Thought this was an excellent article on the recent tragedy — the recent murder — of Jemel Roberson, a black security guard who apprehended a would-be shooter at the restaurant where he worked, and was shot to death by responding officers.www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/when-the-good-guy-with-a-gun-is-a-black-man/Roberson was the good guy with a gun that gun rights advocates champion. He was preparing to begin training to become a police officer himself. He did everything right — and still died at the hands of the government, even as fellow patrons screamed to the responding officers that he was a security guard employed by the restaurant.Gun rights advocates tend to also be supporters of the police in most to all circumstances, so this places them at a difficult intersection. The NRA made a mess of a kinda similar situation in the shooting of Philando Castile, who was not doing everything right, but still gave the officer that killed him no reason to do so. They got a lot of flack for that, including from their members. I personally quit supporting the NRA as a result of that, choosing to support the Second Amendment Foundation instead.
They are to the 2nd Amendment what the ACLU is to the 1st Amendment: Rabid, radical supporters who can’t think of a single justification to AT ALL limit their respective Amendment-of-choice.Everyone is afraid of the slippery slope downward, not accepting that we are surely wise enough to place appropriate restrictions without compromising the intent of the Founders.The ACLU never met a free speech case that, no matter how horrific, evil, or otherwise vile, they wouldn’t support.
I lived in Windsor, ONT, Canada in the 1970s. Windsor is across the river from Detroit, MI, connected by a bridge and a tunnel. At the time I lived there both were car towns (building cars and associated business like stamping and tool & die shops), but what a difference in the crime and murder rate. Detroit was and is very dangerous, and Windsor was and is very safe. In Detroit you did not want to be caught without a gun and in Windsor you better not be caught with a gun. You could walk the streets of Windsor at night, you could not drive the streets of Detroit at night (and some streets, like the Cass Corridor at anytime). My dad was born in Detroit and my wife was raised in Detroit (in the city limits). I spent much time working, dating and driving in Detroit, and I would love to call it my city (Lions, Tigers, Pistons and Red Wings). So what is the difference? We make fun of Canadians (well I do after living, going to school and working there seven years), but why is it in the good old USA on one side of the river you can get gunned down and on the other side you can feel (and be) safe?
WE may have some smart people who know the answer, but they have never been able to put it in words that Yelled at ME……THIS IS THE RIGHT WAY TO HANDLE GUNS.Yeah the slippery slope is a fact in many, many cases. Personally I see no need for the ‘fully automatic weapon’. To most people for some reason it is a high priced toy. They love to go to a firing range and ‘turn it loose.’ Or in the case of some folk I know who own some land past the back 40, turn it loose on trees and stumps. Ain’t a think wrong with that, but is it necessary? Is it reasonable?Presently the argument of ‘saving our country from within by revolution is ludicrous. You would be fighting our military. The best in the world, they have weapons that laugh at the ARs. Drones, rockets, etc. I would hope Aaron is right, that protections would be in place that would put a block on a slippery slope of confiscating weapons, can it be done?Of course Aaron is right in his conclusion of the dogmatic approach of the NRA and the ACLU. For some reason they can see no compromise. I do (I THINK) but I am not SURE! ________________Some facts but mostly just my [email protected]/
MAT,You ask a million dollar question. It is a society THAT ALLOWED THE BREEDING of GANGS. Now that it is started and embedded, without wholesale slaughter I can see no change. Until somehow they can see the error of their ways, there will be no change. I remember when I shared the idea of longer and tougher sentences and laws. BUT that has not worked Three strikes and you are out has not worked.What is your opinion of your tale of two cities? ________________Some facts but mostly just my [email protected]/
The book or the articles? To be honest, I think at best I’ve only read the first chapter of the book, Cliff Notes and watched an old movie based on the book (did our teachers really expect us to read it?). If you mean the many articles written about the contrast between Windsor and Detroit, I have seen a few over the years. Living in Windsor, where my dad was led to plant a church, and going over to Detroit to see my girl friend, my dad’s family and others, I crossed the border on some days four times. I would go pick my girlfriend up on the westside of Detroit, drive back across the border for a date and then take her home and come back again. Back then the border was not as big a deal – the tunnel was always easier to cross then the bridge. If we stayed on the US side we would go more to the west, as far as Ann Arbor. In the 70s Dearborn still had some nice/safe places to go.
