Al Sharpton on guns in black neighborhoods:

[Tejas]

Gun supporters and advocates always champion the 2nd Amendment and our right to bear arms. But this right doesn’t mean that everyone should possess a weapon. It doesn’t mean guns should be so readily accessible to the least stable among us. And it doesn’t mean that we don’t need stricter gun laws to keep them out of the hands of criminals and those with a complete disregard for human life. Perhaps the fierce gun proponents need to take a walk in our neighborhoods, where young children have to dodge bullets just to get an education, or where mothers and fathers spend sleepless nights figuring out ways to keep their families safe. Or maybe they need to have a conversation with Zurana Horton’s 13 children who will now have to somehow survive without a mother for the rest of their lives.

http://newsone.com/nation/newsonestaff4/al-sharpton-gun-laws/



Appears to me that criminals and those with a complete disregard for human life are the problem. What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

[Remmah2]

1. Wow!

I can't believe what I just read.

[jmg257]

4. What is so surprising? Al is pushing for more control...

Stricter gun laws to cut down on gun trafficking so guns aren't as readily accessible.

He wants to "focus how guns get into the hands of the wrong people"...and "stop guns from coming into our community -- period" as the way to reduce/eliminate the number of senseless acts of violence.

"How to end violence? Get rid of guns."

[GreenStormCloud]

17. Getting rid of guns will end violence? ROFL. LOL.

I suppose that you also believe that nobody was violent before guns were invented. :sarcasm:

[jmg257]

19. Don't laugh too hard - you supposed wrong.

It wasn't me who said it...did you not see the quotes?

"How to end violence? Get rid of guns."

If you have to think too hard about who did say it :sarcasm:, then I'll give you a hint...see what the OP is about.

[GreenStormCloud]

26. My apologies. Didn't notice the quotes. N/T

[SteveM]

36. No surprise; I mean, the efforts to stop dope from "coming into our community..."

have been successful. Really worked. Sure. wow.

[ileus]

2. Those evil guns always tempting and victimizing people.

[gejohnston]

3. he is missing some people for the walk

If I understand him correctly, Sharpton has a good straw man under construction. I have yet to meet any gun rights advocate who thinks that everyone should be able to own a gun. We support many of the current laws, the NICS system put in place by the Brady Bill was supported by the NRA.
I would propose this to Mr. Sharpton, it is not " fierce gun proponents need to take a walk in our neighborhoods, where young children have to dodge bullets just to get an education" it is those who think continuing the war on drugs is good for the country.
Even better yet, how about the drug users, including middle class and rich people who drive to that area to buy their dope and say "oh my pot does not hurt anyone" should walk through those areas to see how their dope money is being spent. It is a war for market share. The money they give to their connection for a bag is used to buy guns and ammo from the underworld market to settle "business disputes". If there were no demand for drugs, there would be no gun fights over market share.
Before the WOD, if these gangs had a gun, it was a homemade zip gun. They could not afford guns so they settled for tire chains and knives. I am old enough to remember that. Then Nixon's WOD and crack made the street level trade more profitable. Just like the mob going from cheap pistols to machine guns during Prohibition.
I'll walk those neighborhoods with you Mr. Sharpton, unarmed and unafraid. I have lived in those neighborhoods. All I ask is bring some of those bong owners from the "nice part of town" to see what their money is fueling.

[msongs]

5. if those bong owners could grow their own, a win for everyone except the dealers nt

[gejohnston]

6. this is very true too

I honestly think our drug laws should go back before 1937. My point is not to be a drug warrior, far from it. My point has more to do with it is a bigger issue than "oh if we pass this gun law, this will do something." Of course there will still be the hard drugs, but I doubt the market for coke and heroin is as big as for pot. At least, I hope not.
There was a flap about the ATF telling FFLs to refuse sales to patients using Medical. Given federal law, they were correct. I would support repealing the federal pot ban and amending the Gun Control Act of 1968 to reflect it.

[SteveM]

37. If bong owners weren't threatened with seizure of property/real estate...

but they are; hence, the purchase from someone who has those concerns "covered." All a "bong owner" has to worry about is simple possession.

Prohibition stinks.

