The New York Times Discovers That Black People Buy Guns for the Same Reasons Everyone Else Does

Many black Americans are, for the first time, deciding that owning a gun is necessary to protect themselves and their families. The New York Times presents this video op-ed along with a soto voce lament that we live in a country in which black people — or anyone for that matter — feel the need to own a gun in order to ensure their safety.

What the Times doesn’t know — or, to be more accurate, refuses to acknowledge — is that Americans of all colors, black included, have been buying guns for this very reason since, well, forever. There are over 100 million gun owners (probably far more) in the US. That population is comprised of every sex, gender, religion, color and political persuasion. And as recent numbers make clear, that number is growing rapidly.

Not everyone is happy about this, but when you consider who’s expressing alarm at the spike in gun sales, you have to conclude that it is, in fact, a good thing.

What the Times finds so disturbing is that the people who are featured in the video — like so many people these days — are coming to gun ownership at all. They’re buying their first firearms in the knowledge that, as one woman says, “That was a turning point for me…understanding that the people who are supposed to take care of us and keep us safe may not always be there for us.” Go figure. That same realization is being shared these days by more and more people of every demographic group.

In the Times’ world, white Americans buying guns is prima facie evidence of systemic racism. Black Americans (or any other minority for that matter) buying guns is solely a response to white Americans’ racism.

While actual racism may be a motivating factor in the buying decisions of some tiny percentage of gun buyers, whatever their color, the vast majority purchase firearms for all the same reasons people in this country have always bought them: hunting, sport shooting, recreation, personal, family and home defense. They also have come to understand that, to paraphrase the woman above, you truly are your own first responder.

So while the isolated, effete opinion shapers at the Times cluck disapprovingly at the decisions Americans make regarding their safety, out here in the real world, people are lining up and buying up every gun and round of ammunition they can get their hands on.

No one in this country, no matter what identity group into which the Gray Lady would segregate them, has been unmoved or unaffected by what they’ve seen over the last 90+ days. That includes the people the Times has cherry-picked for their video. And this reasoned, rational response by the population at large isn’t likely to change any time soon.

 

 

comments

  1. avatar Neil says:

    Arm everyone who is legal.

    I notice that what guns are selling best are based on who can produce the most.

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      I’d like to respectfully add my own two cents to your comment for clarification.

      Arm everyone (who’s not currently incarcerated for criminal charges or under probation/parole). That means everyone, period. Not simply anyone who’s “legal”, as that term is fluid and can change on the whims of politicians…words on a piece of legislative paper. We are all “lawfully” able to carry not only per the USC, but per the accompanying DOI under the “laws of Nature and Nature’s God”. It is our natural right to defend ourselves, and once even an incarcerated person has fulfilled his/her punitive debt to society and is released back into the community, he/she should be able to exercise self-defense again.

      ****
      Remember the saying: “Everything Hitler did was legal”.

      1. avatar All Hail! says:

        The infallible words of the peerless ‘I Haz A Question’. As it was, is and ever shall be.

        1. avatar Hail All Hail! says:

          The sycophantic leg-humping of All Hail. As it’s been, and as it continues to be.

        2. avatar jwm says:

          Hail all Hail. All Hail is simply speaking the truth and hero worshipping.

          At least, that’s my take on his posts.

      2. avatar BLAMMO!! says:

        To be human is to be armed.

      3. avatar Geoff "Guns. LOTS of guns..." PR says:

        “That means everyone, period. Not simply anyone who’s “legal”, as that term is fluid and can change on the whims of politicians…words on a piece of legislative paper.”

        In theory, yes. However –

        As long as they know fully well what they are getting into, the ramifications of being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm. That has real, drastic consequences…

        1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

          Hence my oft-mentioned recommendation to change the laws that prohibit people from exercising their right to defend themselves after they’ve already paid their debt to society for a past act. And the term “felony” has been dumbed down to be applied to things that should never be considered heinous crimes. In fact, some states (I’ve researched this) actually have clauses in their Penal Codes that state a resident is considered a felon if convicted of an act elsewhere that’s regarded as a felony in that other jurisdiction, even if that same act is seen as either a misdemeanor or no crime at all in his home state.

