Replies

Where in the article did you see that the Oath Keepers (many of whom are also FReepers!) are going to arm New Black Panthers and gang bangers?

It’s not there.

So what’s your problem with law abiding black Americans being legally armed? Do you think black people should have fewer rights than you do, Mr. Crow?

Where to start?

That's a hard question, but lets start at the location, which is the city of Ferguson in which the protesters are admittedly made up, in large part, by people who self identify as Gang Bangers and New Black Panthers - many of whom are paid, out of town community organizers agitating and successfully inciting violence and riots.

Many of these protesters have made threats of violence against the general population and they have an obvious history rioting and killing in the area during “protests”. This is, in fact, official policy of the New Black Panthers

Many of the above also self identify as being under the influence of drugs and alcohol to the extent that they are stoned out of their minds and I am fundamentally against people provocatively brandishing weapons in public to make statement while under the influence

Obviously Ferguson has a past history of riots and violence, but the recent past is the worst by far.

The “protesters” at the anniversary of the Brown Riots were not some group of non violent, we shall overcome types intent on peaceful protest to air their grievances. They were self described Gang Bangers and New Black Panthers who were engaging in running gunfights with the police and with other gang members. Lots of rounds were expended in the process.

Once again, many were seriously stoned, which is a probably a good thing because it negatively impacts precision shot placement while in commission of random drive by shooting.

There have been comments by the perpetrators that the intent of the violence was to incite violent racial conflict.

So, in answer to your questions

The Oath Keepers have said that the protesters themselves will be armed.

The protesters themselves have self identified as Gang Bangers, New Black Panthers and community organizers. Many have admitted that they traveled to Ferguson specifically to incite and participate in violence.

All of above have followed through on their threats by starting and unprovoked attack on police and citizens with violence that included heavy gunfire from many shooters - most targeting police officers.

I have absolutely no problem with law abiding black Americans carrying weapons. If fact, I advocate it and have trained more than a few law abiding black Americans in how to do so in a safe, effective and legal manner.

Your assertion that the protesters in Ferguson are law abiding black members of society is simply not supported in fact and is contradicted by the direct testimony of the protesters themselves.

I didn't claim the protesters were gang bangers and NBP members -they made the claims themselves.

I'm just taking them at their word.

I live by the fact that run of the mill, law abiding black people have exactly the same rights that I have - no more, no less.

However, I think you have lost sight of the fact that run of the mill, law abiding black people are the primary victims of the scum bags who are destroying Ferguson and importing violence there.

From my perspective, the Oath Keepers are contemplating arming scumbags who made threats of unprovoked violence and murder against the general population and who have demonstrated the seriousness of those threats by ambushing police officers and engaging in protracted fire fights with pretty heavy exchange of volume of fire.

If these same protesters had access to more accurate, longer range AR-15s, they no doubt would have killed a number of police officers during these ambushes.

Given the circumstances, I have serious reservations about the Oath Keepers plans to provide the protesters with 50 AR-15s to brandish in Ferguson because I disagree with your assertion that this is an exercise of 2nd Amendment Rights.

I am more of the opinion that it constitutes the arming of violent rioters with more effective weapons than the handguns they have already been using to shoot the hell out of police officers and the regular every day law abiding residents of Ferguson, the majority of whom happen to be black.

I have spent a life time advocating for the safe, responsible handling of firearms. In a volatile situation such as we find in Ferguson presently, there is a very fine line between open carry of a firearm and provocative brandishing of a firearm with intent to intimidate and to incite and engage in violence.

Enabling such a situation is not, in my humble opinion, consistent with what I consider safe and responsible handling of firearms.

Sorry that we must reluctantly (on my part at least) agree to disagree with each other on this topic.