Previous Post
Next Post

Screen Shot 2015-01-15 at 7.42.54 AM

Distinguished Gateway City barrister and TTAG reader Dirk Diggler emails the following: “So the VPC wants guns taken away from all blacks. That’s how I read this article. No 2A rights for my peeps. They can be racist and get away with it without the media doing anything. Got it.” Here’s VPC’s take-away from the numbers they’ve compiled . . .

For blacks, like all victims of homicide, guns — usually handguns — are far and away the number-one murder tool. Successful efforts to reduce America’s black homicide toll, like America’s homicide toll as a whole, must put a focus on reducing access and exposure to firearms.

Strangely enough, the VPC’s report, titled Black Homicide Victimization in the United States, doesn’t mention how many defensive gun uses blacks engaged in during the study’s time period (2012). Naturally, the VPC’s prescription — “reducing access and exposure to firearms” — would have a negative impact on law abiding blacks’ ability to defend themselves against criminal predation. Apparently, blacks aren’t trustworthy enough to make decisions about armed self defense for themselves.

Not that the elitist gun grabbers at the VPC care one whit about them. No, they assiduously ignore the other side of the “gun violence” equation — armed self defense — and patronizingly claim to know what’s best for blacks (and all Americans), even if we’re too thick-headed to realize it.

I’ll leave a detailed take-down of the numbers behind VPC’s little PR exercise to someone like Nick who’s not as numerically and statistically challenged as am I. Not that the supporting data’s accuracy really matters much.

Just like the carpenter whose only tool is a hammer, the solution to every problem the VPC and their fellow travelers in the Civilian Disarmament Industrial Complex see is more gun control laws and fewer firearms in the hands of civilians. No matter what the Second Amendment may say. Or the experience of other countries where civilian firearms ownership has been banned.

Gun control’s roots lie in 19th century efforts to disarm blacks. It seems some things never change.


Previous Post
Next Post


  1. So, once again the political left flouts its blatant racism against blacks. I would show you my shocked face, but I have to stop laughing, first.

    • Yep.

      Add this to the mountain of evidence that the Democrats are still, after 100+ years, the party that really, really hates blacks.

      A few nuggets off the top of the mountain: Affirmative action says that they’re stupid and can’t compete. Welfare policy says that they shouldn’t form families. Abortion rights harridans think blacks shouldn’t even have children. (Maggie Sanger was actually quite explicit on this point…)

      And now, Obama is ready to crater the economic prospects of blacks with less education than a college degree by legalizing a huge influx of cheap labor.

      But don’t worry. Blacks will keep voting Democrat with a likelihood of 0.85 or better. LBJ appears to have been more right than anyone could foresee, and the strong majority of blacks have at least another 40 years to go before they wake up to the screwing the Democrats have been giving them.

      • And Rand Paul blew the opportunity to cut into that margin when he stood by the race hustlers and gangbangers in Ferguson. Instead of endorsing Sharpton he should have been asking what have these guys done for you besides send you an EBT card? Do you like living your life in fear the Michael Browns? Do you not care if your children get educated?

      • Isn’t it more like 200 plus years…at least 150 plus years. The Democrat Party represented slave owners back before, during and after the Civil War. In a way, they are still doing it. It is astounding today that so many African-Americans blindly follow the orders of the party that fought a war in an attempt to keep African-Americans as slaves.

        • Learn your history. The reason why African Americans are voting Democrat is because all the hardcore racist segregationalist Southern Democrats have switched to the Republican party from late 60s onwards. Still plenty of familiar faces in GOP (though of course now they “regret” their past “mistakes”).

        • Int19h: you mean like the late esteemed Senator and former KKK chapter leader Robert Byrd? Last time I checked, he was a life long Democrat.

          Maybe you can cite some examples to support your “all racist Democrats turned Republican” claim.