          New York/California’s gun laws vs. Montana/Idaho’s gun laws, for example.

        2. avatar GS650G says:

          The intent of denying felons guns was focused on the obvious, violent offenders. Bounce a check big enough and you’re disarmed for life. It would be nice to focus the restriction on the right kind of criminals but they are he’ll bent on getting as many people on The List for as many reasons as possible. They’ve got it down to any crime you serve a year or more in jail, like that’s got FA to do with gun owning. And then we have the little domestic dispute clause Lautenberg gave us that lets your ex disarm you as well. That one opened the red flag law door.

          Name another right with so many exceptions and ways to lose.

        3. avatar tdiinva says:

          Because once they paid their debt to society they would never hurt a fly again. /Sarc

          If it is legal for them to own black powder revolvers in their state then they have an option. Even if it is not legal for them to own them who’s going to know. Plenty of people were killed from cap and ball revolvers.

          They their Second Amendment rights through due process of law.

      4. avatar One of Us says:

        That saying about Hitler isn’t true. He broke many laws and commissioned many crimes, both domestic and international, on his rise to power and during his time in power. It may be accurate to say “everything Hitler did went unprosecuted” but not “legal.” IMHO

  2. avatar jwm says:

    Well, duh. Everybody wants the right and means to defend themselves and this surprises the NYT.

    1. avatar Art out West says:

      The folks at the NYT don’t really understand that the peasants (white, black, brown, whatever) are actually people.

    2. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      Several years ago after TTAG and other gun civil right s web pages, pointed out that the NYT had armed guards at the building front entrance. The guards were told to stay inside the building. Out Of camera view. Same for the Washington compost.

  3. avatar Prndll says:

    I’ve never understood the thinking (or perhaps I do) about all this. Why is it even a question? Surely the bullet itself does even know what it’s hitting? It’s liberalism and the extreme left that gives us racism. The New York Times illustrates this quite clearly.

    1. avatar Dude says:

      The indoctrinated are well trained to ignore facts. Schools are promoting SJW activism over critical thinking.

  4. avatar Ginder12 says:

    I do all my business with a small but well stocked one man shop. Hadn’t been in for a while and went for cleaning supplies. He had exactly 4 handguns, 3 rifles and less than a dozen boxes of ammo. Told me because he was a small shop getting more guns and ammo was problematic because big dealers were a priority for his distributors.

    1. avatar GunnyGene says:

      In another part of the country, arms and ammo at small shops is plentiful. Largely because the market is very nearly saturated. It’s not unusual around here for a household to have 2 dozen firearms of various types and a 1000 rnds or more of ammo for each of them. I know several individuals who have over 100 guns, including full auto’s, and Barretts.

    2. avatar FlaBoy says:

      Same at my fairly large local gun store in North Central Florida. Stopped by yesterday and was surprised by the half empty store. The wall display where ARs, AKs, KSGs, Shockwaves, etc were displayed was totally bare. The pistol display areas were at least half empty. Totally out of 9mm and 38spl ammo…didn’t even have 38 spl wadcutters target ammo, which I had come for. Also found out background checks were taking at least 8 to 12 hours. Customers are having to come back the next day to pickup their gun.

      1. avatar Martin Buck says:

        I live in New Zealand, which took some stick last year with semi autos being banned. Oh well. But if we decide to head for the local gun shop to buy something shiny and new, or ammo, all we do is show our firearms license, and we can have whatever we want as soon as we like. No waiting at all. WTF is up with you guys having to wait, doesn’t your government trust you or something. I hate waiting. It makes my blood boil. No telling what I’d do if I had to put up with wanker politicians sticking their noses into my business. Sort this shit out, pronto. Don’t make me wait.