[gejohnston]

40. I agree

[SteveM]

43. I spend outrageous $ for local hot house stuff, but can't safely grow it at home.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

7. good grief

pretty condesending attitude he has towards his own race. Wonder if he has heard of The High Point Strategy.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hoyt]

13. More pro-gun BS from right wingers. Stossel is wrong on guns.

[Tejas]

16. The convicts Stossel interviewed, are they RW shills?

[Simo 1939_1940]

27. I guess I had post #8 deleted because I linked to what is

considered a right wing site. To reiterate the point - Stossel asked Sharpton what he thought would happen if U.S. citizens were allowed to carry concealed firearms. Trick question, of course -- and Sharpton took the bait hook, line and sinker. His response was along the lines of "Terror would reign" -- displaying his ignorance of the fact that the majority of states at the time of the question were "shall issue" w/regard to concealed carry. Sharpton is hardly the only high-profile progressive that would flunk a remedial gun control knowledge quiz.

[Hoyt]

9. Sharpton is not perfect, but he's said something gunners should listen to and think about.

[gejohnston]

10. I stand by my post above

it is part straw man and part, god knows what.

[Hoyt]

11. So let's say that we end the "drug wars" -- you gonna quit carrying in public and promoting it?

[gejohnston]

12. I remember mentioning to a couple of people

I take it you have not seen it, I don't carry other than the Wyoming wilderness. As in, where the deer out number humans. I simply never took the time to apply for a Florida CCW. That is my own choice for my own reasons. I don't promote nor do I discourage.
To answer your question, I can't quit carrying for the same reason I can't quit smoking.

[Hoyt]

14. So you think the other gunners who were standing in line at permit office - day one - will quit?

Nope, don't think so. But, that would be a good thing to do while passing reasonable gun laws to restrict gunners in public.

[gejohnston]

15. define reasonable?

That seems like a talking point everyone uses but never defines. On the rare occasion someone actually answers the question, it usually amounts to current law they did not know existed. I think most current federal laws are reasonable. There are a few tweaks I would make in either direction. Each person has their own situation and reasons. It is not for either of us to judge.
My view is that if a restriction is lifted or enacted and nothing happens, then it is theater and best left lifted. Nothing as in empirical evidence demonstrating compelling state interest. I tune out references to vague concepts like "for the good of civil society"
I don't think the drug war and CCWs are related. One has nothing to do with the other.

[PavePusher]

22. If the WOD ended, and crime went down... why should lawful people stop carrying?

We aren't part of the problem.

[Hoyt]

53. Good point. Gunners only care about themselves. As long as they've got that warm and fuzzy gun

tucked down their pants, the hell with what is good for society.

[gejohnston]

57. have to ask

what turned you to the dark side? Were you always on the dark side?

[Union Scribe]

68. Quite the cartoon world you've drawn for yourself.

Must be tough evenly applying paint with a brush that gigantic though.

[rl6214]

71. Why are you always so worried about what's in peoples pants?

Are you some sort of pervert? Are you just a sexual predator waiting to happen?

[Hoyt]

75. We are talking yahoos with concealed guns in this forum. Do you wear your guns around your neck?

[AtheistCrusader]

92. Shoulder holster, left side.

I don't put guns in my pants.

[Atypical Liberal]

80. But CCW permit holders aren't bad for society!

Good point. Gunners only care about themselves. As long as they've got that warm and fuzzy gun tucked down their pants, the hell with what is good for society.

But CCW permit holders are good for society! They are less likely to be involved in crimes than non-CCW permit holders.

Even if there was zero crime, there would still be no problem with CCW permit holders carrying firearms - they are not the problem.

[AtheistCrusader]

91. Firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens IS good for society.

[rl6214]

70. You still won't answer my question

WTF is a "gunner"?

Only reference I have ever seen for this is in a military setting ie:door gunner

[SteveM]

38. Who's "promoting carrying in public?" Concerning the "drug wars"...

The longer our nation waits before legalizing and regulating what are now illegal drugs, the less our crime reduction "dividend," as the powerful cartels will have so much money, they can influence and corrupt other aspects of government and society, if not become a major player in governments.

Prohibition stinks.

[Euromutt]

67. Hel-lo, non sequitur!

I thought the topic at hand here was violent crime--particularly fatal violent crime--in "black neighborhoods." The only connection the topic of licensed concealed carry has with this is that both involve handguns. You might as well ask, "So let's say we manage to stop overfishing of Northern and Southern bluefin--are you going to stop eating yellowfin?" for all the relevance one bears to the other; they're both tuna, but while the bluefin are listed as "critically endangered" by the IUCN, the yellowfin is of "least concern."

