Activism Change

Catholics Keep your powder dry

Question:

<<K-Mart should discharge Ms. O’Donnell and hire a person who upholds American values of private firearms ownership, racial

harmony, and the right to self-defense. How does this "right to self-defense" work?  Do you get to shoot when you **feel** threatened?  Or does someone have to shoot at you first?  Can I shoot them if they have a knife? How about a fork?  Or a spoon?

How about fruit? What if they attack me with a bunch of grapes? Or worse, a banana?? Or heavens above – a pointy stick????? — Yes, I believe in God! Reply to the newsgroup or to the address below, please! http://www.javanet.com/~lanat

Response:

bill cooper at  www.harvest-trust.org Does A Racist Speak For K-Mart??? Would K-Mart employ an avowed racist to be the company’s spokesperson? Unlikely. Yet Rosie O’Donnell’s recent statements about "gun control" suggest either that she harbors racist views, or that she does not know about the racist roots and purposes of "gun control." The first "gun control" programs in America were enacted to help slavemasters control their Negro slaves. Many such laws were born of fear of slave uprisings. State governments used "gun control" laws to support racism before and after the Civil War. There were laws to ban firearms, to require licensing and registration of firearms and firearms owners, and to impose high taxes on guns and ammunition. To possess a firearm in some states, black people had to get approval from either their master, the police, or a judge. Some laws allowed warrantless "gun sweeps" of blacks’ private homes. Many people don’t realize the dark history of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968. First, that Act was developed using the Nazi Weapons Law of 1938 as a model. Second, that Act was a response, not to political assassinations as sometimes claimed, but to the race riots that took place in the 1960’s. Fear that black people were too easily getting firearms motivated passage of that Act. Recent history shows how private firearms ownership protects fundamental human rights in America. During the Civil Rights Movement, the Ku Klux Klan attacked voting rights and integration activists. Frequently the local police were no help, so black people armed themselves and repulsed Klan terrorism. The Deacons for Defense and Justice and other armed volunteer groups organized in southern states to defend black people and deter racist violence. Ms. O’Donnell advocates total disarmament of all Americans. She reportedly said that she didn’t care what reasons that individuals might have for owning and using firearms: "Sorry, it’s 1999. We have had enough as a nation. You are not allowed to own a gun, and if you do own a gun I think you should go to prison." Rosie is right: This is 1999. It’s not 1865, when blacks were jailed for owning a gun. It’s not 1938, when Jews were sent to concentration camps for owning a gun. Her statement shockingly disrespects the lives protected and saved by private ownership of firearms. It’s not only that she ignores the estimated 2 million defensive uses of firearms to stop active crime each year. If a racist gang menaces a black family, Ms. O’Donnell would forbid the mom and dad from protecting the family. When skinheads threaten and insult a Jewish family, Ms. O’Donnell would sleep comfortably, knowing that the Jews are defenseless. K-Mart customers include millions of family-oriented people, including millions who are from racial or other minorities. K-Mart sells firearms to citizens without discriminating on the basis of race, religion, or other such factor. Ms. O’Donnell certainly has a legal right to "free speech," but that does not require K-Mart, a private employer, to use her as a spokesperson. She has taken a position directly conflicting with the merchandising practices of the store. Her views are rooted in the lingering racism that still finds expression in "gun control" laws. If the facts showing the racist history of "gun control" are new to Ms. O’Donnell, then she should consider those facts and rethink her views. Otherwise, K-Mart should discharge Ms. O’Donnell and hire a person who upholds American values of private firearms ownership, racial harmony, and the right to self-defense.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – bill cooper at  www.harvest-trust.org Does A Racist Speak For K-Mart??? Would K-Mart employ an avowed racist to be the company’s spokesperson? Unlikely. Yet Rosie O’Donnell’s recent statements about "gun control" suggest either that she harbors racist views, or that she does not know about the racist roots and purposes of "gun control." The first "gun control" programs in America were enacted to help slavemasters control their Negro slaves. Many such laws were born of fear of slave uprisings. State governments used "gun control" laws to support racism before and after the Civil War. There were laws to ban firearms, to require licensing and registration of firearms and firearms owners, and to impose high taxes on guns and ammunition. To possess a firearm in some states, black people had to get approval from either their master, the police, or a judge. Some laws allowed warrantless "gun sweeps" of blacks’ private homes. Many people don’t realize the dark history of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968. First, that Act was developed using the Nazi Weapons Law of 1938 as a model. Second, that Act was a response, not to political assassinations as sometimes claimed, but to the race riots that took place in the 1960’s. Fear that black people were too easily getting firearms motivated passage of that Act. Recent history shows how private firearms ownership protects fundamental human rights in America. During the Civil Rights Movement, the Ku Klux Klan attacked voting rights and integration activists. Frequently the local police were no help, so black people armed themselves and repulsed Klan terrorism. The Deacons for Defense and Justice and other armed volunteer groups organized in southern states to defend black people and deter racist violence. Ms. O’Donnell advocates total disarmament of all Americans. She reportedly said that she didn’t care what reasons that individuals might have for owning and using firearms: "Sorry, it’s 1999. We have had enough as a nation. You are not allowed to own a gun, and if you do own a gun I think you should go to prison." Rosie is right: This is 1999. It’s not 1865, when blacks were jailed for owning a gun. It’s not 1938, when Jews were sent to concentration camps for owning a gun. Her statement shockingly disrespects the lives protected and saved by private ownership of firearms. It’s not only that she ignores the estimated 2 million defensive uses of firearms to stop active crime each year. If a racist gang menaces a black family, Ms. O’Donnell would forbid the mom and dad from protecting the family. When skinheads threaten and insult a Jewish family, Ms. O’Donnell would sleep comfortably, knowing that the Jews are defenseless. K-Mart customers include millions of family-oriented people, including millions who are from racial or other minorities. K-Mart sells firearms to citizens without discriminating on the basis of race, religion, or other such factor. Ms. O’Donnell certainly has a legal right to "free speech," but that does not require K-Mart, a private employer, to use her as a spokesperson. She has taken a position directly conflicting with the merchandising practices of the store. Her views are rooted in the lingering racism that still finds expression in "gun control" laws. If the facts showing the racist history of "gun control" are new to Ms. O’Donnell, then she should consider those facts and rethink her views. Otherwise, K-Mart should discharge Ms. O’Donnell and hire a person who upholds American values of private firearms ownership, racial harmony, and the right to self-defense.