        1. avatar Mercury says:

          “Waiting periods” are a state law which appears in only a few restrictive states (e.g. California,) which usually also require a license to purchase firearms at all. However there is no federal law requiring a “waiting period” and in fact the federal government does not have the authority to do so in the first place. In most states, not only is there no license required to purchase and no waiting period, but no registry and no requirement that all sales must come through a government-licensed dealer. You, on the other hand, can’t legally buy or sell a gun from or to another person unless both of you have that government permission slip you seem so proud of. Moreover, even your “conservative” party only argues about privacy when opposing the creation of a national registry cataloging not just gun owners, which you effectively already have, but their specific guns as well. Once the proposal has some “privacy protection” measures slapped on it it’ll pass, and you’ll have to fill out a form for every gun you own and send it to the police. Your government doesn’t trust you. They’re mad that so few semiautomatics were surrendered and now they want the means to go down the list and come take your guns personally when they ban the next thing. I’m guessing either calibers above .30 or lever/pump guns, based on the trajectory of other countries which have gone for gun registration. You should be in open, armed insurrection over the semiauto ban, but instead you’re saying “oh well, at least my license still lets me buy the guns they’ll still let me own with a little less paperwork than in America.” You may disagree with Americans about the role of the citizen and the rifle in both national defense and in preventing domestic tyranny, but you should reconsider your priorities when it comes to laws restricting when and where you can buy and sell things. “It’s easy when I’m allowed to do it” is a flimsy premise on which to claim your government trusts you and wants to protect, rather than infringe on, your rights.

        2. avatar Walrus Gumboot says:

          As a firearms owner one must be calm, patient and tolerant of fools. Hotheaded people and guns are a dangerous combination. Unwillingness to wait is a red flag for me so chill.

  5. avatar Dude says:

    The real story here is that Left wing propaganda is driving up gun sales within the black community. I’ve seen this everywhere recently. Black people are arming up to protect themselves against the racist police and white people.

    The NYT video is absolutely laughable. 3:00 in the video: “…until all the wrong people don’t have guns…” As the video pans to white people with guns.

    You would think the Party of Science would step in and tell their pet minority group that around 90% of black people are killed by….black people. Unfortuneately, the Party of Love and Unity needs for black voters to hate white people. This is the strategy being implemented by democrats.

    1. avatar Reason says:

      Yes I found the video to be very racist and anti white. If a video was made with cutaways to black people in the same manor with white people talking it would be totally and understandably unacceptable. I find this one just as bad.

      1. avatar Dude says:

        “…in the same manor with white people talking it would be totally and understandably unacceptable.”

        You are absolutely correct, which means that they are NOT interested in equality. It’s so easy to see, yet half the country can’t or won’t see it.

      2. avatar FlaBoy says:

        Agree video is very biased, especially the part about not feeling welcome at gun stores or the shooting range. At every store or range I have ever been at, everyone is welcome, especially people who appear to be new gun owner, regardless of race or sex. Everyone usually goes out of their way to help new people, unfamiliar with weapons. I’m in rural North Fla, still part of the Deep South, and while at the range have watched white shooters go out of their way to help new, black shooters. I’ve done so myself.

      3. avatar Chris T in KY says:

        They are foolish black racists. They believed the white liberal racist propaganda that america is racist. “But you black person don’t need a gun.” They are told by the same white liberals!
        Fortunately blacks are starting to figure this out. This is discussed on many black forums. Which is why Youtube has shut many black conservative sites down.

    2. avatar Southern Cross says:

      I don’t see black people. I just see people.

      Am I racist? Human race most definitely. Unlike some Progressives whose tastes a more diverse, and even perverse.

      1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

        (smile)

    3. avatar Mercury says:

      See, there’s science, which describes empirical study of a subject through verifiable data and logical analysis, and then there’s Science, the new cult which claims its high priests are infallible and that anyone claiming to be a Scientist that disagrees with them is a heretic. Do you want to be a heretic? Of course not. Listen and believe. That’s what “the party of Science” means.

      1. avatar Tommy357 says:

        Exactly! I am a scientist. And I don’t believe in scientists. I believe in science. Nazis believed in scientists who promotes eugenics. The history of mixing politics and science is a sad one and should serve as a precautionary take for those who use fabricated consensus among scientists as a justification for radical
        Policies.

  6. avatar 9x39 says:

    Nothing quite like the willfully blind attempting to lead. You. On. Eh NYT?

    The plan in play; keeping up the distraction by pitting the lower & middle classes against one another, largely over trivial quibbles, so neither has the time to cast a critical eye at the overview. Divide & conquer, in the classical sense.

