Maybe one of our Dallas members can investigate it and provide a report on what its like, how much influence the New Black Panther Party has on it etc.

Everything I have seen says that the Huey P Newton Gun Club is an org that is internal to the NBPP.

Considering the rhetoric of the NBPP, which flies in the face of what I saw them doing here in Ferguson, I'm holding my support for now. Not that separatists would ask for my permission or alliance as I am a White Devil.

From what I seen and heard, the New Black Panther Party is as reactionary as the country club Rick Perry is a member of.

Everything I have seen says that the Huey P Newton Gun Club is an org that is internal to the NBPP.

Everything I've read appears to suggest the same, but the organization is not officially affiliated, nor have there been any statements by members to the press that the two are one and the same. The msm has done a terrible job at reporting on the group. It would be good if a member who is in the area spends the time to contact them and learn about them. Think of it like a potential home-work assignment. I personally think that despite all of the fiery rhetoric from the NBPP, they're pretty harmless. They protected cops in Ferguson of all places and are regulars on nearly all of the msm channels with white hosts.

If they're calling for an end to police brutality and for the right of black people to self-defense, they have every right to do so. With Open Carry Texas attempting to march through the 5th ward in Houston (a historic black neighborhood), and the ongoing police lynchings of unarmed black men..these demands are totally reasonable.

It does not matter to me if the Huey P Newton Gun Club is not directly affiliated with the NBPP, but I wish they would not open carry those weapons.

Nothing scarier to the white establishment than people of color with guns.

Good for them.

jubjub wrote:Nothing scarier to the white establishment than people of color with guns.

Good for them.

Good for them, but perhaps not good for the 2A cause.

Always a balancing act.

HereInWA wrote:

jubjub wrote:Nothing scarier to the white establishment than people of color with guns.

Good for them.

Good for them, but perhaps not good for the 2A cause.

Always a balancing act.

Using the same reasons for the Mulford Act in today's political landscape should lead to the end of political careers in most if not every state. I mean, racism is dead, right?

FlintlockPhryne wrote:It does not matter to me if the Huey P Newton Gun Club is not directly affiliated with the NBPP, but I wish they would not open carry those weapons.

So, rights don't keep up with technology or something else?

ErikO wrote:

FlintlockPhryne wrote:It does not matter to me if the Huey P Newton Gun Club is not directly affiliated with the NBPP, but I wish they would not open carry those weapons.

So, rights don't keep up with technology or something else?

No one needs so-called modern sporting weapons and handguns, and I am not for open carry anyway. Madison did not intend for us to have AR-15s and the like.

FlintlockPhryne wrote:

ErikO wrote:

FlintlockPhryne wrote:It does not matter to me if the Huey P Newton Gun Club is not directly affiliated with the NBPP, but I wish they would not open carry those weapons.

So, rights don't keep up with technology or something else?

No one needs so-called modern sporting weapons and handguns, and I am not for open carry anyway. Madison did not intend for us to have AR-15s and the like.

And I suppose that Madison also didn't mean to protect non-print media or cell phone traffic under the First? I guess the HUffPo and WaPo guys who got pinched at the McD's in Jennings (yes, it was the one on Jennings Station and Hall's Ferry) had it coming as they aren't in print?

I suppose you agreed with the Pistol Permit law that we got rid of in 2007?

ErikO wrote:

FlintlockPhryne wrote:

ErikO wrote:

FlintlockPhryne wrote:It does not matter to me if the Huey P Newton Gun Club is not directly affiliated with the NBPP, but I wish they would not open carry those weapons.

So, rights don't keep up with technology or something else?

No one needs so-called modern sporting weapons and handguns, and I am not for open carry anyway. Madison did not intend for us to have AR-15s and the like.

And I suppose that Madison also didn't mean to protect non-print media or cell phone traffic under the First? I guess the HUffPo and WaPo guys who got pinched at the McD's in Jennings (yes, it was the one on Jennings Station and Hall's Ferry) had it coming as they aren't in print?

I suppose you agreed with the Pistol Permit law that we got rid of in 2007?

