New York Times article on minority gun owners

[jr_roosa]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/15/u...eighing-isolation-and-stigma-of-violence.html

This is the top of the page article on NYTimes.com right now.

It's an interesting read in general, but I'm really surprised to see it at the top of the site on a day where the news cycle is somewhat busy with election stories and Iraq falling apart.

Discusses some of the demographics of gun ownership and issues that minority gun owners run into.

It's almost neutral on guns themselves. I don't see "high capacity" or "assault rifle" mentioned anywhere, but all the photos are ARs. (Didn't get a chance to watch the video).

It's a little surreal, actually.

-J.

 

[Red Wind]

Very unusual for The Old Grey Lady. All in all, an interesting, balanced read with a look into a subject rarely probed by MSM. The demographics of firearm ownership.

Fascinating that it is the lead off article as the OP stated. From New York Times, it's a pleasant surprise. I'll take it.

Thank you for posting, jr roosa.

 

[Baron66]

When society teaches you to take care of yourself, you think about protecting yourself and your family.

When the government, the media, the New York Times and other liberals tell you that you can't do anything without them, and that the NRA is a bunch of racist whites, then you will tend to think of the government as being responsible for your protection.

I applaud any blacks that have the guts to join the NRA or express libertarian views.

 

[CoalTrain49]

Well, they are still using the term "gun violence" so they aren't there yet, but it's a good start. You never see that term in any media coverage about Syria but there is an awful lot of violence by people using guns there. So it really isn't about the weapons but the people who use them as was the focus of this story. I don't even mind when someone characterizes the NRA as bunch of old, fat white guys because it is a description that is void of politics. The media may be finally waking up to the fact that more than half of the people don't vote in this country and all of these left or right leaning stories with a political statement may be turning half of the potential audience off. Why not just write it from the people perspective and leave the %^&* gun politics out of it as they came very close to doing. Good job NYT.

 

[SuperNaut]

I wish comments were enabled on that story.

 

[GEM]

There are a few excellent books on the role of guns in the Civil Rights movement.

They make a better case for defense against tyranny than the usual RKBA musings, to be blunt.

They also make a clear case against bans of weapons type and mags when you read what these folks faced.

http://nyupress.org/books/book-details.aspx?bookId=10963#.U526qigeknE

We Will Shoot Back
Armed Resistance in the Mississippi Freedom Movement
Akinyele Omowale Umoja


Negroes with Guns Paperback
by Robert F. Williams (Author), Martin Luther Jr. King (Author), Truman Nelson (Author)
http://www.amazon.com/Negroes-Guns-Robert-F-Williams/dp/1614274118


Negroes and the Gun: The Black Tradition of Arms Paperback
by Nicholas Johnson (Author)
http://www.amazon.com/Negroes-Gun-Black-Tradition-Arms/dp/161614839X
/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_y


The Deacons for Defense: Armed Resistance and the Civil Rights Movement [Paperback]
by Lance Hill
http://www.amazon.com/Deacons-Defen...402845978&sr=1-1&keywords=deacons+for+defense

These should be key points in RKBA discussions. They blow Joe Biden for example right out the water.

 

[ATLDave]

There's a brand new book out about the history of guns in the (African-)American civil rights movement. http://www.amazon.com/dp/0465033105/ Title: This Nonviolent Stuff'll Get You Killed: How Guns Made the Civil Rights Movement Possible

The author was/is a civil rights activist and historian. I haven't read it yet, but it's going into the Kindle today.

 

[Somewhere in NM]

A good reason for us in the 2A community to stick to gun rights issues. No need to bring in other unrelated issues that could alienate those who would ortherwise be our natural allies.

 

[CoalTrain49]

Deleted.....

 

[Speedo66]

I kind of resented the characterization of NRA members as fat old white men.

I'm not that heavy.........

Good, unbiased article.

 

[NoirFan]

Racial, religious, political, and sexual orientation minorities have more reason to own guns than than do most.