      • “Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”
        — Ruth Bader Ginsburg
        (1933- ) Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States
        Source: July 7, 2009 interview, New York Times

        Gun control isn’t only racist, though, it’s classist. It’s the deep-rooted opinion of the ruling class that they and their cronies are the only ones worthy to have that sort of power, and that firearms are too dangerous, powerful, whatever for those that they lord over. Well, in order to more effectively lord over them, they must be disarmed and at the mercy of the ruling class. This is how you get laws like the “Saturday Night Special” laws that banned handguns under a certain MSRP. It’s how you get laws requiring annual registration renewal, special taxes, ammo taxes, mandatory training, licensing, safe storage, and myriad other things with no purpose other than to add more and more and more expense to firearm ownership. The goal is pricing guns and ammo out of the grasp of the poor. The unwashed masses. …in Chicago and elsewhere this has been the stated goal, no less. Literally said in plain language that the intent of laws xyz are to make firearm ownership prohibitively expensive.

        They also pass laws that are subjective in nature — you can only exercise a right such as the right to carry IF you can prove a legitimate need — but exempt themselves. Like in CA where the law stated that “need” was presumed to have been met if you were a government official or a judge. In many CA counties we see carry permits granted only to elected officials and their cronies. If you’re rich enough to have political power, you can carry. If you aren’t, you obviously can’t be trusted with a gun.

        Then they make the laws so complicated and the hurdles to LEGAL ownership (the constant registration, training, notifications, safe storage, etc) so complicated and expensive that it’s impossible for anyone but a dedicated, intelligent, educated, monetarily-secure individual to legally possess a firearm. This way everyone is a criminal and you always have leverage over them. It also discourages people from even attempting firearms ownership. I can’t tell you how many people I knew in CA who wanted to own a gun but were so scared of accidently breaking a related law that they completely avoided it. The laws are such a vast labyrinth in CA and many other places that it deters perfectly law-abiding, good people from being able to buy a gun. By design.

        And let’s not forget IT’S A RIGHT that every U.S. citizen has. For some reason the exact same politicians who push so hard for making gun and ammo ownership literally as expensive and complicated as possible are out there telling us that requiring so much as an ID to vote is a poll tax and a violation of the rights of poor people. They tell us that rights come with responsibilities and your 2A right can’t be exercised without going through steps A through F and paying your fees and taxes for each one, because it’s a dangerous right so we have to be responsible about it, but there can be ZERO infringement on your right to vote because apparently that isn’t dangerous and we should just let it happen with no attempt at “common sense” record keeping measures.

        Cool. Good talk.

        • +1

          It applies not only to anti’s but to the domestic gun industry as well. Look at imports for example.

          Like what you said about “Saturday Night Specials”, the GCA of 1968 stopped imports of them that poor Americans could afford that were of decent quality. It was from that law that George Jennings and the “Ring of Fire” took advantage of to put out low quality junk thanks in part to the domestic market’s cronyism whereas the imports were safer and better quality.

          Another example is Chinese firearms and ammo that are banned. While they definitely were not pretty nor the best at anything they were reliable, durable, and affordable. Another casualty of elitism and the domestic gun industry’s cronyism as well.

          Then you have the recent ban on 7n6 ammo. It was ammo that was affordable compared to 5.56, even cheaper than 7.62×39, that was banned. They say it was because it was AP (and the Ukraine situation) nevermind the fact that it passed the GCA’s draconian interpretations on what constitutes non-AP ammo but BATFE banned it anyway (with a large part of help from the domestic gun industry as well, could not have any meaningful competition to 5.56 could you?).

          Probably the reason why .22LR is still hard to find as well.

          The funny thing is you will have gun owners defend these import restrictions not only because it doesn’t affect guns they like (hypocrites) but because they are not American (jingoism) or that the 2nd Amendment does not cover them (which the last time I checked didn’t have a clause on banning imported guns like imported speech).

    • You guys are as bad as the left, crying “racism”. Stating facts does not equal racism. Blacks are disproportionately violent. They commit 51% of murders, despite being 13 percent of the population. They commit the majority of interracial murders, too.

  2. The whole gun control – background checks – thing is inherently racist and always was.

    But, nothing will change until minorities demand and proudly display their freedom.