Madison could only apply First Amendment protections to what he understood at the time. It is up to the courts to rule on where the First Amendment applies today, and reasonably that would include modern media. Also reasonable are some restrictions on the Second Amendment. Common sense dictates that we should take steps to impose sensible restrictions for the public good. Shooting is for fun. People get too wrapped up in the politics of the right to keep and bear arms. We should just enjoy it and not worry about things that were never intended to happen, like people carrying handguns. I shoot for enjoyment, not to get stressed out about it on the internet.

FlintlockPhryne wrote:

FlintlockPhryne wrote:

ErikO wrote:

FlintlockPhryne wrote:It does not matter to me if the Huey P Newton Gun Club is not directly affiliated with the NBPP, but I wish they would not open carry those weapons.

No one needs so-called modern sporting weapons and handguns, and I am not for open carry anyway. Madison did not intend for us to have AR-15s and the like.

And I suppose that Madison also didn't mean to protect non-print media or cell phone traffic under the First? I guess the HUffPo and WaPo guys who got pinched at the McD's in Jennings (yes, it was the one on Jennings Station and Hall's Ferry) had it coming as they aren't in print?

I suppose you agreed with the Pistol Permit law that we got rid of in 2007?

Madison could only apply First Amendment protections to what he understood at the time. It is up to the courts to rule on where the First Amendment applies today, and reasonably that would include modern media. Also reasonable are some restrictions on the Second Amendment. Common sense dictates that we should take steps to impose sensible restrictions for the public good. Shooting is for fun. People get too wrapped up in the politics of the right to keep and bear arms. We should just enjoy it and not worry about things that were never intended to happen, like people carrying handguns. I shoot for enjoyment, not to get stressed out about it on the internet.

What do you think Madison would say about some states denying the right to keep and and bear certain arms while other states say it is okay. This is not equal rights under the the Constitution. Also "things not intended to happen' like people carrying handguns" ,people have carried handguns for all of the history of the United States. It wasn't until the the 1934 we had a national gun control law. Most laws trying to control guns of the 19th century were of the Jim Crow era and earlier slave laws. These were designed to prevent blacks from having guns.

We all shoot to have fun. I just would like to see all law abiding Americans have the same rights and freedoms enjoyed by those living in gun friendly states.if we don't defend our rights we will lose them. I don't agree with the tactics of the far right (NRA) on guns or the far left (DiFi and others. There has to be a middle ground and I see the LGC as part of that with our discussions and trying to educate not browbeat others about guns.

ErikO wrote:

HereInWA wrote:

jubjub wrote:Nothing scarier to the white establishment than people of color with guns.

Good for them.

Good for them, but perhaps not good for the 2A cause.

Always a balancing act.

Using the same reasons for the Mulford Act in today's political landscape should lead to the end of political careers in most if not every state. I mean, racism is dead, right?

Obviously we're a post racism country. I mean, as fears for the 2A show...

They're doing what they're doing and upsetting the apple cart, albeit from what I've seen, politely. Good for them. More people should stand up for things. (Says the guy sitting down working for a foreign firm.)

Also, did someone just call DiFi a far leftie?

amrev360 wrote:Maybe one of our Dallas members can investigate it and provide a report on what its like, how much influence the New Black Panther Party has on it etc.

The NBPP doesn't appear to be gaining any traction among blacks in the DFW area. Perhaps it's because, in Dallas, we have a black D.A. and a black Chief of Police; and, we have a fairly reasonable number of black and Latino officers. In Arlington, we have a black CoP and a reasonable number of black and Latino officers. In Fort Worth Worth, we have a fair number of black and Latino officers, as well. Now I am not implying that things are "peachie" and that a killing like that of young Mr. Brown would not occur. What I am saying is, their is a strong political structure in place that can fight for rights issues without brandishing weapons.

Focusing solely upon "open carry" and the NBPP's impact ... they scar the shit out of liberals and conservatives, alike; and, that is a BAD outcome for 2nd rights advocates. Remember Reagan's actions while he was Governor of California, when the Panthers marched (armed) on the State House, there. Yeah ....

I am a very strong advocate of law abiding blacks arming themselves, but do so quietly .. below the radar.

TrueTexan wrote:

FlintlockPhryne wrote:

ErikO wrote: And I suppose that Madison also didn't mean to protect non-print media or cell phone traffic under the First? I guess the HUffPo and WaPo guys who got pinched at the McD's in Jennings (yes, it was the one on Jennings Station and Hall's Ferry) had it coming as they aren't in print?

