Does the Second Amendment Protect Only White Gun Owners? (ACLU)

[entremet]

The most common refrain from gun rights supporters in the wake of mass shootings or other gun violence is that the best response to a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Yet in recent weeks, we have seen two Black men, a group already disproportionately victimized by police use of lethal force, shot and killed by police while protecting those around them with guns they were legally allowed to carry.

It turns out that not only are unarmed African-Americans more likely to be shot, but those who seek to follow the advice of the National Rifle Association and others to arm themselves may only make themselves more vulnerable. It is especially troubling that gun rights proponents have largely been silent when police kill Black people for lawfully using their guns.

For example, the NRA and President Trump — despite their embrace of the social media bullhorn — have not condemned the police for killing unarmed Black people. Moreover, they have yet to denounce police officers who kill Black people for possessing guns they're legally entitled to carry.

The police killings of legally armed Black citizens, and the refusal of leading gun-rights proponents to sincerely defend the victims, raises the same troubling question that both Martin Luther King Jr. and the Black Panther Party also confronted when they tried to exercise their rights to bear arms: In practice, do Second Amendment rights protect only white gun owners?

https://www.aclu.org/blog/racial-ju...econd-amendment-protect-only-white-gun-owners

 

[Dultimate]

Owning a gun for a black person is pretty much always dangerous. Even the stand your ground laws aren't applied the same way to blacks as they are with whites. Blacks are damn if they do and damn if they don't. They sure as shit ain't getting no support from these two fucks, the POTUS and the NRA.

 

[Slayven]

In theory, no. In execution, yes way too often to seen as anything but intentional.

 

[Shadybiz]

I don't know that the Amendment itself only protects white owners.

However, it is abundantly clear by now that the terms "open carry" and "concealed carry" should come with an asterisk. And the notation for that asterisk should read "If you are black, do this at your own risk."

 

[TrailerParkRanger]

Yes. And this is the inherent difference between the majority of "gun nuts" and 2A supporters. A 2A supporter will encourage underrepresented groups to exercise those rights, educate themselves about the usage of firearms and train, they want an elimination of high licensing costs, and other restrictive regulations which are designed to make the ability to exercise 2A rights harder for people who live in economically disadvantaged and urban areas. A 2A supporter recognizes there are root causes to gun violence which need to be addressed, and that the majority of firearms arrests and prosecutions target certain populations. A 2A supporter recognizes that gun culture is racist, and seeks to exclude certain groups from having the ability to protect themselves, while maintaining/encouraging the privilege of gun ownership exists only amongst certain groups. It also recognizes that "allies" also seek to keep certain groups unarmed, and reliant on maintaining said allies in positions of power, like a drug dealer/addict relationship.

One side keeps amassing arms and becoming more open and demonstrative with their armed aggressions and armed fear mongering/intimidation, while enacting social/cultural barriers to discourage underrepresented groups from exercising their 2A rights. While alleged allies still seek to maintain control and force deference to the existing power structure through legislative and economic means to keep underrepresented groups unarmed and artificially reliant on a power structure that those same underrepresented groups have not been adequately served by.

 

[hydrophilic attack]

yes

the concept of private gun ownership for self-defence is steeped in racism

almost every argument made by people who believe in civilians owning guns for self-defence is rooted in racism. they may not all be racists themselves, but the arguments build on fears that became widespread due to racism

"i need guns to protect myself from burglars, terrorists and rapists"— read: i am afraid of black and brown people and need guns to feel safe

"i need guns to be able to overthrow a tyrannical government"— read: the government has gone too far in giving rights to non-white people and taking away privileges from us white people so i want to own guns to fantasize about killing upstarts like barack obama and hillary clinton that don't know their place

they see privately owned guns as the last remaining bulwark of institutionalized white supremacy (in reality more exist, but these people are paranoid) and as such only see white people as legitimate gun owners. they see a white person with a gun out in public as a hero and good guy with a gun. they see a black person with a gun out in public as a potential robber, drug dealer, rapist, thug, they see a brown person with a gun out in public as a potential terrorist. as such, black and brown people with guns in public are legitimate targets of law enforcement and vigilantes, while white people with guns in public are not

in short, ban private ownership of guns for self defence

 

[E_i]

Anybody watch Adam Ruins Everything last week (about guns)? They go over this.

 

[TrailerParkRanger]

in short, ban private ownership of guns for self defence

Click to shrink...