  3. If you ever want to see eyebrows hit the hairline, tell a black person about the racist roots of gun control. I’ve done it and it tends to be somewhat amusing.

  4. “Successful efforts to reduce America’s black homicide toll, like America’s homicide toll as a whole, must put a focus on reducing access and exposure to firearms.”

    That there, people, is the mother of all “false premise” fallacies.

    For sake of discussion, suppose that government could magically make almost all firearms vanish:
    (1) Prove to me that alternate weapons will be less lethal than firearms and thus reduce “homicide toll”.
    (2) Prove to me that criminals will not INCREASE their number of attacks — emboldened by the fact that smaller, weaker, slower victims are magnitudes more vulnerable — and thus increase the homicide toll.

    Weakening victims of violent crime and taking away options for their response to a violent attack serves no other purpose than to increase the lethality of attacks on victims. It’s almost like the Violence Policy Center wants to see more black people die at the hands of violent attackers.

    • Add to those points the steady decline of violent crime, according to DoJ, and these a$$clowns have not a leg to stand on. And yet they keep spewing all this crap endlessly without end.

      • The steady decline of violent crime AND a steady increase of gun sales and ownership at the same time — draw your own conclusions.

  5. When the Progressives want to ban guns, it is for the good of all the Blacks. The Progressives will come for your votes in the Fall, and leave Black Communities with nothing after they are done. Look how well gun control has worked, the Progressives just want to help.

    Let us not pretend, gun control has always been based on fear and racism from the KKK to even Ronald Reagan.. The people who are most vocal and who do most of the funding for gun control are all White and upper middle class or billionaires like Soros, Gates or Bloomberg. If they spent their time and effort creating jobs and opportunity for Black Communities the gun problem would go away by itself. Restricting access to guns from people to defend themselves and then leaving Black communities to crumble only makes things worse. Gun Control is farce and will always be.

  6. “Apparently, blacks aren’t trustworthy enough to make decisions about armed self defense for themselves.”

    Well, to be fair, they think that about everybody. Except of course their body guards.

  7. I see how my death by bludgeoning,stabbing, strangulation, poison or such is preferable and morality superior to being shot, most sound more painful and suffering builds character, got it.

  8. Violence couldn’t be caused by Progressive social policies that destroyed the black family. Nah, it must be the guns.

    • That, and the “War on Drugs” that makes an economic incentive to be a “gangsta”.

      If they want even more of a drop in the violent crime rate, de- criminalize if not legalize drugs and our violent crime rate would rival Canada’s. In a year.

      • The legalize drug mantra is not different the ban-guns mantra. Simplistic and wrong. There are reasons why legalizing drugs may be the right thing to do but they will have little to do with reducing the social dysfunction in the urban ghetto. The gangs date from well before the so-called drug wars. When the Mafia controlled the drug trade there still drivebys and gang violence in the inner city. If illegal drugs were the problem then crime would not have fallen for the past two decades.

        • Not entirely correct. Just look at the result of Prohibition. A large jump in murder, machine gun battles between different alcohol gangs and the police in different groups trying to control lucrative alcohol territory. Just like our drug gangs of today.

          When better than sixty percent the current prison population is due to drug use or the selling of such. To say that the legalizing of these substances would have an insignificant impact on violent ctime ignores that reality as well as the history of the ending of prohibition and the drop in violent crime afterward.

          Would this solve the dysfunction of the “gansta” culture or eliminate criminals? Of course not, but it would takeout a huge incentive for many in trying to exist as a criminal.

        • Last time I checked the Mafia did not go out of business when Prohibition was repealed. The gang wars of the 1920s were as much a battle between the rising Italian-Jewish Mafia and the receding Irish mob as anything else. Sure they battled over alcohol sales during Prohibition but the battle started in the teens. Just look up the big jump in the murder rate between 1910 and the start of Prohibition. The Mafia still controlled the wholesale didistribution of alcohol 50 years after Prohibition ended. Do you think they played nice because ii was legal? Do you what one the things that helpd the feds bring down the old mob? Pizza cheese. They tried to monopolize pizza cheese and decided to take on A&P. Big mistake — A&P fought back. Go back and look at the murder rate just before the feds the broke mob in 1980. It was turning down because of demographic factors. However, when the mob went down you introduced new players from South America who battle it out must like the Italians/Jews and the Irish in the 1920s.