    1. avatar Unrepentant Libertarian says:

      Anything to keep the eye off everything that is being brought out about the Democrat corruption. If the population finds out about all the corrupt actions the Democrats have done in the last few years than it will be over for the party. Keep the folks distracted by any means necessary. Be it about guns, or Wuhan Virus, or riots, just do not let them see what the Trump administration is bringing to light.
      Many are finding out that being armed keeps you and your family safe no matter the color of your skin. They are hopefully finding out that gun owners are not crazy conspiracy advocates.

      1. avatar Dude says:

        Agree all around. I’ll add that dems have the unfortunate advantage of controlling the media, academia, and general pop culture which will run cover for their misdeeds.

  7. avatar strych9 says:

    Just more NYT nonsense that inadvertently advertises their privilege and ivory tower status.

    I mean, come_the_fuck-on, the apparatus of “systemic racism” (police) is being dismantled at the same time the rallying points for discrimination (statues) are coming down but now, when it’s less likely you’d actually get a response from the uniformed racist brigade (police), is when people suddenly sense the danger and arm up because there’s somehow an enhanced danger that you’d be accosted, quite racistly, by the very people you can’t get to respond to your location?

    You gotta be retarded to believe that. You’d think that the NYT would be embarrassed to publish something so condescending towards their readership. It’s flat out insulting.

    1. avatar Dude says:

      “You gotta be retarded to believe that. You’d think that the NYT would be embarrassed to publish something so condescending towards their readership. It’s flat out insulting.”

      You’re trying to use logic which doesn’t work once you’ve been indoctrinated, and taught to ignore any argument which refutes Left wing doctrine. Why would they listen to a bunch of racists anyway? See how that works?

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        I imagine that a decent number of NYT subscribers, yes even their subscribers, find this kind of thing to be *eyeroll* material.

        1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

          No. Readers of the NYT are “true believers”. Which is why the paper is failing. People with common sense don’t read their paper.

        2. avatar strych9 says:

          Doubtful. The NYT is a great source of openly available intelligence on what the other side is doing. TTAG just proved that with this very article.

          Further, the NYT only has the circulation it does because colleges get a big discount for buying the paper by the hundred-stack and trying, in vain I might add, to give the paper away to students.

          Without classes requiring reading of the paper for “current events quizzes” nearly no one picks one up. Few profs bother and most of the papers go straight from the rack to the recycling bin.

        3. avatar Geoff "Guns. LOTS of guns..." PR says:

          ” Readers of the NYT are “true believers”. Which is why the paper is failing. People with common sense don’t read their paper.”

          Chris, Strych is right.

          I read the NYT, WaPo, ect., for one reason – to “Know the enemy”…

    2. avatar Geoff "Guns. LOTS of guns..." PR says:

      Too bad the comment section is closed, I’d love to see you drop that nugget in there. I think you’d be surprised at the support you’d get in that comment section…

  8. avatar Jimmy Beam says:

    All law-abiding Americans should buy as many guns and as much ammunition as they can afford and safely store. The federal government should subsidize these purchases through tax breaks. All schools should have firearms education beginning in the third grade. All schools should have shooting teams that compete in competitions. All teachers/professors should be armed against crazies. All churches should allow armed congregations. There should be Constitutional carry in all 50 states.

    I know I’m dreaming, but maybe this pandemic/riots buying is the first small step to this vision

    1. avatar Jimmy Beam says:

      To continue, every adult willing and able should supplement the Sheriff’s deputies and police. Every adult willing and able should be organized into militias that train monthly, not just in firearms, but in rescue operations, crowd control, and whatever else is needed to supplement and support professional law enforcement. Tax breaks/stipends/awards/kudos should be given to individuals that participate.

      1. avatar Eric says:

        A little free beer would be all I’d need.

        1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

          Me too!

        2. avatar GS650G says:

          And a side order of QI too.

    2. avatar Martin Buck says:

      Just look at the illlustrious career of the actor Robert Stack (my Mum’s absolute favourite thespian). His dad was rich, so he went to college, where he enjoyed polo and skeet shooting, both of which he competed at nationally and internationally. This innate ability helped in the military, where he was an aerial gunnery instructor. Skeet shooting was a required part of the course. If I’d had a rich dad, no telling what I coulda done. Who knows?