But you always have to bring it round to your personal hobby-horse, don't you, Hoyt? Seriously, work out some new material because your current schtick has gone beyond stale and well into putrid. May I suggest you read Ebon Musings' "How Not To Convert an Atheist"? Yes, it's originally advice for theists debating atheists, but many of the points are sound advice for discussion on any subject; in particular, you might want to check out the ones labeled "Don't use threats, personal insults, or ad hominem attacks," "Don't try to be an armchair psychologist," Don't assume that any one <pro-RKBAer> speaks for all atheists" and "Don't refuse to consider the <pro-RKBA> viewpoint honestly and seriously." Bear those in mind and you might actually get someone to take you halfway seriously.

[Hoyt]

76. Good advice if we were discussing religion. Guns are different.

To beat the poor, dead horse a few more times, it is very difficult to discuss anything "honestly and seriously" here with people who have to strap on a gun or two to venture outside into our public parks, churches, restaurants, squares, streets, etc.

[Euromutt]

77. How would you know, Hoyt?

It's not like you've ever made an attempt to discuss anything honestly and seriously on this sub-forum. All you ever do is regurgitate minor variations on the three sound bites you've managed to concoct, all of which serve to get people's backs up, not to foster "a robust and respectful discussion focused on ideas" (as the forum rules page puts it). And in spite of this, quite a few pro-RKBAers have tried time and again to have reasoned arguments with you, only to have their attempts rebuffed. So don't insult my intelligence by pretending "it is very difficult to discuss anything 'honestly and seriously' here"; you'd find it quite easy if you ever made even a modicum of an effort, instead of behaving like a complete prick.

[Common Sense Party]

86. +1,000,000

Well said.

Of course, it's in one ear and out the other.

[Euromutt]

89. Quite so

Which is why I've finally put Hoyt on "ignore." He never had anything to say other than the aforementioned three soundbites ("guns carried in public pollute society," "practice shooting at silhouette targets and fast-drawing in front of the mirror" and "can't leave the house without strapping on a gun or two"; seriously, somebody find me one post of Hoyt's that didn't incorporate one of these three) so I'm done feeding that particular troll.

[AtheistCrusader]

93. Especially when you continually mischaracterize, and smear them.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

20. We have and rejected it for the nonsense it is

Have to wonder the last time he was actually in the neighborhoods he spoke of.

[iverglas]

31. "Have to wonder the last time he was actually in the neighborhoods he spoke of."

Do you really?

I assume the implied pronoun there is "I", because I don't think anybody else has to wonder at all.

Ms Horton was killed in Brownsville. Sharpton was born there, and according to one website I see, still lives there; if that is out of date, I would think it is not by long.

Instead of "wondering", how about you try making a claim and backing it up?

[Atypical Liberal]

79. It was racist and highly offensive.

The implication here is that African-Americans can't be trusted with firearms. It's disgusting.

[RSillsbee]

18. Dammit! I unrecced by mistake so add a rec to the count in your mind

My opinion is that it's more of the same antigun demagoguery

[burf]

21. You can have some of mine. n/t

[PavePusher]

23. Al Sharpton is a blowhard and a political ass. Fuck him. n/t

[spin]

24. In my opinion we should keep guns out of the hands of criminals but allow honest ...

and responsible people to own them and even legally carry them for self defense. The neighborhood an individual lives in is totally irrelevant.

All American citizens in ALL neighborhoods should have the right to use a firearm to stop an attack that would lead to serious injury or death. I see no problem with REASONABLE restrictions being placed on who can own a firearm nor with requiring a person who desires to carry a concealed weapon to have to meet certain requirements such as passing a background check and passing a training course.

I feel that the requirements for owning a firearm and for carrying a concealed weapon in Florida are reasonable.


A summary of the firearm laws in Florida can be viewed at:
What Are the Gun Laws in Florida? http://crime.about.com/od/gunlawsbystate/p/gunlaws_fl.htm


The information on acquiring a concealed weapons permit in Florida can be found at:
Florida Concealed Carry Permit Information http://www.usacarry.com/florida_concealed_carry_permit_information.html

[Francis Marion]

25. If Al supports gun bans for black folks...

That is also the Klan position, and the Slave Code position.

Strange bedfellows!

And yet, a serious problem of mentality hurts the black community: Misuse of guns is glamorized, celebrated, tolerated in the gang and gang affiliate subsets of black culture.