          There is this myth both inside and outside the ghetto that all gangbangers are rolling drug money. For one thing in places like NYC and Chicago selling untaxed cigarettes has displaced drugs as the primary moneymaker. However, your average street punk isn’t making any more money than he would be making at Mickey D’s. It’s only the guys at the top who have the money. Now, it’s probably true that 60% of the inmate population is there on some drug charge; however, their targeting and arrest had little to do with drugs. Drugs are to gangbangers what tax evasion was to Al Capone; a way of getting criminals off the streets. Do you think the cops care that Jawon the gangbanger is selling a couple bucks worth of weed? They can’t get him for the drive by or the beatdown of some citizen but they know that they can put poor Jawon away on a drug charge. Take that away and Jawon stays on the street until they catch him in the act or some rival puts a bullet in his head.

        • Sorry tdiivna; your not making much sense. The reason they are called drug gangs is because right now they make most of their money by selling drugs. Pot, heroin, coke, and method are the biggies.

          Criminals organizations also rob, extortion, protection money, gambling prostitution true.

          But the cartels in mexico get most of their cashflow through drugs.enough to where they have enough money to fight head to head against the government if they can’t buy them off.

          When that lone individual sells that pot or meth or coke on the street corner; sure he many times makes just minimum wage, but the guy on top is making hundred of millions and even billions of dollars.

          Sorry tdiivna. But when you see a guy on the corner selling something, more often than not it’s drugs; at least out here in NM where you can buy tax free cigs on the Res.

          But that is the point, any time a government artificially restricts anything that people freely want, there is a market that criminals will fill.

          The War on Drugs simply enriches the criminals, empowers the government by the laws it passes and the bribes criminals give the enforcers to look the other way and we the law abiding citizen are left with less freedom. So with the depredations by rich criminals, corrupted cops and courts , and we the people being preyed upon by the common criminal in the street and the criminals in government simply continues to grow.

          So tell me tdiivna. In the war on drugs, how are we made “safer” with asset forieture, no knock warrants, the violations of or freedom from search and seizure by the drug sniffing dog.?

          All have been attacks against our constution and our freedoms by people like you that want to control the free actions of other human beings.

          In the end ttdiivna, you are simply a person, like many; that knows what is best for others. And you will make laws that will imprison or kill any one that will not do what is you know is best for them.

          In other words, a tyrant.

        • The gangs we are talking aren’t in Mexico, they are on the south side of Chicago and they have been there for more than 50 yearyears. They aren’t drug gangs no more that the Mafia was an alcohol gang. Like the gun grabbers your are impervious to facts and history. You have single point solution for symptom and the root cause, Using your logic the war drugs must be a sucess becahse in the past 20 years crime has been cut in half.

        • Tdiivna, your verging on the absurd. For you to keep insisting that the power and money at this time for gangs in our current war on drugs does not come from drug sales is for you to deny fact and history.

          If we decriminalized all illegal drugs, would criminals continue to be criminals and still try to continue with robbery, prostitution, gambling, extortion, blackmail, protection money etc. Of course.

          But the end of the “War on Drugs” would put a serious crimp in the ability of gangs to have the power and money to influence the police, the courts and the laws that infringe our constitution and our rights.

          Is the drop in crime to historic lows due to the war on drugs, the carrying of guns by the law abiding citizens, by the longer prison sentences caused by “three strikes and your out”? Because of all three? Who knows.

          But i do know one thing Tdiivna, the loss of my fellow citizens and myself from unreasonable searches and seizure of a No knock warrant, the abuse by the police of Asset forfeiture, the loss of the right to privacy in all of our bank accounts by the bank tracking how much money is taken out at any particular time, the government tracking purchases by whether a person uses cash all in the effort to track “drug money” is not worth trying to control what an adult freely puts in their own body.