There are too many guns out there. That isn't feasible. So what, stop people from being allowed to purchase additional firearms? That still skews firearms ownership heavily in one direction, while still denying the ability of the most targeted people the ability to defend themselves. You continue to force people to rely on law enforcement which has shown time and time again that they do not protect and serve large segments of the population and only serve to patrol and control them.

"Hey, we know are certain group of people have really gotten out of hand with their ownership of guns, and they also have an anti-government streak in them. We're just going to take their guns, thus realizing their wackadoo fears and potentially making them go off the deep end. Oh you? Uh, no, you aren't allowed to exercise this right anymore. You're just going to have to rely on us to keep you safe from now on. Yes, we disproportionately incarcerate you, we've legislated discrimination against you, we let Lena Dunham think she's here to save you all. Trust us."

 

[hydrophilic attack]

There are too many guns out there. That isn't feasible. So what, stop people from being allowed to purchase additional firearms? That still skews firearms ownership heavily in one direction, while still denying the ability of the most targeted people the ability to defend themselves. You continue to force people to rely on law enforcement which has shown time and time again that they do not protect and serve large segments of the population and only serve to patrol and control them.

Click to shrink...

it is going to be a tough transition period, yes

buyback programs and confiscation of guns will be needed. owning firearms without a licence for hunting or competitions should be a felony (strict regulations about how the guns should be stored in a way that makes them inaccessible would ensure that guns owned for such reasons cannot be used easily for other reasons). suspicions of unlawful gun ownership should be grounds for a search warrant

 

[Aurongel]

The ACLU has been historically pro-gun in the sense that they interpret the second amendment as advocating a collective right more than an individual one. It's nice to see them speak up about this.

Stand your ground laws are always vague enough in their wording that they are routinely and systematically applied selectively to black people all across the country. Fear mongering is the most powerful tool the NRA employs so it's not a mystery as to why they disproportionately defend the most privileged citizens.

 

[entremet]

There are too many guns out there. That isn't feasible. So what, stop people from being allowed to purchase additional firearms? That still skews firearms ownership heavily in one direction, while still denying the ability of the most targeted people the ability to defend themselves. You continue to force people to rely on law enforcement which has shown time and time again that they do not protect and serve large segments of the population and only serve to patrol and control them.

Click to shrink...

It's not the number of guns that is the issue. We can take of that. It's that gun owners have huge amount of representation in state and federal governments. Those government officials will continue to advocate for that group.

We can amend the Constitution but you need huge majorities to do this. Right now, for the other side, they won't cede this.

 

[TrailerParkRanger]

it is going to be a tough transition period, yes

buyback programs and confiscation of guns will be needed. owning firearms without a licence for hunting or competitions should be a felony (strict regulations about how the guns should be stored in a way that makes them inaccessible would ensure that guns owned for such reasons cannot be used easily for other reasons). suspicions of unlawful gun ownership should be grounds for a search warrant

Click to shrink...

Why should law abiding individuals have to relinquish their arms, obtained legally, while exercising a right enumerated by the framework for this country?

Liberal notions of gun control are also racist. It still seeks to control and force targeted groups to rely on those on a flawed, discriminatory system for protection, while ignoring all the root causes of gun violence. Poverty, inequality, lack of resources and opportunities. But, we won't fix them now, we need to defang you first, and trust us we'll get around to making everything better?

The point of the topic is that black people, and other underrepresented groups don't have the practical privilege of being able to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights. And the solutions in this thread, for people who presumably are allies, are to take those rights away from the disenfranchised so they don't have to worry about having the desire to want to exercise those rights.

Okay.

"Hey black man, we know that other people are really fucking up the 2nd Amendment for everyone else. Also, we're not so great in letting you exercise those rights yourself, seeing as how we kill you for doing so. Because of your pattern of being murdered while exercising a right that has been available to white men for centuries, we've decide to take those rights away from you."

 

[Deleted member 25606]

The Amendment itself isn't racist, but it's application, how it's enforced and protected sure as hell is, just like any other law that white people can find to bend in their favor in America.

 

[Deleted member 33533]

Owning a cell phone is dangerous enough as a black man in America. When you're carrying something that unmistakably is a gun, of course they're going to shoot first and ask questions later.

 

[Kill3r7]

No but many of its vocal endorses do.

 

[Bakercat]

Spoiler

yes

The Amendment itself isn't racist, but it's application, how it's enforced and protected sure as hell is, just like any other law that white people can find to bend in their favor in America.

