New Black Panther Party says to carry arms in Cleveland if legal

They have a right.

Not really any more to say on this.

(shrugs)

Hashim Nzinga: you're probably 90% white.. you're barely black at all..

"Bring your signs and support, leave the guns at home"

^^ That would be the message I'd pass along if I was organizing a protest/rally. Dunno, but these things always tend to get infiltrated with provocateurs who want to start something.

Someone always infiltrates, starts trouble and the entire group is blamed for the fallout. Having more guns around just increases the chance of things ending badly.

a reply to: Liquesence

Didn't say they didn't.

They have the right to carry.

IF they get stupid the POLICE have a RIGHT to shoot them.

End of story.

In my opinion this is about as STUPID as it gets.

The police ALL across this country ARE on edge.

5 of their own where just gunned down another 7 shot by a 'BLACK' supremacist.

There will be those with itchy trigger fingers.

Cleveland+Black Panthers=recipe for DISASTER.

I hope cooler heads will prevail.

Don't be surprised if it ends in a blood bath.

a reply to: neo96

Didn't say they didn't.

Never said you didn't, which is why I asked.

They have the right to carry.

Thank you. I'm satisfied.

a reply to: neo96

IF they get stupid the POLICE have a RIGHT to shoot them.

If the police get stupid do they have a right to shoot them?

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: neo96

IF they get stupid the POLICE have a RIGHT to shoot them.

If the police get stupid do they have a right to shoot them?

Nope.

a reply to: neo96

Why not?

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: neo96

IF they get stupid the POLICE have a RIGHT to shoot them.

If the police get stupid do they have a right to shoot them?

Maybe we should hold police to the same standards as politicians.

hahahahahahahahahaha

a reply to: JimNasium

If the community is 40% black then the PD should be 40% black

I'm not at all meaning this to sound nasty but good luck finding 40% or 30% of people that would qualify to be police in some areas. 25% of black people are convicted felons, I'm sure a significant portion have non felony records that would disqualify them and I doubt many from those more troubled areas would even want to be cops. Then there are the other qualifications like passing a lie detector test and not having used certain drugs within x amount of time and reading comprehension. These are all areas where black people have trouble sadly. I don't think it's because they're black, I think it has more to do with economic position and that you'll find the same problems in any low income area.

It's nice to say that communities should police themselves, but when the community is a cess pool (and I'm not just talking about black people I'm talking about scuzzy places to include backwoods redneck strongholds that would have the exact same problems) do you WANT them policing themselves? It's just going to breed up more corruption.

Let's say your a black cop, why would you WANT to go police a bad black neighborhood? You can't start paying people of certain races more to incentivize them.

I think what really needs to happen is helping people with education and trying to get these communities to change their behaviors along with police. The cops aren't making people murder each other in Chicago.

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: Krakatoa
a reply to: Logarock

Why are you denigrating the conversation with derogatory remarks in a stylized bit of grammar? Who is saying anything like that. I am saying that if they are legally allowed to carry a firearm for self-defense, then they are well within their rights to do so, regardless of your opinion of their politics and speculation on their motives.

It's obvious. The right to open carry shouldn't apply to a group of mostly blacks one believes is "racist."

Is that a sarcastic remark? I cannot tell since it is no obvious to me. If not, the right to carry applies to ALL citizens that have been through ALL the restrictive "gun control" measures first. If they have been found to not have passed the background checks, local police department, and federal regulations, then WHY NOT? What have they, as individuals, done that you think would NOT be covered by the current system?

Rights are inherent in the individual, not the group.

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: neo96

IF they get stupid the POLICE have a RIGHT to shoot them.

If the police get stupid do they have a right to shoot them?

Nope.

If they perceive the police to be a tyrannical arm of the government, when do they have the right to exercise that right in self-defense of tyrannical government?

a reply to: Domo1

I think that if we encourage BLM to patrol their own neighborhoods then things will quiet down.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: neo96

IF they get stupid the POLICE have a RIGHT to shoot them.

If the police get stupid do they have a right to shoot them?

Nope.

If they perceive the police to be a tyrannical arm of the government, when do they have the right to exercise that right in self-defense of tyrannical government?

Well...see... that's a tricky question to answer. In *certain* situations, under *certain* circumstances, deemed by *certain* people who have a *certain* agenda it's warranted.

I think as long as it could be a scene from the movie "Red Dawn" then I think it's OK to go full mall ninja. Otherwise, never go full mall ninja.

a reply to: neo96

IF they get stupid the POLICE have a RIGHT to shoot them. End of story.

define stupid and what would allow cops to shoot?

back on topic, surely the nra should be supporting this move?
they preach more guns are needed after every mass shooting and, would have some believe evil democrats scrapped the second amendment.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: neo96

IF they get stupid the POLICE have a RIGHT to shoot them.

If the police get stupid do they have a right to shoot them?

Nope.

If they perceive the police to be a tyrannical arm of the government, when do they have the right to exercise that right in self-defense of tyrannical government?

Newsflash.

PERCEPTION isn't reality.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Perhaps. But then, it could result in a very profitable protection racket too. Not because they are black, but because power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. There are many, many, prior examples of protection rackets happening in NYC in the 70's and 80's when the funding for the police departments was cut to the bone during annual fiscal crises.

Which is better for those local citizens in that case?

BTW: I do not know the answer.

a reply to: stinkelbaum

Remember Dallas?

A 20 armed guys then it went down to one 'lone gunman'.

Remember that one guys who face got plastered all over the news for open carrying ?

TOO much can go wrong.

EVERYONE knows it.

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: neo96

IF they get stupid the POLICE have a RIGHT to shoot them.

If the police get stupid do they have a right to shoot them?

Nope.

If they perceive the police to be a tyrannical arm of the government, when do they have the right to exercise that right in self-defense of tyrannical government?

Newsflash.

PERCEPTION isn't reality.

Nice attempt to dodge the question.

If they perceive the police to be a tyrannical arm of the government, when do they have the right to exercise that right in self-defense of tyrannical government?