DigitalWarrior
Member
I was in a forum where the president of the San Diego NAACP was invited to speak, and I ended up asking a few questions y'all might be interested in the answers to.
I wasn't even going to walk in, because I have strong feelings on some of their actions, and I did not want to be disrespectful. However, the man who coordinated it invited me to go inside and talk about my concerns.
The PoSDNAACP got up and started talking about some of the things they are involved in. He talked about after school programs (good). He talked about maintaining education in the trades, rather than trying to put everyone on a college prep track (really good). He talked about fighting racial profiling (good). And he talked about affirmative action stuff (not good, but not a deal breaker). He talked about how everyone should be a member.
He then asked if there were any questions. I stood up first to speak, and asked "I understand that the NAACP is involved with several lawsuits against gun manufacturers related to the unfair marketing practices of guns in urban disadvantaged communities because people of color are disproportionally affected by gun-violence."(I can speak good duck-speak when I need to), I continued, "Why is it the policy of the NAACP that the poor and people of color should not be entitled to a means of self-defense?"
His response was that they were not against the poor being able to defend themselves, but in poor communities there are gun stores on every corner, and that the availability of guns is hurting the community, leading to all kinds of bad stuff.
I responded that one of my favorite paintings was harriet tubman conducting slaves through a swamp, and in her hands, she held a rifle, which she was nto permitted to do. I mentioned that one of the reasons for jim crow was to make sure that black men could not arm themselves. I mentioned that I thought that only good men obey laws, and the more good men who have guns, the better off everyone would be.
I said to him "And if it were not for that position of the NAACP, I would already be a member." and took my seat.
He ended that conversation by saying guns are used to destroy, and that reasonable men can disagree on small things, but agree on the larger issues. What he did not understand was, to me, this is the LARGEST issue.
But now for the question: I am still thinking about joining, and attempting to change the attitude of the organization from the inside. I just worry about giving material support to the enemy. What do you think?
Will
I wasn't even going to walk in, because I have strong feelings on some of their actions, and I did not want to be disrespectful. However, the man who coordinated it invited me to go inside and talk about my concerns.
The PoSDNAACP got up and started talking about some of the things they are involved in. He talked about after school programs (good). He talked about maintaining education in the trades, rather than trying to put everyone on a college prep track (really good). He talked about fighting racial profiling (good). And he talked about affirmative action stuff (not good, but not a deal breaker). He talked about how everyone should be a member.
He then asked if there were any questions. I stood up first to speak, and asked "I understand that the NAACP is involved with several lawsuits against gun manufacturers related to the unfair marketing practices of guns in urban disadvantaged communities because people of color are disproportionally affected by gun-violence."(I can speak good duck-speak when I need to), I continued, "Why is it the policy of the NAACP that the poor and people of color should not be entitled to a means of self-defense?"
His response was that they were not against the poor being able to defend themselves, but in poor communities there are gun stores on every corner, and that the availability of guns is hurting the community, leading to all kinds of bad stuff.
I responded that one of my favorite paintings was harriet tubman conducting slaves through a swamp, and in her hands, she held a rifle, which she was nto permitted to do. I mentioned that one of the reasons for jim crow was to make sure that black men could not arm themselves. I mentioned that I thought that only good men obey laws, and the more good men who have guns, the better off everyone would be.
I said to him "And if it were not for that position of the NAACP, I would already be a member." and took my seat.
He ended that conversation by saying guns are used to destroy, and that reasonable men can disagree on small things, but agree on the larger issues. What he did not understand was, to me, this is the LARGEST issue.
But now for the question: I am still thinking about joining, and attempting to change the attitude of the organization from the inside. I just worry about giving material support to the enemy. What do you think?
Will
(If you doubt this, just think how a group called "NAAWP" would fare on the public stage. Especially if their "affirmative action" platform were to include, say, professonal sports such as the NBA.)