We'd be a lot better off keeping our guns and freedom, grounding ourselves in history and education, and dumping the cultural garbage of gang violence, drugs, and lawlessness.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

60. Al supports that for black neighborhoods since it would not apply to him

He doesn't live there and such restrictions are not applied to the wealthy and powerful. Gun control is both racist and classist. Al is a good example of the latter.

[iverglas]

63. are you going to substantiate this ever?

What is Sharpton's address?

Calling Al Sharpton a racist ... you've got gall, if nothing else. Nothing else being what you've got.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

69. Actually I accused him of being classist

Al is an opportunist with some serious baggage. I assume as a legal sort you are aware of at least some of it.

[Tejas]

74. Some say McKinnon might call Sharpton classless.

[rl6214]

72. Reading is fundamental

He said he was classist

[iverglas]

73. yeah, but the mostest importantest thing

is that he's a Democrat (who supports Democratic Party policies).

:rofl:

[AtheistCrusader]

94. I would have voted for him in '08

If he'd cleared the primary.

[iverglas]

28. you should have taken Sharpton's advice

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/oct/26/zurana-horton-hero-children-gunfire

At first blush, it's the kind of story made for the insta-news cycle of 21st-century media: a mother picking up her kid up from school in Brooklyn spots a rooftop sniper, throws herself into the line of fire to protect a group of schoolkids and, while saving them, is shot and killed herself.

Most likely, if Zurana Horton were white and blonde, she would have been catapulted to the top of the news, her short and tragic story the stuff of People magazine covers and breathless segments on the Today show. After all, we're a society obsessed with the stories of pretty white women and girls who come up missing or dead. Witness the endless coverage over Natalee Holloway, or Caylee Anthony, or the scary story du jour: missing baby Lisa.

But Horton, who was 34, was neither white nor blonde nor particularly photogenic: the first published picture of her was a blurry shot where large sunglasses obscured most of her smiling face. Nor did she have the kind of squeaky-clean narrative that fits easily into the feel-good story mould. She was poor, unmarried and the mother of 13; she lived in Brownsville, one of Brooklyn's most notorious neighbourhoods. And she was black. On Monday, police charged three youths with the shooting.

She's just one of the many, many people in the US who would be alive today IF THE GUN HAD BEEN REMOVED FROM HER EQUATION.

You really really really really don't get killed by people throwing rocks or knives or pillows or punches from rooftops. Really.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Straw Man]

87. How about shopping carts?

You really really really really don't get killed by people throwing rocks or knives or pillows or punches from rooftops. Really.

http://nyaccidentlawyers.com/?p=696

Oops, that's only critical condition. A little bed rest, a little rehab: day at the beach, really.

Do overpasses count? Cinder blocks?

http://www.usroads.com/journals/p/rilj/9710/ri971002.htm

Or... rocks?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P67FzT2aiso

[ObamaFTW2012]

29. Al Needs to Shut His Mouth

Who does he think he is? Did somebody anoint him the king of black people? Black folks have a right to be armed just as much as any white folks, but if you listen to old Al speak it's like he thinks we're too stupid and/or undisciplined enough to own guns, and shouldn't have access to them.

A small segment of society is almost entirely responsible for all the bad things that happen in America involving guns. Unfortunately, many of the people that make up that small segment are black (black males 16-24yo, actually), but that doesn't mean the majority of black people who don't commit crimes and don't hurt others should be denied their rights.

That guy makes me sick to my stomach. I am offended by his "I know what's best for you peons" racist bullshit.

[iverglas]

33. can you give us some quotes please?

... if you listen to old Al speak it's like he thinks we're too stupid and/or undisciplined enough to own guns, and shouldn't have access to them.

Where do I need to go to listen to this, please?


What an amazing number of African-Americans show up in this forum when duty calls ...

[ObamaFTW2012]

39. From what I've seen

Al Sharpton never explicitly states such a sentiment, but after hearing his various statements and speeches over the years, it is quite clear that he feels nothing but contempt and distrust for black people. His empathy for ordinary black folks ends when the cameras and microphones shut off.

[iverglas]

42. why would I be surprised

that someone here would claim to "see" such dreadful things about a Democratic Party figure?

And yet nothing to back up the claim ... nothing ...

:rofl:

[ObamaFTW2012]

46. Al Sharpton is to Democrats

What Bill O'Reilly is to Republicans. Both make those with whom they align look like fools, or worse. Al has the added insult of acting as the self-appointed spokesman for black people in America. I want Al to stay as far away from Democrats and "black people issues" as possible.

