Does Actions of BLM meet criteria for stand against tyranny?

The right to walk down the street having done none of those things and be free of persecution, arrest, imprisonment, even death at the hands of government for no other reason than the color of their skin.

These men did nothing that has not been talked about by the NRA and other groups as being "necessary" in defense of our rights.

Where is the praise that came for Cliven Bundy?

 

dadoalex got wrecked in his own troll thread.

 

Well said

 

Police go where crime is. If it is mostly in black communities like it is here, more blacks will be stopped. Mostly men white or black are stopped by police because they cause 96% of crime though they are only 50% of the population. Are men being unfairly targeted?

You have bought into a lie promoted by an agenda.

 

Got something from this century?

 

Was racism invented in this century?
Is racism no longer existent?

I point out to you that the things you say today paraphrasing "if those BLM people would just stop protesting everything would be OK," and "if Black people would just not do those things," were the same things people like you were saying in denying race issues 50 years ago.

 

Really? Remember Bob Vogel? Sure you do, look him up. He got famous making big drug busts on I95 back in the 1980s. He had his "magic formula" for "knowing which cars were carrying drugs. Turned out the formula was

A black man + Driving North on i95 + Large older model car = Drugs

Seemed that the vast majority of his pretextual stops were of Black men and that only a small percentage of those stops yielded any arrest or even citation. Still, those innocent of any crime were stopped, detained, threatened, searched, and had property seized for no other reason than the color of their skin and the direction of travel.

So, I guess the question to you is...

How many Black communities are located on the shoulder of I95 between St. Augustine and New Smyrna Beach?

I believe the correct answer is ZERO which kind of makes your point pointless.

 

In case you missed it, this ain't the 80's.

 

I get your devils advocate play. I do that myself at times.

Im still waiting for the BLM folks to denounce the democratic party since they were the party of slavery.

We both have a long wait, what kind of beer you drinking i'll buy?

 

Obviously.
Of the scores of reasons one might have to own a firearm of any kind, to oppose tyranny is minor.

Your claim to this effect is unsupportable, and thus, meaningless.

- - - Updated - - -

Sorry that we did not go along with your pile of straw.
Try harder next time.

 

Wait...
You believe that you have the right to walk down the street and that if you are stopped, absent any probable cause or reasonable suspicion, by a police officer, who detains you while he checks to see if you are doing something illegal, your right to walk down the street has been violated?
Really?

 

Law enforcement does not meet the definition of tyranny. Actions by some bad cops should not translate into LE being equal to tyranny.

Jmo here

 

So, then, you're saying that "standing against government tyranny" ala the Bundy's is NOT a valid reason for owning the types of firearms used in Dallas and Baton Rouge?

Well then, if that is not a valid reason, please state why this has been the stance of pro-gun types and what then is the valid reason.

 

Perhaps you're not familiar with that "Constitution" thing...

"[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

You need a little thing called Probable Cause. Absent probable cause, as described in your scenario, yes, the stop is illegal.

 

Because they are your heroes on the left. The right doesn't support killing cops, the left does, and has for a long time.

Your entire OP is simply projection.

 

One of BLM's founding fathers, Louis Head, Mike browns stepfather, incited his followers to violence, looting, and arson ... live on CNN. So, with overt rhetoric calling for violent acts against the groups perceived enemies, my question is : Does BLM meet the criteria for being identified as a terrorist network? Abu al Baghdadi, the leader of ISIS, hides id Raqqa inspiring fanatics to attack their enemies in the same manner? Obama authorizes hundreds of leathal drone strikes to sumarily execute suspected terrorists, without benefit of a trial, yet will not even make an attempt to reign in domestic terrorists who espouse violence against police. Someone has inspired these assassins in Dallas, and Baton Rouge, and they are terrorists speading violent propoganda.

 

There is only one way to "stand against tyranny". That is with our lawful and peaceful revolution.

UNITY in support of our law, to enforce our law. This is natural law we can simply unify around.

Do you agree and accept that the framers of the founding documents intended for us to alter or abolish government destructive to our unalienable rights?

Do you agree and accept that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity adequate to effectively alter or abolish?

 

I do agree.

That's why they created the democratic processes.

 

BLM is a terrist group that does not respect individual rights, they should be rounded up before they cause more deaths

 

And of course none of that has anything to do with my point. My point is that if you are going to hang on to the dead past you'll never be able to step into the present let alone the future. Is racism still about of course? It's called affirmative action and as long as it exists there will be race baiting horses asses of one sort or the other using it to justify their horse crap. The guy in Minnesota was stopped because he bad a tail light out, not because he was black. He was almost certainly shot because cops, a group in which a certain degree of paranoia is a survival trait, have had that paranoia driven over the top by the roll call of dead cops generated by black lives matter's incessant demand for more of the same. And lets not ignore that the cop that shot him was Latino.

 

Not about BLM despite the moderator change to the title.

About the failure of the NRA and other gun groups to praise these men for taking up arms in opposition to a government harassing, arresting, and killing Black men for no legal reason.

Use of firearms to oppose government oppression has been a central theme of the pro-gun groups and their specific justification for their claimed need of assault style weapons and large capacity ammunition systems.

 

What?

The cop in Minnesota said clearly on the radio he was stopping him because he was black and had wide set nostrils.
Past performance is not an indicator of future performance? The taillight was a PRETEXT for an otherwise illegal stop.

And, despite the disclaimers, past performance is the BEST indicator of future performance.

But, let's use your logic...

Man accused and found guilty of being a serial rapist. Apologizes, says he'll never do it again so we let him walk free?
Convicted pedophile wants to teach in a daycare. Says we should ignore history and hire him. That OK?

The investigation into the police in Ferguson found an ongoing pattern of abuse of Blacks by the Ferguson PD. Oops. That was just last year. But, I suppose we should ignore all that because it's in the past.

Please!

 

What the investigation found in the main was that Ferguson is a majority black community and that most of them are not rich. And because of that, a stop for one item usually resulted in findings of multiple violations. And that the town was basically funded by such violations because the tax base sucked. By the way the majority of the city council in Ferguson was also African American. They knew this was going on and did nothing to stop it. So I ask you were the cops behaving in a racist fashion or were they simply acting as their majority black city council pressured them to do?

 

Have you heard the phrase "systemic racism?" Look it up. It provides a wonderful explanation for why a Black cop would harass a Black citizens.

BTW, on the plantations the salves were generally managed, that would be overseen by a fellow Black slave. That did not make the system less racist.

 

If you read my posts in this thread, you'd already have an answer to that question.
Give it a try and let me know what you find.