Like most on the left, you attack the NRA as if its a nebulous organization funded by millionaires. Its not, its me, its my neighbors, my friends, and MILLIONS of other American gun owners, most of which barely have the money for membership, but do it because they believe strongly in our second amendment. The NRA is the very definition of grass-roots in America, and as a conservative organization has been the focus of negative liberal smear tactics for so long that people have become indoctrinated by lies. You think the MAGA hat gets people riled up, try wearing an NRA hat.Now, to the OP. This is tragic but its a problem with police training rather than the man’s right to defend himself. Its a problem that needs addressing for sure. I don’t see where being a black man has anything to do with it from a 2nd amendment standpoint. This is not much different than the case where the female cop shot the black man in his own home, its a bad cop problem (bad as in not very good at their job). I don’t think the cops were racist, just that they are not well trained, or simply not fit to be cops.
why? Because it is never enough and it never gets to the root issue.I talked to someone in Jersey and this was her take…they wanted to ban 30 round mags…okay fine…down to 15…..eventually they forced it down to 10…now they want 7.Secondly, people screech common sense gun laws. What does that mean? To those who say that, they don’t know or they spout off ban assault weapons.
The man was not shot because he was black. Similar things have happened in the past, and to white people. When the police show up at an active shooter scene and see someone with a gun, they tend to think they are encountering the shooter. This is not a race issue________________
What kind of gun …
What kind of gun training tells anyone to keep holding a gun after a shooting when police show up? You folks think the Concealed Carry Course makes you an expert in a live fire situation are really mistaken, and it may cost you your life. You may be able to carry legally, but that does not make you law enforcement. If I were a cop and had to run into a shooting, I would most likely shoot anybody who was holding a gun. As the cops say, better to be judged by 12 that killed by one.Something I remember for Infantry training in the Corps is that your have a better chance to live it you shoot at anything that looks like the enemy. The police dispatcher says active shooter at _____, multiple victims. You pull up with you adrenaline wide open and your head on a swivel. You see victims on the floor and a man standing with a gun. What are you going to do?As someone said about innocent people being shoot by a Concealed Carry Cowboy (CCC) trying to stop a shooter, the innocents were just collateral damage in a good faith effort. If the police shoot the CCC who holds on to his weapon when the police arrive in an active shooter situation, the CCC is just collateral damage. He brought it on himself.
Mat, he was a security guard who had subdued an armed intruder who was planning on committing a mass murder. What do you think he should have done, set him at a table and given him a glass of water while everyone waited for the cops to show up? Of course he was going to keep his firearm trained on him until the police arrived to take him into custody.
Gun rights advocates argue in favor of more permissive firearm licensing and permitting under the assumption that a good guy with a gun can act to stop a situation much faster than responding law enforcement, and IMO they’re exactly right.However, if this viewpoint from Mat is correct, and if police are perfectly within their rights to start shooting at anyone with a gun when they respond to an incident, then gun rights advocates need to hang it up and we need to have a full firearms ban with a buyback. According to Mat, it is unreasonable for a private citizen to stop a crime and use a firearm to detain a would-be shooter until police arrive to take that shooter into custody. If he does so, it’s his own fault if he gets gunned down by responding officers. It is
The issue is the problem this causes for the good guy with a gun narrative. It’s irresponsible to encourage people to bear arms if the cops are going to gun them down if they ever use them to stop a situation. It rarely happens________________
Cops shoot an armed black man.It’s what they do.How is this a question about 2nd amendment rights again? The cops did the killing – not an armed citizen.If there is someone at fault – it’s the cops. Perhaps we should just give all the cops batons only________________
Come on Dave, Mat’s world?