I cannot believe people are trying to tie in the right to bear arms with "racial harmony." You guys are desperate. Josh

Response:

<<K-Mart should discharge Ms. O’Donnell and hire a person who upholds American values of private firearms ownership, racial harmony, and the right to self-defense. How does this "right to self-defense" work?  Do you get to shoot when you **feel** threatened?  Or does someone have to shoot at you first?  Can I shoot them if they have a knife? How about a fork?  Or a spoon? Since it seems part of the justification for this is your belief that we can’t count on the police, how do they fit in?  Do you get to shoot them if you feel threatened?  Do they get to shoot you if they feel threatened?  Like the gal asleep in her car with a gun; can’t blame the police, can you, since she was "threatening".  Can’t blame her, since she obviously felt "threatened".   Just an unfortunate accident for folks who believe in "private firearms ownership, racial harmony, and the right to self-defense." Deo Gratias John

Response:

<<Her statement shockingly disrespects the lives protected and saved by private ownership of firearms. It’s not only that she ignores the estimated 2 million defensive uses of firearms to stop active crime each year. If a racist gang menaces a black family, Ms. O’Donnell would forbid the mom and dad from protecting the family. When skinheads threaten and insult a Jewish family, Ms. O’Donnell would sleep comfortably, knowing that the Jews are defenseless. This is a hoot!  What’s the writer’s suggestion that our society’s reaction to racist gangs be?  A black moms and dads gang.  And how to control skinheads? Arm the Jewish families.  In short, the way to maintain civilization is to organize into armed camps.  A neighborhood arms race! The only people I see sleeping like babies would be the wealthy arms merchants in their fortified villas.  Far from the ‘hood. Deo Gratias John

Response:

Filed under: Human Rights

Related Posts

• to our Swedish friends
• HOLOCAUST: Finkelstein should criticize the Swiss, not Zionists
• Let's Be Clear
• Life can be fun
• Well Said, This Says It All
• Validate and Vote Your Values
• A TRIBUTE TO AMERICA
• MYANMAR- Please E-mail Tips
• Islamic Conference Stresses Moderation, Tolerance
• South Africa after apartheid