          The fact that you completely ignored my point about this abuse of us as Americans, and of our constitution and of our civil rights says where you stand on this point.

          To me, by your ignoring this, you are saying you support the abuse of our freedoms and that you support the growth of the surveillance society in the tyrannical attempt to control what should be left to individual choice.

    • No, because blacks are violent everywhere. They’re disproportionately violent in the US, Canada, and Europe—and it goes without saying that countries under black rule are chaotic and violent.

      Blacks were violent way before any progressive policies “destroyed their families”. They’re just genetically predisposed to it. If you disagree, kindly find me ONE instance where violent crime dropped as the black population increased.

  9. Too poor or too black. All prohibition has always been based on these two beliefs.
    There is no shortage of people either poor or black who believe these true.
    Poor self-esteem, misplaced trust in authority, fear of your neighbor who happens to look like you. It’s really quite sad.

  10. Even if a majority of criminal homicides are black on black, the vast majority of African Americans aren’t criminals and aren’t trying to kill each other.

    To insinuate otherwise is by definition racist. Whoever wrote this article at the VPC should take a look in the mirror and think about what they wrote.

    Rights (and the constitution formally defining some of those rights) are colorblind. As they should be. As MLK day comes next week we should remember how the racist Democrats of the south tried multiple times to prevent King from carrying a handgun for self defense.

      • Oh my God, not this again. Please, do us all a favor, and prove it.

        Here is my response to that fallacy, taken from Kevin Williamson at NRO:

        “If the parties had in some meaningful way flipped on civil rights, one would expect that to show up in the electoral results in the years following the Democrats’ 1964 about-face on the issue. Nothing of the sort happened: Of the 21 Democratic senators who opposed the 1964 act, only one would ever change parties. Nor did the segregationist constituencies that elected these Democrats throw them out in favor of Republicans: The remaining 20 continued to be elected as Democrats or were replaced by Democrats. It was, on average, nearly a quarter of a century before those seats went Republican. If southern rednecks ditched the Democrats because of a civil-rights law passed in 1964, it is strange that they waited until the late 1980s and early 1990s to do so.”

        • Reagan’s “southern strategy” appealed to the racists in those states. A whole swath of states that had been Democratic switched to Republican. Remember the Willie Horton ad? That was a direct GOP move to pick up the racists in order to stay in the game.

          Even where I am in Oregon, it was pretty easy to see that the old racist Democrats had switched over. The very active KKK in the south end of my county used to vote Democratic en mass; now they vote GOP.

  11. “Successful efforts to reduce America’s black homicide toll, like America’s homicide toll as a whole, must put a focus on reducing access and exposure to firearms.”

    Reducing exposure to drugs and gangs would go a lot further.

    But, that’s too hard, and understanding the poverty cycle, educational deficits, and a culture that glorify violence and crime confuses and scares us… So, let’s just ban gun’s, mkay.

    • The overwhelming number of black homicides involve a small number of hardened gang bangers. Racists, like the VPC, attribute these problems onto blacks at as a group. It’s hasty generalization on steroids.

  12. Can we say “Jim Crow”, Black Codes, Sullivan Law? ALL intended to disarm black people involuntarily now with shall-issue CCW taking over they want to browbeat blacks into being a permanent subculture of victims.


  13. Murder is directly proportional to poverty rate no matter what color your skin is or how many guns you have available. I’d go out on a limb and guess that it’s even more strongly correlated with skilled employment rates.

    Open more tech high schools in ghettos so kids can be exposed to better role models, learn practical skills that can be used to fix their neighborhoods, and so they can get skilled jobs and start practical businesses that pay more than crime. Too much of the education system is geared toward college prep.

    • Not really accurate. It’s true that there is a positive correlation between income levels and murder (violence rates in general), it’s nowhere near one for one and varies dramatically among different cultural / ethnic groups.