  9. avatar LifeSavor says:

    On a related note, it looks like Merriam-Webster is caving to the left and redefining the word ‘racism’.

    https://www.naturalnews.com/2020-07-01-merriam-webster-change-definition-racism-only-white-people.html

    1. avatar GS650G says:

      If they lived in a country where 99 % of the people were one race and they were a micro percentage they would see what real racism looks like. Right in their face and openly allowed.

      Try Japan or China. They don’t even like Asians from other countries around them. Whites are treated as curiosities and necessary only rarely.

      It would awaken them to see how the rest of the world really is and then maybe they would cut the US some slack.
      But what is the advantage in doing that?

      1. avatar Southern Cross says:

        Try current South Africa where whites are racially profiled for extra treatment by the police.

        But for Progressives this is called “Social Justice” where random people are punished for what other people did in the past.

        1. avatar Dude says:

          Social justice is code for social revenge. Same thing with racial justice. There should only be justice, and everyone should be treated equally.

    2. avatar Nero "...diction, not grammar..." Wolfe says:

      Just a guess, but I would suppose the editors of this dictionary, and most if not all others, all received “Liberal Arts” (read “Leftist Arts”) educations from our snowflake generating universities. Another tentacle.

    3. avatar Someone says:

      The vocabulary needs to keep up with the policy. Newspeak mirrors the Party line.

  10. avatar neiowa says:

    “The New York Times Discovers” – bull the NYT couldn’t discover their ass if had both thumbs stuck in their

  11. avatar tdiinva says:

    Both Faux Libertarian and BLM are white dominated movements. Black America is probably more supportive of the police than the TTAG readership. They know they will bear the brunt of the crime wave caused by reductions in policing from Defunding and ending QI.

    1. avatar Dude says:

      “BLM are white dominated movements”

      See video in link below.
      White girl: “Racism is MY problem. I need to fix it.” (By yelling at black guys.)

      https://twitter.com/henryrodgersdc/status/1275527981470035969

    2. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      to tdiinva
      BINGO!

  12. avatar 2aguy says:

    And then these new gun buyers will vote for democrats who will end their ability to own that gun…….biden has stated he is going to go after gun makers, and will repeal the Lawful Commerce in Arms act which will allow left wing, democrat party lawyers to sue gun makers and gun stores….in order to drive them out of business…..so…..vote for Trump and every single weak, spineless, cowardly republican on the ticket….we need the numbers in the Senate to put judges on the bench as a line of defense against the gun grabbers, and ginsburg and breyer may be off the bench in the next 4 years…….so vote for Trump, and the moron republicans…then primary the republicans in the next election….but vote for them now.

    1. avatar Southern Cross says:

      Then other industries will suffer with the repeal of PLCAA. Automotive, tobacco, alcohol, pharmaceutical, construction, etc.

  13. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    No chit Sherlock.

  14. avatar GS650G says:

    I bet blacks buy guns not because of white cops or white people. They watch the news and hear the stories in their neighborhood. While pampered white people demand cops be defunded and all that they know what that means for them.

    It would be nice if the democrats paid a price in the states and cities they control for the lockdown shit storm and the recent riots they allowed but that’s a pipe dream.

    1. avatar General Malaise says:

      You have no idea what it is to be black.

      1. avatar edward kenway says:

        Nor do I want to because skin color isn’t the issue.
        It’s the value system, culture, and diseased PC lunacy driving a certain mindset that’s the problem.

      2. avatar Cuteandfuzzybunnies says:

        I dunno. My wife is black so I think I have a pretty good idea.

        And the comments about gun ranges made me call bullshit. I’ve never been to a gun range or pro gun function where my wife was treated in anyway worse than me. Granted she’s an attractive woman and attractive women generously are treated well in society.

        Did the fat older lady go to the range wearing some leftist or pro gun control bullshit? Maybe then she got sideways looks ?

        Or did they recognize her as a local anti gunner ? Cuz I might tell an outspoken anti gunner to hit the road at my range.

