NAACP considers suing gun manufacturers

R

rod

New member
The Associtated Press is reporting that Kweisi Mfume President of the NAACP is considering filing a suit against gun manufacturers.

"We represent a significant constituency that is disproportionately affected by gun violence. The time has come for us to look at the proliferation of handguns,'' Mfume said at the association's annual meeting Saturday."

Mfume said he would present to the NAACP's 64-member Board of Directors several options, ranging from issuing a resolution that voices concern about guns to joining suits that filed by cities including Chicago and New Orleans. The NAACP also could file a separate suit, he said.

Meanwhile new statistics are on the way from the ATF: The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco
and Firearms is ready to report that 51 percent of the guns used in crimes by juveniles people aged 18 to 24 were purchased illegally over the last three years from licensed dealers by people acting as intermediaries for the real owners. Additionally 35 percent of guns used in crimes by juveniles and young adults were stolen. The rest were acquired from non-licensed private sellers not required to
obtain identification or subject their customers to background checks.

Amazing how these "statistics" appear at such opportune times.

=rod=
 
This doesn't surprise me much.

The biggest issue I have is all the time, effort, and money that groups such as this and HCI, etc., spend on trying to make the world safe, but do nothing more than erode our rights. If they apportioned these efforts into correcting the sociological problems that lead to crime, if they researched into the deeper moral issues that arise that have placed the value of a human life equal to a package of Pop Tarts. Anti-gun laws and lawsuits are basically, in my view, admissions that they have failed their constituents and group members in finding ways to truly improve the "way of life" of those constituents and group members. They are incapable, and perhaps unwilling, to address the deeper issues, so they try to pass what is nothing more than "feel good" legislation, with the hopes that people don't realize that the king has no clothes.
 
A possible lawsuit from the NAACP against gun manufacturers doesn't really surprise me. A little blood in the water will attract sharks from miles away, and these under-employed anti-tobacco/gun lawyers have been very busy chumming wherever they can. The NAACP also represents a sizable constituency that is plagued by a host of other social ills. If they truly believe that a lawsuit will somehow correct any of these sad circumstances then more power to them. But I believe that Mr. Mfume knows better. This action may help build his personal power base and enrich some of his shyster friends, but in the end I don't really believe it's going to do much about curbing the violence.
If the new statistics coming out from BATF are really true (and why would anybody with half a gram of gray matter between his ears NOT think so), I would have to wonder why they haven't been busy busting all these clowns that have been making straw purchases of firearms and then reselling them to these underage hoodlums. I don't know about anyone else, but every time I purchase a firearm I have to fill out a BATF form 4473. As soon as I put my signature on that form, reselling that firearm in the manner necessary to generate those statistics would make me a felon. But if that law goes unenforced, why would I worry, and why would I stop?
The trouble with most laws is that the people who most readily comply with them are usually not he same people whose actions prompted passage of the legislation in question to begin with. I am always amazed by the mentality that seems to think that "if we just pass ONE more law" a problem will magically go away.
 
Talk about shooting yourself in the foot, especially when John Lott has proven that what minorities need are more guns.

------------------
"Oh, grow up, 007."
 
Its been conclusively proven that gun control from its historic inception has racist roots:
1)Disarming Amerinds
2) Jim Crow laws
3) Hispanics in the west
4) Asians ("orientals") in the Pacific west
5) Sullivan laws in New York (Italians and Jews)
6) Clinton's laws and sweeps in housing projects

But I suppose its too much to ask the NAACP to research the topic, huh?

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"
 
Oh, for crying out loud :(
Who want's to jump on this band wagon next?

MADD,SADD or the local merchants assoc?
Excuse my venting. Maybe the local school district might want to jump in for little Johnny or Maryann bringing dad's 1911 to school to put the bully at bay, makes me sad to see what is happening, I write to my local congress and senotors sometimes I get a response sometimes not.

------------------
Justice for one,Justice for all.




[This message has been edited by Flyerm14 (edited February 22, 1999).]
 
Kwasi Mfume is being an idiot again. I don't like to think about where my family and I would be without the NAACP, but I really think that the organization has become a tool of a larger ideology with no interest in the rights of blacks. It may sound "Uncle Tom" of me to accuse them so, since the NAACP has been called a leftist tool since the '40's, but it's starting to look that way. What the hell does Mfume think he will accomplish by depriving law-abiding blacks like me of a gun? I tell you, I used to live in the ghetto, and I owned no gun. When the shots rang out, it was terrifying; I felt helpless. If Kwasi thinks that black people who own guns for protection are running out into the tenement hallways and shooting each other, he needs to check his statistics.
 
Good to hear it, Mort. The teachers' unions and labor unions have alwasy been nothing more than a tool of the liberals. It would be my hope that NAACP does not become such a group as well; rather they will hopefully stick to their reason for being - serving their constituents (blacks). But I suppose, like the labor unions and teachers' unions, power in the hands of the leaders corrupts them greatly. How to stop this...?
 
I don't really think it's about corruption in the NAACP yet, Ex; I think its leaders are listening to the wrong people. Do Democrats (clearly a force at work here) have the interests of blacks at heart? No. Well, perhaps Charles Rangel, but he infuriates me anyway.

I can understand the knee-jerk reaction of the law-abiding black citizen to "gun violence". The gun is right there. When violence is directed towards you, the implements of violence become totems of fearful power. Many people stop there, and let fear dictate their decisions. Others, like me, say, "I, too, can have power; I can control it."

Power, whether by parliamentary procedure or racking a slide, requires responsibility.

When black leaders parrot liberal whites in calling for gun legislation or litigation, they unwittingly promulgate and amplify the basic tenet of liberalism: You can't handle your own life. This idea has always been disproportionately applied to minorities.

So, 'taint corruption, 'tis manipulation at work in the offices of the NAACP.
 
The data clearly show that the vast majority of crimes against minorities are committed by minorities, usually of the same ethnic group. Perhaps the gun makers could pacify Kweisi by announcing that, in acquiescence to the wishes of the NAACP, they will quit selling guns to Americans of African lineage.

The beauty of this approach is that the NAACP will likely point out that this violates the rights of their constituency. At which time the gun makers will have a ready-made reply in the vernacular of the day... Duh!
 
Mort,
The way I see the NAACP it should read is NAASCP National Assosiation for the Advancement of Socialist Colored People.

I think there needs to be another group for Blacks who want to be an equal part of a Free Nation.
 
Mort, if I find an opportunity, may I quote your last post? To the point and quite eloquent. There was an article in an older issue of, I believe, "American Survival Guide" that discussed rampant liberalism leading to unhealthy and dysfunctional co-dependent relationships between the liberal power structure and the mostly-minority constituency.
As you stated, Mort, people are told they can't handle their own lives. They're not responsible enough to take care of themselves. The nine most dangerous words you might hear - "I'm from the government, I'm here to help you." Hell, our prez won't even give back tax surpluses because he implies that we aren't responsible enough to invest it wisely ourselves. Does this start from the top and work its way down, or vice-versa?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top