Forced internments, detentions, lynchings, pogroms and genocides are carried out by majorities, after all.

There are those still living in this country who set attack dogs on the Civil Rights movement protest marches, who burned crosses on lawns. They are the same people who defend the internment of American citizens during WWII, who have no problem supporting racial detentions in current and future wars. This is a big part of why I own guns.

 

[GEM]

NY Times has a video presentation on their page today. Didn't watch it yet.

 

[skoro]

Good article.

 

[frankiestoys]

This is good to see , being a responsible gun owner doesn't always mean your color is white

 

[akv3g4n]

A good reason for us in the 2A community to stick to gun rights issues. No need to bring in other unrelated issues that could alienate those who would ortherwise be our natural allies.

This. The more that we associate gun rights with conservatism, the harder our fight will be. The right to protect yourself and your family shouldn't be a political issue or a racial issue.

 

[22-rimfire]

I read the article and really came away with little information. I don't know what I was expecting, but the article didn't really impress me from an information point of view.

As far as the NRA goes, it is an organization that supports the legal use of firearms for sporting and self defensive purposes. There is no racial aspect to the organization per se.

I think that whites in general have had more exposure to the legal use of firearms. Most of the blacks I know only think in terms of self defense, not going out to the range and blasting away a bunch of ammo for the fun of it. Seeing a black person out in the woods is a rarity. Some would say something along the lines that they fear the good old boy white hunter and what they might do in the woods.

I think that there is certainly a class or economic reality involved for the majority of blacks. The article mentioned that 49% of non-white participants to a 2013 Gallup poll supported more stringent gun control, but it followed some well publiced shootings. So, I don't really know what the 49% actually support. I think the black view of gun control has protection from gang and other violence built into it as well as crime in general. They don't like feeling unsafe any more than other people but gun violence is more prevalent in the minority neighborhoods. But the typical gun control law has little real impact on crime rates. The impact comes with law enforcement in the "neighborhoods".

But the other reality for minority's is that they are going to get their guns regardless of what some law says in Washington DC and they are likely not to admit it in a Gallup poll. That is a fact. Non-minority people generally are more influenced by the "law".

 

[bainter1212]

Racial, religious, political, and sexual orientation minorities have more reason to own guns than than do most.

Forced internments, detentions, lynchings, pogroms and genocides are carried out by majorities, after all.

There are those still living in this country who set attack dogs on the Civil Rights movement protest marches, who burned crosses on lawns. They are the same people who defend the internment of American citizens during WWII, who have no problem supporting racial detentions in current and future wars. This is a big part of why I own guns.

Had to quote this. Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[22-rimfire]

Racial, religious, political, and sexual orientation minorities have more reason to own guns than than do most.

Forced internments, detentions, lynchings, pogroms and genocides are carried out by majorities, after all.

There are those still living in this country who set attack dogs on the Civil Rights movement protest marches, who burned crosses on lawns. They are the same people who defend the internment of American citizens during WWII, who have no problem supporting racial detentions in current and future wars. This is a big part of why I own guns.

It is not why I own firearms. I also think that the second statement is in correct unless you view the word "majorities" to be white and it would be a very small minority fraction of the whites. There has also been persecution of other minorities thoughout the history of the US until they integrated into society. It just seems that Blacks in general have not integrated into the mainstream society in the US as other minorities. I believe it is mostly their own fault if you want to generalize. Many do not take advantage of the educational opportunities offered and seem to be too influenced as children by the drug dealer with the big car and wad of cash in their pocket. That's success for many of these younger people.

There are also the professional class of blacks that have totally integrated into the society in general. These people in general think about the same as the professional class of non-minority members. They own firearms and probably view gun control much like other non-minority people. Essentially race is not an issue for them except as a historical fact or something that impacts others more.

