CoRoMo
Member
Yep. The poll results add up to 120.59%.
??????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????
On May 2, 1967, the California State Assembly Committee on Criminal Procedure was scheduled to convene to discuss what was known as the "Mulford Act", which would ban public displays of loaded firearms. Cleaver and Newton put together a plan to send a group of about 30 Panthers led by Seale from Oakland to Sacramento to protest the bill. The group entered the assembly carrying their weapons, an incident which was widely publicized, and which prompted police to arrest Seale and five others. The group pled guilty to misdemeanor charges of disrupting a legislative session.[45]
On May 2, 1967, the California State Assembly Committee on Criminal Procedure was scheduled to convene to discuss what was known as the "Mulford Act", which would ban public displays of loaded firearms. Cleaver and Newton put together a plan to send a group of about 30 Panthers led by Seale from Oakland to Sacramento to protest the bill. The group entered the assembly carrying their weapons, an incident which was widely publicized, and which prompted police to arrest Seale and five others. The group pled guilty to misdemeanor charges of disrupting a legislative session.[45]
Sounds familiar. I have only ever characterized the black panthers as a hate group. i have no idea how their ideologies could be linked to THR.
Are we now comparing law abiding pro 2nd Ammendment citizens to a pro vilolence militant socialist group? Wow...
What if I told you that the vote count prior to the BPP protest was already showing lopsided passage of the bill in question, rendering the BPP protest irrelevant... Am I correct? Do you know the vote count prior to the protest?So people showed up armed to protest an anti-gun bill being discussed that day. The result was they scared the legislators and insured the passage of the bill. The passage of the legislation prevented anyone from ever legally doing something like that again, or carrying openly in public within the state at all (while loaded).
Saying it over and over does not make it any more true.In other words: In the past, open carry by political protesters has led to the end of legal open carry.
That's simply a dishonest statement. Threats of violence and shootouts with law enforcement by an openly-radical protest group led to the passing of a law prohibiting open carry in California. To claim that their open carry protest (the only parallel between then and now) is the sole, or even principal, factor in the passing of the Mulford Act is simply not sustainable by fact no matter how many times you make a run at it.In other words: In the past, open carry by political protesters has led to the end of legal open carry.
It began shortly after the shooting of Denzil Dowell. Easy Bay legislator Don Mulford introduced a bill to repeal the law that permitted citizens to carry loaded weapons in public places so long as the weapons were openly displayed [see link to California Penal Code, Sections 12031 and 171.c]. What the Mulford law sought to achieve was the elimination of the Black Panther Police Patrols, and it had been tagged "the Panther Bill" by the media.
The Police Patrols had become an integral part of BPP community policy. Members of the BPP would listen to police calls on a short wave radio, rush to the scene of the arrest with law books in hand and inform the person being arrested of their constitutional rights. BPP members also happened to carry loaded weapons, which were publicly displayed, but were careful to stand no closer than ten feet from the arrest so as not to interfere with the arrest.
Passage of the Mulford Bill would essentially end the Panther Police Patrols, so the BPP sent a group to Sacramento, California on May 2nd, 1967 to protest. The group carried loaded rifles and shotguns, publicly displayed and entered the State Capitol building to read aloud Executive Mandate Number 1, which was in opposition to the Mulford Bill. They tried to enter the Assembly Chamber but were forced out of this public place where they then read Executive Mandate Number 1 out on the lawn.
The legislature responded by passing the bill, thus creating the Mulford Act, which was signed into law by Governor Ronald Reagan. This step by the Black Panther Party was enough to put them into national prominence and was a stimulus for growth of the party within the young Black population.
In the 1960s, the Black Panthers decided to introduce guns into the political dialogue. Much like the recent armed protesters making the news, they claimed merely to be exercising a right they possessed under the law. Also like today's armed protesters, they claimed they were suffering under government oppression/totalitarianism/etc. and styled themselves as revolutionaries.
The Black Panthers' decision to openly arm themselves during political protest terrified the public and set off a wave of gun control, including the end of open carry in California by Governor Ronald Reagan.
Mark me down as supporting the B.Panthers, because in the end, it's not about White or Black folks
is the same as this:In the past, open carry by political protesters has led to the end of legal open carry.
Renders the debate irrelevant. They are not the same. I cannot say it more plainly, in hopes that SOMEBODY that is capable of critical thought will read these words and understand them.The Police Patrols had become an integral part of BPP community policy. Members of the BPP would listen to police calls on a short wave radio, rush to the scene of the arrest with law books in hand and inform the person being arrested of their constitutional rights. BPP members also happened to carry loaded weapons, which were publicly displayed, but were careful to stand no closer than ten feet from the arrest so as not to interfere with the arrest.