  15. avatar Ralph says:

    Black people buy guns for the same reason as white people — to p!ss off Pierced Organ.

    1. avatar former water walker says:

      LOL Ralph! I was going to use the brit a-hole’s nom de plume😏 Just got back from buying ammo at my favorite gunshop>Blythe’s,Griffith,IN. They got it! Got some Frontier spire point for defense. Saw a video on AR15.com reviewing it. Reasonable price!

  16. avatar Dale Menard says:

    I am white and yet I do not fear blacks. I fear white people who think they are helping blacks by killing me. A mob has no gender, no race, no brain, and is totally unpredictable. The mob in St. Louis that threatened that couple did not know that the two attorneys were big BLM supporters, and they did not care, all they saw was that the couple were white, and therefore bad.

    1. avatar ChoseDeath says:

      Well said Dale.

    2. avatar LifeSavor says:

      Dale,

      1

      I prepare for anyone that becomes a threat to my family. At that point, purple, green, cerulean, or plaid. It does not matter, I will defend.

      Prior to the point of threat, everyone is a brother or sister, but some require more vigilance than others. 😉

      1. avatar Viper says:

        If they want to come for my Freedom, my Family or my stuff they need to understand one thing and that is I will run out of THEM before I run out of AMMO! Why are we letting the 2% of the morons in this country take over and take away our History and God given Rights. It is time for the 100 million silent majority to come forward and start defending this country. I am Ready! “LETS ROLL”

  17. avatar Fred says:

    This shows us a couple really interesting things. First, wanting to be prepared (not safe, just prepared) knows no racial lines. Second, firearm purchases have a significant economic factor. I know of multiple people that bought guns (one was a first-time buyer) because of the economic stimulus payment. It’s important to feel prepared but many people are just trying to survive and don’t buy guns because they need food and shelter (and usually want a TV or two). Unwise financial decisions play a part as well, but this shows gun ownership is skewed by economic lines. With COVID, mobs, and both sides fearmongering in the media the urgency to be armed has risen above the desire to buy new stuff (like a TV) for more people than ever before. The people that need guns the most (statistically) are less likely to buy them, but with the stimulus and unemployment bonus many can now afford the basics.

  18. avatar Fed up says:

    Who gives a [email protected]#k what the NYT has to say about anything ? Just like WT , CNN , MSNBC , CBS , ABC , NBC , and all the local liberal news . Listening to or reading anything from these outlets gets you nothing but DNC talking points , lies , and fake stories .

    1. avatar Geoff "Guns. LOTS of guns..." PR says:

      “Who gives a [email protected]#k what the NYT has to say about anything ?”

      You need to care, because a lot of the country believes what the NYT says.

      “It’s not nice, but reality.”

      ‘Bury my heart at Wounded Knee’ – Buffy St. Marie…

  19. avatar Pb_fan59 says:

    Hey Piers, new reality show – it’s called America’s Got Talons…. and you are definitely NOT the fucking host !!!

    1. avatar Southern Cross says:

      Piers Morgan vs Jeremy Clarkson in pay-per-view. Will Piers make a comeback or will Jeremy maintain his winning streak?

  20. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    The NYT ran similar stories about the Deacons For Defense and Justice 50 years ago. They didn’t like law abiding blacks with guns back then either. The difference to day is we have the internet. And blacks with gun channels are numerous on the internet now. The genie is out of the bottle. And racist white liberals don’t like it.

    There has been gun advertising featuring blacks modeling guns, for over 10 years now. If the NYT or other white liberals had seen these ads back then, their heads would have exploded in 2010. TV and magazine ads. Including a magazine cover on Guns and Ammo.
    And a Pin Up pull out poster in Recoil magazine.
    (smile)

    1. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

      When one has been around long enough, and paying attention to politics in the US long enough, one starts to notice patterns. These recent events are one of those patterns.

      The unwritten subtext of the NY Times is “If we let blacks have guns, we’ll never get them back on the plantations!”

      Democrats have been furious at Republicans ever since Lincoln freed the Democrats’ slaves. This is just one more the every-20-year outburst of young Democrats finding out that Republicans freed their slaves. It’s the Republicans’ fault that Democrats have to mow their own lawns or actually pay someone to do it. The nerve of those Republicans!