Click to shrink...

More specifically, this.

 

[Lundren]

Liberal notions of gun control are also racist. It still seeks to control and force targeted groups to rely on those on a flawed, discriminatory system for protection, while ignoring all the root causes of gun violence. Poverty, inequality, lack of resources and opportunities. But, we won't fix them now, we need to defang you first, and trust us we'll get around to making everything better?

Click to shrink...

This is a strange argument in this thread.

 

[faceless]

it's not really a proper question. the amendment is not a factor at all for us.

when you're Black, you don't need a gun, the cops will plant one on you after.

they can even plant gunshots now!

 

[TrailerParkRanger]

This is a strange argument in this thread.

Click to shrink...

Hey loyal Americans, we don't have any proof that you are actively aiding our enemy . But just to be safe, why don't you give up all your land and property, especially that valuable farm land, whose successful, profitable techniques your white peers have not been able to replicate. And we're going to just keep you in these camps where we can make sure you are safe. No, for real, we're going to let you out as soon as the war ends and make sure you get everything back. Trust us.

 

[Lundren]

Hey loyal Americans, we don't have any proof that you are actively aiding our enemy . But just to be safe, why don't you give up all your land and property, especially that valuable farm land, whose successful, profitable techniques your white peers have not been able to replicate. And we're going to just keep you in these camps where we can make sure you are safe. No, for real, we're going to let you out as soon as the war ends and make sure you get everything back. Trust us.

Click to shrink...

You need to think out your posts before hitting the post button. Your edits make what you're saying or trying to say very difficult to parse.

 

[Deleted member 25606]

it's not really a proper question. the amendment is not a factor at all for us.

when you're Black, you don't need a gun, the cops will plant one on you after.

they can even plant gunshots now!

Click to shrink...

Tech has come a long way since the days of sprinkled crack.

 

[Deleted member 22649]

yes

the concept of private gun ownership for self-defence is steeped in racism

almost every argument made by people who believe in civilians owning guns for self-defence is rooted in racism. they may not all be racists themselves, but the arguments build on fears that became widespread due to racism

"i need guns to protect myself from burglars, terrorists and rapists"— read: i am afraid of black and brown people and need guns to feel safe

"i need guns to be able to overthrow a tyrannical government"— read: the government has gone too far in giving rights to non-white people and taking away privileges from us white people so i want to own guns to fantasize about killing upstarts like barack obama and hillary clinton that don't know their place

they see privately owned guns as the last remaining bulwark of institutionalized white supremacy (in reality more exist, but these people are paranoid) and as such only see white people as legitimate gun owners. they see a white person with a gun out in public as a hero and good guy with a gun. they see a black person with a gun out in public as a potential robber, drug dealer, rapist, thug, they see a brown person with a gun out in public as a potential terrorist. as such, black and brown people with guns in public are legitimate targets of law enforcement and vigilantes, while white people with guns in public are not

in short, ban private ownership of guns for self defence

Click to shrink...

I would probably have capitalized some of these words; otherwise, this exactly mirrors my own experience and frustration with every gun owner I have met. My own parents bought guns specifically because a black family was moving into a house down the street.

 

[TrailerParkRanger]

"Black folks are getting murdered by the police for being law abiding gun owners."

"Ooh, lets take that right away. Surely that will stop the police from murdering black people exercising their rights and following the law."

 

[mutantmagnet]

Well I hope this is a preamble for the ACLU to start a Supreme Court challenge.

 

[TrailerParkRanger]

I would probably have capitalized some of these words; otherwise, this exactly mirrors my own experience and frustration with every gun owner I have met. My own parents bought guns specifically because a black family was moving into a house down the street.

Click to shrink...

But this topic isn't about how white folks irrationally buy firearms due to racist fear of black folks. This topic is about how black people get murdered for unmitigated gall of acting like any other American. Even in a topic specifically about how black people are being discriminated against for exercising a right available to all other Americans, the comments are about denying those rights those black men exercised lawfully, and irrational fear of those black men exercising those rights.

 

[Lundren]

"Black folks are getting murdered by the police for being law abiding gun owners."

"Ooh, lets take that right away. Surely that will stop the police from murdering black people exercising their rights and following the law."

Click to shrink...

Do you think that gun control advocates only want to keep minorities from owning guns?