Passage of the Mulford Bill would essentially end the Panther Police Patrols, so the BPP sent a group to Sacramento, California on May 2nd, 1967 to protest. The group carried loaded rifles and shotguns, publicly displayed and entered the State Capitol building to read aloud Executive Mandate Number 1, which was in opposition to the Mulford Bill. They tried to enter the Assembly Chamber but were forced out of this public place where they then read Executive Mandate Number 1 out on the lawn
I am pleased that you've at least taken the opportunity to Google this, and come up with some basic background. Sadly, however, you read the facts but you do not comprehend them. You parrot them back, but you do not seem to understand their meaning. So let's use a public search engine and see what pops up, other than the PBS link. Here's a compilation of various readings on the subject: http://www.answers.com/topic/black-pantherBut the basic facts are still the basic facts, and the basic facts above are correct and of uncontroversial standing. The accusation that they are "factually incorrect" has been demonstrated to be false, unless there is some novel definition of "correct" that I'm unaware of.
How about the Law Encyclopedia's version:Black Panthers, U.S. African-American militant party, founded (1966) in Oakland, Calif., by Huey P. Newton and Bobby Seale. Originally espousing violent revolution as the only means of achieving black liberation, the Black Panthers called on African Americans to arm themselves for the liberation struggle. In the late 1960s party members became involved in a series of violent confrontations with the police (resulting in deaths on both sides) and in a series of court cases, some resulting from direct shoot-outs with the police and some from independent charges. Among the most notable of the trials was that of Huey Newton for killing a policeman in 1967, which resulted in three mistrials, the last in 1971.
How about referencing the Ten Point Manifesto itself, since that formed the public face of the BPP:Police violence against African Americans was a common complaint in impoverished Oakland, California. By 1966, two young men had had enough. One was Huey P. Newton, age twenty-three, a first-year law student. With his friend Bobby Seale, age thirty, Newton founded the BPP, with the intent of monitoring police officers when they made arrests. This bold tactic — already being employed in Minneapolis by the nascent American Indian Movement (AIM) — was entirely legal. Also legal under California state law was the practice of carrying a loaded weapon, as long as it was visible. But legal or not, the sight of Newton and Seale bearing shotguns as they rushed to the scene of an arrest had enormous shock value. To police officers and citizens alike, this represented a huge change from the previously nonviolent demonstrations of civil rights activists. Although they did not use the guns and maintained the legally required eight to ten feet from officers, the Panthers inspired fear. They also quickly won respect from neighbors who saw them as standing up to the predominantly white police force. The law books they carried— and from which they read criminal suspects their rights — appeared to many in the community to give the Panthers a kind of legitimacy.
Attracting new members through their high visibility, the Panthers sprang to national attention in 1967. Antagonism toward the party by law enforcement officials had prompted California lawmakers to consider gun control. In May 1967, legislators met in Sacramento, the state capital, to discuss a bill that would criminalize the carrying of loaded weapons within city limits. To Seale and Newton, chairman and minister of defense of the BPP, respectively, the proposed law was unjust. Governor Ronald Reagan was on the lawn of the state legislature as thirty armed Black Panthers arrived and entered the building. TV cameras followed the group's progress to the legislative chambers, where they were stopped by police officers, Seale shouting, "Is this the way the racist government works — [you] won't let a man exercise his constitutional rights?" He then read a prepared statement:
The Black Panther Party calls upon American people in general and black people in particular to take full note of the racist California legislature which is now considering legislation aimed at keeping the black people disarmed and powerless, at the very same time that racist police agencies throughout the country are intensifying the terror, brutality, murder and repression of black people.
The Panthers kept their guns, left the building, and were subsequently disarmed by the police.
No sooner had the demonstration ended than the national media denounced the Panthers as antiwhite radicals. For many white U.S. citizens, the Panthers symbolized terror.
This is the context of the BPP. Open carry by the BPP was a single facet of a very militant worldview, and the Mulford Act was the establishment's response to the overarching threat of black militantism in the Bay Area (and elsewhere). Had busloads of nuns carried M14s through the streets of Sacramento (in protest or otherwise), the Mulford Act would never have existed. On the other hand, had busloads of white-power separatists tried the same thing as the BPP, history probably would have been repeated.We want power to determine the destiny of our black and oppressed communities' education that teaches us our true history and our role in the present day society.
We want completely free health care for all black and oppressed people.
We want an immediate end to police brutality and murder of black people, other people of color, and all oppressed people inside the United States.
We want an immediate end to all wars of aggression.
We want full employment for our people.
We want an end to the robbery by the capitalists of our Black Community.
We want decent housing, fit for the shelter of human beings.
We want decent education for our people that exposes the true nature of this decadent American society.
We want freedom for all black and oppressed people now held in U. S. Federal, state, county, city and military prisons and jails. We want trials by a jury of peers for all persons charged with so-called crimes under the laws of this country.
We want land, bread, housing, education, clothing, justice, peace and people's community control of modern technology.
In the 1960s, the Black Panthers decided to introduce guns into the political dialog. Much like the recent armed protesters making the news, they claimed merely to be exercising a right they possessed under the law. Also like today's armed protesters, they claimed they were suffering under government oppression/totalitarianism/etc. and styled themselves as revolutionaries.