    • “Murder is directly proportional to poverty rate no matter what color your skin is or how many guns you have available. I’d go out on a limb and guess that it’s even more strongly correlated with skilled employment rates.”

      Not sure about that…

      Native American Indians have devastating poverty and I don’t believe their murder rate is that much higher.

      Rate of alcoholism is very high, if memory serves…

    • Nope. If that was true, Appalachia would have a staggering murder rate, and it doesn’t. The best indicator of whether an area will have violent crime is its percentage of black residents. Anything above 30 percent and chaos is guaranteed.

      • Appalachia . . . not as violent as it used to be.

        Population density is a factor, too, which makes a significant difference between out in the hills and down on the streets.

  14. Old white people making judgments about black folks. The problem with black families in the USA is always those durned liberal policies of giving the children enough money so they aren’t on the streets, it’s never conservatives refusing to acknowledge that black people can be equal to white folks without giving up their culture. Because as we all know black culture is worthless as far as whites are concerned.

    • Which black culture?

      The Gangsta culture that glorifies being a criminal and makes fun of other blacks that get a good education as “being like whitey” or calls another black an “uncle Tom” if he gets a good blue collar job?

      Or the black culture that emphasizes being law abiding, hard working, that gets a good education so that can they can get a degreed career or start a business.?

    • And yet another Democrat Party member toddles through and spews the usual sh*t and lies. Again. Still. Why do you hate everyone so much? Is it our moral superiority, our mental superiority, or just the fact we are superior to you in every conceivable way? Pick one.

  15. “Gun control’s roots lie in 19th century efforts to disarm blacks. It seems some things never change.”
    And please note that the original gun control laws were passed by DEMOCRAT legislatures in the south, after the Civil War, in a fairly successful attempt to disarm newly-freed blacks – thus making them helpless victims of the Democrat Party’s continuing efforts to control them. Funny how the Democrat Party has not changed since then – they still want to keep blacks subservient and disarmed.

    Suggested reading – “The Racist Roots of Gun Control” by Clayton E. Cramer. Clayton Cramer is an American historian, author, and software engineer. He played an important early role in documenting the outright lies in the anti-gun book “Arming America” by Michael A. Bellesiles, a book that was proven to be based on fraudulent research. Cramer’s work was cited by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas in United States v. Emerson, 46 F.Supp.2d 598 (N.D.Tex. 1999). His research also informed the Supreme Court decision in the seminal Second Amendment cases District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago.

    Clayton Cramer continues to work with the Idaho legislature and pro-gun groups on 2nd Amendment issues. He holds an MA in history from Sonoma State University. He currently resides in Horseshoe Bend, Idaho, near Boise.

    • Liberals gave us the U.S. Constitution.
      Liberals gave us the anti-slavery movement.
      Liberals wanted everyone to vote, not just landowners.
      Liberals stand up for freedom of religion, freedom of the press, and lots more in the Bill of Rights every day.

      There are a lot of modern liberal failings and stupidity, but absolute generalizations fail.

      • Yes, your sad and laughable generalization fail, completely. The Democrat Party has always been and will always be the Party of racism, hate and tyranny. As for your claim that Republicans are the ones who defended slavery, created Jim Crowe Laws and are responsible for the destruction of the nuclear family among blacks in America, you are still full of sh*t, again, as you have always been.

  16. Great…I’ll have to tell my beautiful college educated black wife she can’t be trusted with a gun. Now what am I gonna’ do with that 357 I bought for her?

  17. if you want to know how important gun rights are, then all you have to do is look at the last group of people in this country that were DENIED gun rights across the board: slaves. Because what is a slave once you give him a gun? No longer a slave.

    • “Freedom of speech isn’t working out so well for liberals now that they aren’t the only ones with a microphone. It’s not so much fun when the rabbit’s got the gun.” — Ann Coulter

  18. The VPC needs to get with the program. The reason that black people are killing each other is “white privilege.” Everybody knows that. Just ask POTUS.

  19. Naturally the conclusion was NOT to end the Drug War – The single reason for both the gang activity, and associated illegal firearms that underpin the “black homicide” numbers.

