a license to exercise free speech? How about a license to plead the 5th?
Suppose the cops kick in your front door at 3 am because your license protecting you from unreasonable search and seizure had expired?
There is no way to justify requiring a license to exercise our rights. The whole idea is absurd.
Some states have Constitutional carry laws. No license required. It’s better, but the reality is that there should not be any gun control laws whatsoever. Not at the state level or the federal level. The fact that there are shows that the government is no longer representing the people or their freedoms and rights.
I think that the governor of North Carolina means well. I don’t think she’s doing this for nefarious purposes. I just think that sometimes people lose sight of what the founder’s intentions were. It’s not always easy to tell the difference between a patriot with good intentions and a snake in the grass who is just saying what people want to hear so they can sneak in some sort of anti-gun legislation that sounds like it’s reasonable.
The majority of the people would certainly support gun rights if they were properly educated and informed.
I could go off on a long tangent here, but suffice to say that everything they have done is all tied together to fit their agenda.
Their ultimate goal is total confiscation. Don’t let their dishonest rhetoric fool you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The anti gun rights lobby, believe it or not, there is one, operates on the basis of emotional claptrap, lies and public ignorance. The informed, educated, as opposed to propagandized, thinking citizenry is what they fear most, for such a citizenry will disregard their wailing, their crocodile tears, their outright lies.
LikeLike
Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act Constitutional – Is a Trojan Horse..
While the reciprocity laws among states are a nuisance, they affect relatively few gun owners – but a national reciprocity system would allow the feds to affect every gun owner and I think it’s a bad idea. I cite as an example the federal takeover of driver’s licensing requirements for heavy trucks. Before the requirement of a federally sanctioned commercial driver’s license (CDL) in 1986, anyone with a driver’s license could drive a heavy truck (semi class) after a little instruction and practice. Now it requires extensive testing, certification and training and in many cases requires applicants to spend thousands of dollars to attend a sanctioned truck driving school. In addition, it’s a huge bureaucracy that requires periodic medical exams, extensive record keeping, and special endorsements for various types of trucks and trucking (i.e. air brakes, hazardous materials, buses, tankers, multiple trailers, etc). I’m not saying all of these things are bad as they are a result of a few people not accepting personal responsibility for their actions – but if the feds impose this level of control on something that is relatively non-controversial like trucking, imagine what they would do with firearms.
I think a better approach is to work with the states to set up a universal reciprocity framework that is acceptable to all of them rather than letting the feds do it with a heavy hand. I realize some blue states will probably never agree to allow reciprocity, but to me that is more acceptable than a federal statute because once the basic framework is written into law in can be clandestinely amended with more restrictive measures in the bowels of a 3000 page bill on an unrelated topic that no one reads and it can be done simply by using an obscure reference to a line item in the law and adding a phrase after some word or changing a word like “can” to “cannot”. Keep in mind this process is why we can’t purchase machine guns manufactured after 1986.
LikeLike
Interesting points you raise, some being quite valid. That said, what about jurisdictions like N.Y., Cal., Mass., Ct., N.J., and the political types therein who not satisfied destroying the rights of their residents, should, if they were able, shove their rubbish down the throats of the entire country. As to your reference to those “little noticed” stipulations hidden away in omnibus, multi thousand page legislative proposals, doing away with omnibus legislation seems like an excellent idea.
LikeLike
States rights don’t Trump Constitutional Rights…period.
I am of the opinion the Democrats still feel the minority segment of our population, including any one of a non-white color, should still be subject to Jim Crow laws and slavery. Nothing the Democrats do today is any different from what they were doing to the negroes in this country back in the ’30’s thru late ’60’s. The veiled discrimination of those who are not granted a concealed carry permit is pretty obvious. All one has to do is go on Stupidtube and watch the vids of law abiding people of color being harassed by local police departments for simply exercising their right to bear arms. The sophistry being projected by the Democrats, coupled with the lies and outright violations of our God given rights need to be reversed with a Constitutional carry Amendment giving every legal, law abiding resident, regardless of race, the right to bear arms. Anyone violating that right needs to be prosecuted for civil rights violations. Time to make amends with what our forefathers intended to be a right for all to bear arms without infringement.
LikeLike
This is why Doug Jones (Alabama) in his campaign ads touts the fact he owns guns. He feels secure in his ownership and knows no one is coming for his firearms. But he will vote lock step with all the rest of the Dems for more and more gun control. It is what Dems do.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on Freedom Is Just Another Word….
LikeLike
The racist origins of Gun Control are well documented in U.S.History, to the extent that even the strongest advocate of the fairy tale that is Gun Control could hardly miss or deny them, though some no doubt will.
LikeLike