I'm posting here and trying to get plans done so my guys will be able to work tomorrow, so I have neither the time nor the interest in finding and dissecting Al Sharpton posts for and with you tonight. I've stated my opinion of the man, and that's it.

[iverglas]

48. Ah

You speak for Democrats.

Sorry, I hadn't realized whom I was addressing.

I've stated my opinion of the man, and that's it.

Actually, no.

You've made a number of quite unpleasant allegations against him, none of which you can apparently substantiate.

Hm, I guess I actually had a pretty fair idea of whom I was addressing in the first place.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

61. He is a seriously flawed instruments with tremendous baggage

His support is mixed even in the black community

[virginia mountainman]

30. Al Sharpton: My Listeners Overwhelmingly Support Supreme Court's Gun Rights Ruling!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIiNI6Z3cIU

[iverglas]

35. that sure is the title of that video

Funny thing is, what I heard Sharpton say in the audio was:

"90% of the calls I got yesterday were disappointed in the Supreme Court"

I assume the other voice is his producer or some such. He notes that most people appeared apathetic. And for pity's sake, do we actually think that comments on the show's Facebook page on this issue (or any other, but I'll say especially this one, knwing the habits of the gun militant brigade) come from people who share Sharpton's values?

The owner of that youtube channel appears to be an extreme right-wing piece of shit; did you imagine no one would click on its name?

Not sure why you're looking at that, let alone posting it here, let alone telling us something that appears to be the opposite of the truth.

[gejohnston]

41. not according to the closed caption

He said some were some on both sides "today" but most were supporting the supreme court "yesterday". That is according to Google's speech to text function(beta).

[iverglas]

44. "My Listeners Overwhelmingly Support Supreme Court's Gun Rights Ruling! "

What special accoutrement am I needing to get Sharpton to say that?

That was the question, you may have noticed.

I wonder whether I expect a response from our virginia mountainman, I wonder, as to why this disgusting right-wing and obviously lying youtube user is being cited to us in this forum. Maybe somebody else will ask him ...

[gejohnston]

45. unless you can show how the channel owner

can manipulate the closed caption (a beta version of Google's text to speech) it is not obviously lying. Why did VM cite him? Because he is there. Expect an answer from VM? Ask him.

[iverglas]

47. let's try this again

The youtube user who posted the audio segment assigned a name to it, which virginia mountainman quoted in his post, claiming it to be words spoken by Al Sharpton.

You now tell me that the closed caption says:

He said some were some on both sides "today" but most were supporting the supreme court "yesterday".

Is this "My Listeners Overwhelmingly Support Supreme Court's Gun Rights Ruling!"?

If not, what is your point?

Do you hear (or see) "My Listeners Overwhelmingly Support Supreme Court's Gun Rights Ruling!" somewhere in that audio? Can you tell me the time point where I should listen for it?

[gejohnston]

50. 1:23

"90 percent were supporters of the supreme court." People on both sides of the right/left divide have issues with Mr. Sharpton (I don't call anyone by religious titles. Even military chaplains, I addressed as their rank never "chaplain" "father" or "rabbi") for their own reasons. Mine is that he is not very articulate.

[iverglas]

51. well

Indeed I may have misunderstood that. I had heard it as "disappointed in the Supreme Court".

But seriously ... talk about your self-selecting polls. One day of calls to a radio talk show.

After a very different balance the previous day, a sudden change on the second day ... we don't imagine there was a concerted campaign to get the gun militants on the line on the second day?

Gimme that proverbial break.

He did say "90% of the calls I got yesterday" -- NOT "my listeners overwhelmingy". I'm sure he knew what was going on.

(I don't believe I used the honorific "Rev.", which I too do not use. I generally use surnames only, as is the practice in newspapers in Canada. I explained to a priest who accompanied a client family of mine once that I couldn't/wouldn't call him "Father". I forget what we settled on, probably first names, but I got a Christmas card from him, from "not your father Bob". ;) )

[petronius]

54. The timing suggests otherwise, doesn't it? If the people supporting the SC decision

were calling in first ("yesterday" in the clip), it seems like those were his listeners, not a 'get out the calls' campaign. And then he concludes with that story of the woman stopping him on the street. He may have been surprised, but it sounds to me that what he is relating is that his genuine listeners really do want their guns (as he put it)...