 

[hso]

The 2A is intended for the defense of the people against an oppressive government and most anti 2A laws were written in the early days to deny minorities and lower classes the ability to resist oppressive government (either directly or because the government fostered private oppression). The Civil Rights movement involved the use of firearms at times exactly because of the need to resist oppressive government, mostly local, but sometimes otherwise, and as such is the most current example of the 2A in action as intended by the founders.

The "minorities" change, but the social, political, and even armed means of resistance are still part of the civil equation.

 

[NoirFan]

It is not why I own firearms. I also think that the second statement is in correct unless you view the word "majorities" to be white and it would be a very small minority fraction of the whites. There has also been persecution of other minorities thoughout the history of the US until they integrated into society. It just seems that Blacks in general have not integrated into the mainstream society in the US as other minorities. I believe it is mostly their own fault if you want to generalize. Many do not take advantage of the educational opportunities offered and seem to be too influenced as children by the drug dealer with the big car and wad of cash in their pocket. That's success for many of these younger people.

There are also the professional class of blacks that have totally integrated into the society in general. These people in general think about the same as the professional class of non-minority members. They own firearms and probably view gun control much like other non-minority people. Essentially race is not an issue for them except as a historical fact or something that impacts others more.

I do not necessarily equate "majorities" with Whites. The Hutu majority slaughtered the Tutsi minority in Rwanda, for example. I take a wider historical view. Minorities of any kind have always existed at the sufferance of the majority, no matter the time or place. A smaller group within a larger society has always been an easy target for oppression, but it's my opinion that guns change that. In the present day we have personal weapons by which a minority can harm an oppressive majority badly enough to deter such behavior.

I live in a place where I am a minority, but everyone more or less gets along, regardless of race or religion. Long may it be so, but I've read too much history to believe good things last forever.

 

[gbran]

The 2A applies to all law abiding citizens, regardless of race or ethnicity, but this right is usually more often infringed in large cities where minorities are in abundance.

 

[hso]

We often choose to forget that "minority" doesn't equal race in the history of the U.S. The 1911 Sullivan Act was against immigrants coming into NY and to allow the corrupt Tim Sullivan to allow his bodyguards to armed while stripping his opponents of the same.

 

[barnbwt]

Not for nothing, but Italians, Jews, Irish, etc. were all seen as very distinct races in those days. Sullivan was also more interested in people on his side remaining armed, than just his guards. It was always about the machine politics, and it did no good to have the oppositions' enforcers go about armed.

While we, as 'enlightened' gun owners understand that force is the only thing that can deter or contradict unjust force, we also have to understand that centuries-old oppression weighs on these disenfranchised communities, who long ago adopted a conform-or-die mantra in order to survive their tormentors.

Having seen evidence in the 60's of what happens when black men did go about armed (broadly labeled terrorists, savaged in media, laws immediately passed to restrict their behavior in conjunction with police harassment ever since), I can understand the black community's reticence in getting back into the shooting game. An awful lot of people here would be pretty freaked out by black gun rights organizations half as militant as we accept (though may not welcome) on our side. And that's not even getting into the whole guns-connoted-with-crime, stop and frisk, illegal possession, and flat out discrimination/racism aspects of the question (which are reflexive syndromes of the gun-repressed conditions many black Americans live under daily in cities rather than a cause for those conditions, though they do reinforce that state of being)

Fun fact: a syphilis-addled Sullivan was later committed to an insane asylum (judging by the Wiki article's expansive retelling of his death and near-anonymous burial, this man is proof of Karmic retribution. He was apparently the biggest piece of work there ever was, and met an end so befitting)

TCB

 

[RPRNY]

I'm quite pleased there were no comments allowed. Published in the New York Times, that was a home run for treatment of gun owners, the NRA and the fact that the organization doesn't attract minority members in line with minority gun ownership rates. The final comment by the black board member about not pandering was also good.

 

[JRH6856]

Now this is the New York Times we all know.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/17/opinion/legislating-ignorance-about-guns.html