I suppose you agreed with the Pistol Permit law that we got rid of in 2007?

Madison could only apply First Amendment protections to what he understood at the time. It is up to the courts to rule on where the First Amendment applies today, and reasonably that would include modern media. Also reasonable are some restrictions on the Second Amendment. Common sense dictates that we should take steps to impose sensible restrictions for the public good. Shooting is for fun. People get too wrapped up in the politics of the right to keep and bear arms. We should just enjoy it and not worry about things that were never intended to happen, like people carrying handguns. I shoot for enjoyment, not to get stressed out about it on the internet.

What do you think Madison would say about some states denying the right to keep and and bear certain arms while other states say it is okay. This is not equal rights under the the Constitution. Also "things not intended to happen' like people carrying handguns" ,people have carried handguns for all of the history of the United States. It wasn't until the the 1934 we had a national gun control law. Most laws trying to control guns of the 19th century were of the Jim Crow era and earlier slave laws. These were designed to prevent blacks from having guns.

We all shoot to have fun. I just would like to see all law abiding Americans have the same rights and freedoms enjoyed by those living in gun friendly states.if we don't defend our rights we will lose them. I don't agree with the tactics of the far right (NRA) on guns or the far left (DiFi and others. There has to be a middle ground and I see the LGC as part of that with our discussions and trying to educate not browbeat others about guns.

Rather than the inconsistencies of the states, I would like to see federal laws enacted. Just let me use powder, and I will be happy. No one really needs anything more if we're being honest. What's the big deal with DiFi? She has never really done anything to infringe on rights, at least not mine. Despite the NRA propaganda she is not coming for your guns.

The "middle ground" is what I have already mentioned. That is where my enjoyment of guns lies. If others would follow suit there would not be thread after thread of anxiety on gun forums.

LibShooter wrote:

amrev360 wrote:Maybe one of our Dallas members can investigate it and provide a report on what its like, how much influence the New Black Panther Party has on it etc.

The NBPP doesn't appear to be gaining any traction among blacks in the DFW area. Perhaps it's because, in Dallas, we have a black D.A. and a black Chief of Police; and, we have a fairly reasonable number of black and Latino officers. In Arlington, we have a black CoP and a reasonable number of black and Latino officers. In Fort Worth Worth, we have a fair number of black and Latino officers, as well. Now I am not implying that things are "peachie" and that a killing like that of young Mr. Brown would not occur. What I am saying is, their is a strong political structure in place that can fight for rights issues without brandishing weapons.

Focusing solely upon "open carry" and the NBPP's impact ... they scar the shit out of liberals and conservatives, alike; and, that is a BAD outcome for 2nd rights advocates. Remember Reagan's actions while he was Governor of California, when the Panthers marched (armed) on the State House, there. Yeah ....

I am a very strong advocate of law abiding blacks arming themselves, but do so quietly .. below the radar.

The New Black Panther Party has very little in common with the original Black Panther movement. The original was based on socialistic principles while the later preaches a reactionary form of Islamic heresy. The former was inclusive the latter is exclusive.

FlintlockPhryne wrote:

TrueTexan wrote:

FlintlockPhryne wrote:

ErikO wrote: And I suppose that Madison also didn't mean to protect non-print media or cell phone traffic under the First? I guess the HUffPo and WaPo guys who got pinched at the McD's in Jennings (yes, it was the one on Jennings Station and Hall's Ferry) had it coming as they aren't in print?

I suppose you agreed with the Pistol Permit law that we got rid of in 2007?

Madison could only apply First Amendment protections to what he understood at the time. It is up to the courts to rule on where the First Amendment applies today, and reasonably that would include modern media. Also reasonable are some restrictions on the Second Amendment. Common sense dictates that we should take steps to impose sensible restrictions for the public good. Shooting is for fun. People get too wrapped up in the politics of the right to keep and bear arms. We should just enjoy it and not worry about things that were never intended to happen, like people carrying handguns. I shoot for enjoyment, not to get stressed out about it on the internet.

