Gun control and California

[Blkfyre]

Interestingly enough in California gun control was signed into law by Republican Darling Ronald Regan and was supported by the NRA itself!

Why, do you say, would the NRA do such a thing as any good conservative knows it is against God and Country to control guns in any way, shape, manner or form?

The answer, it appears: Black people!  Yup, apparently Mulford the author of the bill wasn't a fan of Black folks carrying guns, who knew?

In 1967, a new organization had suddenly appeared in California. Based in the East Bay, where Mulford's district was located, it was known as the Black Panther Party for Self Defense, or Black Panthers for short. The group made gun ownership and—more alarmingly for white conservatives and the police—the public display of guns a central tenet of its platform.

Mulford freaked out. With the Panthers carrying their guns around Oakland, often following police cruisers, he quickly drafted his gun control bill.

https://californialocal.com/localnews/santa-cruz/ca/article/show/4412-california-gun-control-reagan-black-panthers/

[Hobby]

Mulford Act

A.B 1591 was made an "urgency statute" under Article IV, §8(d) of the Constitution of California after "an organized band of men armed with loaded firearms [...] entered the Capitol" on May 2, 1967;[8] as such, it required a 2/3 majority in each house. On June 8th, before the third reading in the Assembly (controlled by Democrats, 42:38), the urgency clause was adopted, and the bill was then read and passed.[1] It passed the Senate (controlled by Democrats, 20:19) on July 26 by 29 votes to 7,[9] and was signed by Governor Ronald Reagan on July 28, 1967.

Both Republicans and Democrats in California supported increased gun control, as did the National Rifle Association of America.[10] Governor Ronald Reagan, who was coincidentally present on the capitol lawn when the protesters arrived, later commented that he saw "no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons" and that guns were a "ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will." In a later press conference, Reagan added that the Mulford Act "would work no hardship on the honest citizen."[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act


True to form...You only want to share part of it not all of it... Seems the bill was bi partisan supported.

[Blkfyre]

Mulford Act

A.B 1591 was made an "urgency statute" under Article IV, §8(d) of the Constitution of California after "an organized band of men armed with loaded firearms [...] entered the Capitol" on May 2, 1967;[8] as such, it required a 2/3 majority in each house. On June 8th, before the third reading in the Assembly (controlled by Democrats, 42:38), the urgency clause was adopted, and the bill was then read and passed.[1] It passed the Senate (controlled by Democrats, 20:19) on July 26 by 29 votes to 7,[9] and was signed by Governor Ronald Reagan on July 28, 1967.

Both Republicans and Democrats in California supported increased gun control, as did the National Rifle Association of America.[10] Governor Ronald Reagan, who was coincidentally present on the capitol lawn when the protesters arrived, later commented that he saw "no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons" and that guns were a "ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will." In a later press conference, Reagan added that the Mulford Act "would work no hardship on the honest citizen."[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act


True to form...You only want to share part of it not all of it... Seems the bill was bi partisan supported.

Nothing I said was untrue in the slightest. And just because it was passed on both sides, doesn't mean that the reason was they didn't want armed black people. There are MANY places to look up the reasons why the bill came into being, and none of them dispute that fact.

[Hobby]

Nothing I said was untrue in the slightest. And just because it was passed on both sides, doesn't mean that the reason was they didn't want armed black people. There are MANY places to look up the reasons why the bill came into being, and none of them dispute that fact.

No?  You just want to make it a racial issue! Gee they were supposed to give Black people a pass for this, who knew?

[Blkfyre]

No?  You just want to make it a racial issue!

It WAS a racial issue! They plainly stated they did not want the BLACK PANTHERS to have guns.

https://www.history.com/news/black-panthers-gun-control-nra-support-mulford-act

https://www.explorationsinteractive.com/picking-up-the-gun-the-black-panther-party-and-the-mulford-act.html

"Mulford even boasted of his intent to sabotage the organization by calling into an Oakland radio program during a feature including BPP members to publicly announce his proposed bill."

https://digital.sandiego.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3267&context=sdlr

"Brown further alleged that Mulford had opposed similar proposals "until Negroes showed up in Oakland-his district-with arms and then he seek[ed] restrictive legislation."'"