      1. avatar Southern Cross says:

        That is why there was Jim Crow, segregation, de jeure discrimination, and lynching. It was remind those other people of “their place” and to not get any ideas above their station.

        Gave Nazis and Communists lots of propaganda fuel.

        Mechanized farming removed the need for mass farm labor, and machines don’t have to be fed daily. Are the Democrats still missing the “other” rights they had with slaves?

        1. avatar Geoff "Guns. LOTS of guns..." PR says:

          “Mechanized farming removed the need for mass farm labor, and machines don’t have to be fed daily.”

          Yeah, they do, in their own way. A modern John Deere tractor can cost $100,000 for a small one, and upwards of $400,000 for one of the larger ones (Or higher). Making the monthly payment on something like that qualifies as ‘Feeding it’, since if you don’t, it goes away…

  21. avatar MICHAEL A CROGNALE says:

    In my experience these past two months in Norfolk, VA I have seen that probably 95% of the customers in my favorite LGS, both, have been black men and women. It’s real.

    1. avatar Montana Actual says:

      I used to live in VA. I was so shocked when the media called the rallies there racist. I know for a fact that the population there is VERY well “diversed”. I was actually a minority amongst gun owning friends there even, and I am neon white.

    2. avatar Cuteandfuzzybunnies says:

      Two Black people work at my LGS. And a lot of black people shoot there. I’ve been to a few ranges in the Houston area. I’ve seen black people ( other than my wife ) there frequently at almost all of them.

      One Houston area “white owned “ gun store hosted black guns matter.

      “The majority of gun stores are owned by whites. “ well the majority of people are white so …

  22. avatar Montana Actual says:

    Damn NYT, almost like black people are Americans huh.

    I haven’t seen democrats this angry since we freed their slaves.

  23. avatar Hannibal says:

    This coming from the same New York Times that has done its best to neuter policing for years.

    And I’m not saying that’s a bad thing, per se; but it’s absurd to think that you’re going to reduce police presence, response, and patrol but NOT get people recognizing that they may be on their own. They are.

    And there’s a reason why polling indicates black people in cities don’t actually want less police (better police, yes); they have to live with the results of hand-wringing liberals at the New York Times convincing politicians to stop cops from doing their jobs. Meanwhile the editors and reporters just take the train back to their suburbs. At least until the train becomes too dangerous…

  24. avatar JM says:

    did the NYT presume that Black people have different reasons? Something doesn’t seem right here.

    1. avatar Fed up says:

      The NYT is a racist group just like the DNC. They think blacks are to stupid to think for themselves , or care for themselves .

  25. avatar GS650G says:

    I’m waiting for democrats to tell their serfs the gun they bought is a mistake and they need to support laws confiscating it from them. The scent of free shit is so strong it might just fly.

    1. avatar Dude says:

      The NYT comments were full of such advice. The reasoning was either guns are the problem or police will shoot black people on site for having a gun.

  26. avatar Fred the deer slayer says:

    Greta van sustren .. the real greta is not ignorant enough to post such stupidity.

  27. avatar Mathews says:

    *discovers black people are people, you mean.

  28. avatar Alseides says:

    Wow! NYT finds out that people of different skin colors are still people? This is a big day for them.

  29. avatar Alan says:

    Regarding that old saw, You don’t need guns, the police are there to protect you, which the anti gun set, led by The New York Times, add whichever journals you think appropriate keep singing, will they ever recognize and admit the facts? The facts being that over time, the courts have repeatedly ruled that the police own no particular duty to the individual, that they are there “to protect society”, whatever that might mean, in plain English. Might it be that more and more people have come to realize this fact, and having recognized the facts of the matter, are acting quite reasonably, in providing, or at least attempting to provide for their own defense? The Times would describe their considered actions as dangerous, unreasonable, etc., etc., a conclusion that I and many others disagree with. The anti gun types are certainly entitled to their own opinions, though as the late Daniel P. Moynihan, one time U.S. Senator from New York noted, they are not entitled to their own facts.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email