 

[Mr. X]

The 2nd Amendment was written when blacks were property. It's enforced as if this were the case today, police treat blacks with guns like we aren't suppose to have one.

 

[ShyMel]

Anybody watch Adam Ruins Everything last week (about guns)? They go over this.

Click to shrink...

Saw it and thought of it as well when reading the thread title.

 

[TrailerParkRanger]

Do you think that gun control advocates only want to keep minorities from owning guns?

Click to shrink...

Yes, because you can now keep minorities from owning guns, economically disadvantaged people from owning guns, rural people from owning guns. And the power still stays within a structure that favors economically/educationally privileged people.

This history of this country, the progress this country has made, has been about giving more people, more access to rights and freedoms. This is not that.

This is gun control folks co-opting racist police brutality and racial inequity to serve their own needs.

 

[Deleted member 22490]

The Adam Ruins Everything about Gun Control with the marvelous title of "Everyone Leaves Black People Out of the Gun Control Debate"

 

[Nephtes]

If you want to responsibly own, train with, and properly care for and secure firearms, more power to you. The color of your skin should not prevent you from exercising your second amendment rights.

If you want to be a shit gun owner, fail to properly train, and leave guns without locks lying around your house with small children ... Please kindly relocate to another country. Your callous disregard for safety makes me nervous.

Anyone who truly supports the second amendment is all about more responsible gun ownership for all citizens.

There is definitely work to be done on the enforcement end.
The NRA should still be ashamed of itself for how it completely botched the Philando Castile murder.
This was a missed opportunity for them to get behind responsible gun ownership for everyone, and they turned their back on a black man who by all accounts was doing everything the correct way.

 

[faceless]

If you want to responsibly own, train with, and properly care for and secure firearms, more power to you. The color of your skin should not prevent you from exercising your second amendment rights.

If you want to be a shit gun owner, fail to properly train, and leave guns without locks lying around your house with small children ... Please kindly relocate to another country. Your callous disregard for safety makes me nervous.

Anyone who truly supports the second amendment is all about more responsible gun ownership for all citizens.

There is definitely work to be done on the enforcement end.
The NRA should still be ashamed of itself for how it completely botched the Philando Castile murder.
This was a missed opportunity for them to get behind responsible gun ownership for everyone, and they turned their back on a black man who by all accounts was doing everything the correct way.

Click to shrink...

it was not a miss.

they weren't interested in defending a Black man.

 

[TrailerParkRanger]

 

[Deleted member 25606]

If you want to responsibly own, train with, and properly care for and secure firearms, more power to you. The color of your skin should not prevent you from exercising your second amendment rights.

If you want to be a shit gun owner, fail to properly train, and leave guns without locks lying around your house with small children ... Please kindly relocate to another country. Your callous disregard for safety makes me nervous.

Anyone who truly supports the second amendment is all about more responsible gun ownership for all citizens.

There is definitely work to be done on the enforcement end.
The NRA should still be ashamed of itself for how it completely botched the Philando Castile murder.
This was a missed opportunity for them to get behind responsible gun ownership for everyone, and they turned their back on a black man who by all accounts was doing everything the correct way.

Click to shrink...

Nah, the NRA did exactly what it exists for.

As one of this forums few believers in gun ownership I openly and easily say the NRA is cancer and anyone who actually believes in responsible gun ownership and the need for more sensible gun laws surrounding it should be against them and actively want to see them eradicated because that is not what they represent.

 

[Akira86]

depends on who you ask.

a lawyer, or a cop who just wants to go home.

NRA won't fuck up their bag with scared white people by actively supporting black and brown people legally owning firearms.

 

[TrailerParkRanger]

Nah, the NRA did exactly what it exists for.

As one of this forums few believers in gun ownership I openly and easily say the NRA is cancer and anyone who actually believes in responsible gun ownership and the need for more sensible gun laws surrounding it should be against them and actively want to see them eradicated because that is not what they represent.

Click to shrink...

The NRA represents gun manufacturers and they don't want to upset gun owner/3%/Molon Labe/Thin Blue Line folks who keep sending in dues.

 

[Deleted member 2226]

I was kind of hoping they'd crunched numbers rather than just relying on individual accounts. Way too easy for you to find the pattern you expect with this, as I'm inclined to believe it.

With that said, there's enough evidence out there that on balance having a gun makes you, your kids, and/or your partner less safe, so you could argue this is just an example of that alongside persistent racial biases.

 

[maxxpower]

Of course, same with voting. As it was intended back then.