What do you think Madison would say about some states denying the right to keep and and bear certain arms while other states say it is okay. This is not equal rights under the the Constitution. Also "things not intended to happen' like people carrying handguns" ,people have carried handguns for all of the history of the United States. It wasn't until the the 1934 we had a national gun control law. Most laws trying to control guns of the 19th century were of the Jim Crow era and earlier slave laws. These were designed to prevent blacks from having guns.

We all shoot to have fun. I just would like to see all law abiding Americans have the same rights and freedoms enjoyed by those living in gun friendly states.if we don't defend our rights we will lose them. I don't agree with the tactics of the far right (NRA) on guns or the far left (DiFi and others. There has to be a middle ground and I see the LGC as part of that with our discussions and trying to educate not browbeat others about guns.

Rather than the inconsistencies of the states, I would like to see federal laws enacted. Just let me use powder, and I will be happy. No one really needs anything more if we're being honest. What's the big deal with DiFi? She has never really done anything to infringe on rights, at least not mine. Despite the NRA propaganda she is not coming for your guns.

The "middle ground" is what I have already mentioned. That is where my enjoyment of guns lies. If others would follow suit there would not be thread after thread of anxiety on gun forums.

Also, if there were not folks trying every year to get bills out of committee that would ban a firearm system sold to civilians for over 50 years with less than 2% of crimes committed with them, there would be less anxiety.

I may not have the knowledge or skill necessary to make a working replica of a Remington M700 but I sure can assemble a semi-auto replica of Eugene Stoner's rifle that is as accurate as a current M4. Which military-style rifle would you rather I employ, my 5 round Mosin-Nagant that is good out to 300m at a man-sized target if I do my best which is loaded with rounds that will defeat even rifle-rated vests or my AR which is good enough to over-penetrate people at 100'? Of course, with stripper clips and decent cover I could run 15 rounds through my M91/30 in ~30-45 seconds with decent accuracy at 75'. My pistols are good out to about 30' on a good day if I aim. I think the government would rather I didn't have my rifles which is funny since I am far more likely to need my handgun for self-defense.

Why would the government want my rifle?

No one needs? Lulz.

Happily, it has nothing to do with your wants and needs. Also, Heller made it quite clear that the Second means common use firearms.

Which, if appropriately applied, would mean you don't need some silly little flintlock contraption that would be more prone to blow up like a pipebomb than to act as an actual effective firearm.

However, modern use is apparently additive. So you get to keep yours, regardless of my wants and needs. Just like I get to keep mine regardless of your wants and needs.

'Murica.

Leave my flinty pipe bomb contraption out of it there, buddy.

Fukshot wrote:Leave my flinty pipe bomb contraption out of it there, buddy.

Only if I can borrow it when I cosplay as a character from Assassin's Creed.

FlintlockPhryne wrote:Madison could only apply First Amendment protections to what he understood at the time. It is up to the courts to rule on where the First Amendment applies today, and reasonably that would include modern media. Also reasonable are some restrictions on the Second Amendment. Common sense dictates that we should take steps to impose sensible restrictions for the public good. Shooting is for fun. People get too wrapped up in the politics of the right to keep and bear arms. We should just enjoy it and not worry about things that were never intended to happen, like people carrying handguns. I shoot for enjoyment, not to get stressed out about it on the internet.

How many cannons were privately owned? How about battleships? How many "Privateers" were around at the time? If you had the money and wanted to own a battleship how much did the government get involved in your purchase? Forms to fill out? Background checks? Letters of your morals and good character? Any limits on the type and model of ship you wished to have?

jubjub wrote:

Fukshot wrote:Leave my flinty pipe bomb contraption out of it there, buddy.

Only if I can borrow it when I cosplay as a character from Assassin's Creed.

I has bayonet for it. You're all set.

do so quietly .. below the radar

Wow, really?

Then again, I kinda wish the white OC goofballs would do the same, if only because they lack the discipline the the HPNGC displayed.

Everything I have seen indicates the the NBPP is a really small organization which does not do a whole lot or have a whole lot of influence except to act as a bogeyman for the racists at Fox News. When two -count em two- showed up at one precinct -count em one- precinct during the 2008 election the right completely freaked. The Bush justice department was so unimpressed that they wouldn't even file criminal charges. Then some dildo quit the Justice Department and accused the Obama justice department of being soft on black people. The right-wing noise machine picked up the refrain and they are still talking about it.