  20. “The homicide rate for black male victims was 32.78 per 100,000. In comparison, the overall rate for male homicide victims was 7.27 per 100,000. For white male homicide victims it was 3.86 per 100,000.”

    …and there it is. If Obama, Sharpton, Jackson and the other black “leaders” want to have a real discussion about why the popo “unfairly” targets all of these young, “law-abiding” black men, they need to start with stats like these.

    Massaging those stats – for every white murderer there is, there are 4-5 black ones. If we looked at other stats for violent crime, robbing, drug-dealing, gang-banging, etc., I bet the ratio would be the same if not higher.

    Yeah, it’s the racist, white cop’s fault.

    • Those have to be adjusted for the fact that given the same set of information, a jury is far more likely to convict a black — even a black jury, curiously enough. It’s still not even, but it’s cut by more than half.

      What’s interesting is that if you restrict the stats for the white population to those under the poverty level, it comes out just about equal. That indicates that if we could get companies like Walmart to actually pay their employees a decent wage, violence would drop (and Salt Lake City has already shown that if you just give the homeless apartments, crime, including violent crime, drops).

      So, get wages higher, provide housing for the homeless, and end the misnamed “War on Drugs”, and our violent crime rate could actually come out better than Canada’s.

  21. True, likely because just about everyone is sick and tired of dealing with the incredibly disproportionate level of crime (and repeat offenders) from the black community. From that perspective, it’s likely becoming hard in some places to get an unbiased cop, judge or jury. It’s not until the black community starts to change it’s ways, will the stereotype (and resulting pattern of “unfair” responses from the greater community, juries, cops, etc) change.

    IMO black people should start by glorifying education and honest living vs. glorifying getting ahead “the easy way” via a culture of drug dealin’, stealin’ and gang bangin’. The influence this has on every new generation of young black males can’t be underestimated.

    I call absolute BS on the homicide stats being remotely equal for impoverished whites.

    Sure, if we just taxed hard working Americans even more so we can give a bunch of addicts or uneducated and unmotivated people (that don’t want to get educated or work) free wages, free housing and free food, they won’t have to pilfer from others to “get theirs”. Yeah, that’s a good plan.

    I do agree with your war on drugs point however. A flawed and failed campaign in more ways than one.

  22. Successful efforts to reduce America’s black homicide toll, must put a focus on reducing access and exposure to firearms. This has at least been legally accomplished in most of the inner city black communities. As can be seen on hey, the results have been incredibly successful.

  23. Everyone is in favor of gun control for others, but not necessarily themselves. For instance I like the idea of gun control on bad people but we don’t know who or where they are at the moment. And who decides who the bad people are?

  24. all segments of the population should have unrestricted access to self defense.
    non violent drug offences should no longer be such.
    to the extent that bootleggers became distributors, so should the drug dealers become legitimized. at the top they are already swimming in filthy lucre that will be invested somewhere.
    just as prohibition street gangs developed, we now have groups that did not exist before restrictions on narcotic distribution and use.

    the big hurdles are the prison industrial complex and the revolving door purse in the courtroom.
    keep the violent ones in, let the punk ass bitches walk.

  25. An opinion here from am OFW guy…

    The research in the article is interesting, but the conclusions are based on faulty logic. If anything, the facts I dicate that black people need better access to firearms for self-defense due to the higher portion of black victims in violent crimes.

  26. The people who get in a riffle over Black people typically never hang out in the community or get to know anyone outside their sterile middle class neighborhoods where everyone is trying their best to ignore one another.

    I live out in the hood and can honestly say people out here tend to lean libertarian than anything else. People who actually make good money in Houston noticeably lean towards being statist. Even the ones who claim to be “conservative”.

    Just because you see Angela Jackson Lee, Al Sharpton, and Jesse Jackson hustling on tv doesn’t mean everyone is down with that. In fact the media specifically tries to hide the fact no one really likes them ( the hustlers ) except mostly the rich folk.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here