 

[BlackGoku03]

Purpose of the second amendment is to fight against government stupidity... when black folks did that in the 60s, they enacted gun control laws. So no, the 2nd amendment isn't for us.

 

[Nephtes]

Nah, the NRA did exactly what it exists for.

As one of this forums few believers in gun ownership I openly and easily say the NRA is cancer and anyone who actually believes in responsible gun ownership and the need for more sensible gun laws surrounding it should be against them and actively want to see them eradicated because that is not what they represent.

Click to shrink...

Agreed. The NRA is a cancer.
I still wish there was a gun rights organization of their size that wasn't complete shit...

Even most of their members want SOME gun control measures, be it better background checks, ending the gun show loopholes, mental health screening, and an end to bump sticks and drum magazines...

 

[floridaguy954]

The Amendment itself isn't racist, but it's application, how it's enforced and protected sure as hell is, just like any other law that white people can find to bend in their favor in America.

Click to shrink...

.

 

[Vic Damone Jr.]

Of course, look at Reagan and California.

 

[Sunster]

The 2nd Amendment was written when blacks were property. It's enforced as if this were the case today, police treat blacks with guns like we aren't suppose to have one.

Click to shrink...

Because the police were formed when black people were property and that is how they behave today.

 

[mael]

Why is the amendment not racist by itself? It was written in a framework where the people subject of the constitution were white people (since black people were in bondage after all).
By default it was never meant for black people.
Now the Emancipation act may have changed the interpretation of the Amendment but that's a 'happy' consequence more than anything.

 

[Deleted member 6582]

As a law it's about invasion from England (white people). Gun laws "protect" nobody, they simply allow them to do incredable violence. Certain minority groups are simply on the receiving end of hatred and guns allow those actions to become worse.

 

[TrailerParkRanger]

Why is the amendment not racist by itself? It was written in a framework where the people subject of the constitution were white people (since black people were in bondage after all).
By default it was never meant for black people.
Now the Emancipation act may have changed the interpretation of the Amendment but that's a 'happy' consequence more than anything.

Click to shrink...

The post-Civil War amendments did change the interpretation directly. That was the whole point of the 13th - 15th Amendments. The purpose was to explicitly change a nation that was "half slave and half free" and unsure that all Americans receive the "blessing of liberty." That's why the 14th is such a broad Amendment in terms of defining a citizen. That wasn't a "happy consequence" the language was intentional In broadly expanding the definition of a citizen and ensuring that the state provide equal protection to all people, not just citizens, under the law.

 

[Crossing Eden]

In theory, no. In execution, yes way too often to seen as anything but intentional.

Click to shrink...

^^^^

 

[mael]

The post-Civil War amendments did change the interpretation directly. That was the whole point of the 13th - 15th Amendments. The purpose was to explicitly change a nation that was "half slave and half free" and unsure that all Americans receive the "blessing of liberty." That's why the 14th is such a broad Amendment in terms of defining a citizen. That wasn't a "happy consequence" the language was intentional In broadly expanding the definition of a citizen and ensuring that the state provide equal protection to all people, not just citizens, under the law.

Click to shrink...

Hence why 'happy' is in quote but still.
But I mean the initial 2A probably was about as racist as the 3/5th compromise and the rest of the constitution.

 

[Richietto]

In theory, no. In execution, yes way too often to seen as anything but intentional.

Click to shrink...

Pretty much.

 

[TrailerParkRanger]

Hence why 'happy' is in quote but still.
But I mean the initial 2A probably was about as racist as the 3/5th compromise and the rest of the constitution.

Click to shrink...

The 3/5 compromise is really racist, but everything after the Reconstruction Amendments, Federally, is also written in the broadest possible language to avoid such a relapse. Now, when you get into state statute, yes, hella racist, but long track record of that shit being found unconstitutional in Federal court due to the broadness of Federal law.

I get what you're saying though.

My issue on this thread, is the gun control arguments being made completely ignore the fact that they were black dudes obeying the law. And that the guns that killed those men were not firearms, whose right to carry, is enumerated by the 2nd Amendment. The guns that killed those black men, were state sanctioned and state issued firearms, by state actors which do not have to abide by gun control measures, and are often exempt from regulations/restrictions placed upon citizens by the ATF and the NFA.

Guns by citizens, governed under Federal law didn't kill those men. The police, the ones people suggest we cede our protection and trust to, killed those men.