Also, it's funny. You focused on my agenda rather than the wording of exactly what you posted:

Mulford Act

A.B 1591 was made an "urgency statute" under Article IV, §8(d) of the Constitution of California after "an organized band of men armed with loaded firearms [...] entered the Capitol" on May 2, 1967;

There were complaints and Democrats wanting to increase gun control in the wake of armed men entering the capitol during the shutdown in Michigan and Jan 6th and uniformly the conservative opinion around here was that's wrong, they had a right to do that, and anyone who would think to do so was trying to take away every American's God-given right to bear arms. At the time, the Black Panthers did have the right to enter the capitol with loaded weapons unconcealed.

There also was outrage over California's current governor wanting to beef up gun laws recently.

So.....where's the outrage over what Mulford and Regan and th NRA did? Why did what they did get not even a token "it was wrong"?

[Hobby]

It WAS a racial issue! They plainly stated they did not want the BLACK PANTHERS to have guns.

https://www.history.com/news/black-panthers-gun-control-nra-support-mulford-act

https://www.explorationsinteractive.com/picking-up-the-gun-the-black-panther-party-and-the-mulford-act.html

"Mulford even boasted of his intent to sabotage the organization by calling into an Oakland radio program during a feature including BPP members to publicly announce his proposed bill."

https://digital.sandiego.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3267&context=sdlr

"Brown further alleged that Mulford had opposed similar proposals "until Negroes showed up in Oakland-his district-with arms and then he seek[ed] restrictive legislation."'"

Also, it's funny. You focused on my agenda rather than the wording of exactly what you posted:

There were complaints and Democrats wanting to increase gun control in the wake of armed men entering the capitol during the shutdown in Michigan and Jan 6th and uniformly the conservative opinion around here was that's wrong, they had a right to do that, and anyone who would think to do so was trying to take away every American's God-given right to bear arms.

There also was outrage over California's current governor wanting to beef up gun laws recently.

So.....where's the outrage over what Mulford and Regan and th NRA did? Why did what they did get not even a token "it was wrong"?

It is pointless to discuss this any further with you.

[bats]

No?  You just want to make it a racial issue! Gee they were supposed to give Black people a pass for this, who knew?

This was the Black Panthers. They were about race, and the government's response to them was about race. It was fucking racial.

[HighStepper]

To give historical context, this was period of racial struggle for civil rights and racial tolerance/acceptance of Negroes/Black people. The Civil Rights act passed, but there was a lot of backlash of hate.

Marin Luther King advocated for peace and brotherhood. This was met by many white people as a good goal, but you couldn't change attitudes right away.

Black power groups organized to counter white supremacy and were critical of Martin Luther King's peaceful protest methods. Their mantra toward white people was, "we don't want to sit in your kitchen drinking coffee and we don't want to date your daughter" We want job opportunities and our civil rights and we will take them by any means necessary.

The Black Panthers viewed the Second Amendment as more than the idea of self-defense in the home, but to have weapons to protect the public (particularly African-Americans) from a corrupt government. The Black Panthers would follow police cars and dispense legal advice to African-Americans who were stopped by the police. They legally carried their weapons.The Black Panthers referred to these activities as "police patrols."

[Danno]

kids get shoot, arm the teachers.
this week arm the doctors.
white supremacist shoots up a black super market, guess what they didn't say. arm the black people.

[Hobby]

kids get shoot, arm the teachers.
this week arm the doctors.
white supremacist shoots up a black super market, guess what they didn't say. arm the black people.

That's because they are already armed.....LOL

[Danno]

now you're making fun of black people getting shot

[bats]

now you're making fun of black people getting shot

That's one way of looking at Hobby's rather clunky comment. It's no stretch at all, however, to look at it another way.