[iverglas]

56. right, so I got it backwards again?

Listen, basically, we know how the right wing astroturfs call-in shows. I doubt that they ignore Sharpton's show. Even without the astroturf, he did say that a lot of people were apathetic. It really isn't an issue that riles up anybody but the true believers; we know that well.

Sharpton didn't say his listeners overwhelmingly supported anything.

He said 90% of his callers supported the Supreme Court.

I don't think he's stupid, and I think he knew what he was saying.

And I have never taken the callers to a call-in show to be representative of anything but themselves.

And I am certainly never surprised at the ability of the right wing to persuade people it is acting in their interests. Never.

[petronius]

58. Yes, you got it backward (i.e. wrong), and neither astroturf nor the RW is relevant

:shrug:

[iverglas]

62. mmm ... sez you?

There was a post here recently urging people to go "vote" in a poll about the Canadian firearms registry ... none of the people it was addressed to actually being Canadian.

Tell me about how astroturf and the right wing are not relevant. :eyes:

[petronius]

64. This thread isn't about the Canadian registry, nor is DU the right wing

(And DUing a poll - although personally I've never seen the point of it - isn't really 'astroturf' in the common usage of that term.) If you were in fact participating in this sub-thread with sincerity and candor, you'd have posted none of those things.

So yeah - sez me (and anyone else with intellectual integrity and genuinely attempting to engage in civil discourse here).

[iverglas]

65. I didn't say it was, and I didn't say it is

and I don't take you as one of those concrete thinkers.

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[petronius]

52. Google has a subtitling function that works on YouTube?

How do you access it?

[gejohnston]

55. click on the CC

then then go to transcribe audio. it is still in the beta and quite crude.

[petronius]

59. Extremely cool, thank you! Definitely a bit crude, but still helpful...

:toast:

[Atypical Liberal]

78. Holy shit that is some racist, paternalistic shit!

"In response to the recent murder of Zurana Horton, a 34-year-old mother of 13 who was killed by a stray bullet last Friday, Rev. Al Sharpton is calling for an end to gun possession in African-American communities."

What is the implication here? That African-Americans can't responsibly own firearms?

[Hoyt]

81. Myopic view of what he is saying -- basically communities would be better off not arming up like you

guys hope for.

[jmg257]

82. It would be nice if they read the original article, and not someone

else's summary.

"But what we do not focus on enough is how guns have gotten into the hands of the wrong people in the first place, and why they are so readily accessible to them."

"Gun supporters and advocates always champion the 2nd Amendment and our right to bear arms. But this right doesn't mean that everyone should possess a weapon. It doesn't mean guns should be so readily accessible to the least stable among us. And it doesn't mean that we don't need stricter gun laws to keep them out of the hands of criminals and those with a complete disregard for human life."

"The trafficking of guns in this country is it an astronomical level"

Though he does summarize with: "Get guns out of the community and stop them from ever finding their way back in. Together, we can save ourselves -- and the next generation.", so it appears he would be very happy having ALL guns removed, he certainly seems more concerned with better controlling them 1st.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-al-sharpton/gun-violence_b_1034944.html?ncid=txtlnkushpmg00000016

Sharpton is calling for more gun control. Likely he would be happy if they were all gone. He is NOT stating that black communities can't handle guns. Though I do wish he would also stress focusing on the causes of violence, which are not usually the gun's fault.

[Atypical Liberal]

84. Again, highly condescending and paternalistic.

As if people in African-American communities aren't capable of responsible firearm ownership.

[Hoyt]

85. You two are being obtuse. I'm against any community allowing guns in public.

Does that help you? In other words, Sharpton is right for everyone -- including you guys. Hope you are better at deciding when you should touch your gun in public.

And please don't make the equally obtuse comment -- "but what about LE?"

[Tejas]

88. "And please don't make the"

And please don't make the equally obtuse comment -- "but what about LE?"


Of course not, why would anyone do that?







oh wait

[Atypical Liberal]

90. But we are talking about Sharpton, not you.

You two are being obtuse. I'm against any community allowing guns in public.

Does that help you? In other words, Sharpton is right for everyone -- including you guys.

But Sharpton is specifically calling out African-American neighborhoods as being incapable of responsibly owning firearms.

[oneshooter]

83. It can not be racist, the words were spoken by a black man. They are not

capable of racism. :sarcasm: