• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Just How Racist is the NRA?

Cigar said:
The typical reaction is to defend the Cop at any cost and despite what their own eye and ears are telling them.
Click to expand...

Did the NRA defend this cop? Those that have been cops and interviewed witnesses probably know that your eyes and ears lie to you.
 
Black Dog said:
Which is absolute bullshit. You are more likely to be shot by a police officer than a CCW holder. I don't care what the officer thought. He fucked up real bad. He panicked because a black guy had a gun, that could have been me. There is no excuse or valid reason for this man to be dead at the hands of this chicken shit cowardly cop.



The NRA could have said something, anything in support of this CCW holder who was gunned down for simply being black.
Click to expand...

This is a problem for the NRA leadership, most people I know see the obvious regardless if they're an NRA Member or not.
 
Rucker61 said:
Did the NRA defend this cop? Those that have been cops and interviewed witnesses probably know that your eyes and ears lie to you.
Click to expand...

No your Eyes and Ears don't lie to you, your perceptions, interpretations and life experiences do.

Deception is in the mind and how you process what to See and Hear.

Look it up ...
 
Cigar said:
This is a problem for the NRA leadership, most people I know see the obvious regardless if they're an NRA Member or not.
Click to expand...

I agree. Like I said I know why they said nothing as they are supported by police organizations. I don't think they were being racist necessarily, they were however being cowards. They did not want to upset a large portion of the base. I mean look here in the gun forum. We have pro 2nd amendment people on both sides.
 
calamity said:
Very racist, it seems

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ict-the-nra-is-silent/?utm_term=.176e7033d818



Black guy with legal gun and CCW shot by cop...crickets. Good job, NRA.
Click to expand...

George HW Bush himself apparently disliked their rhetoric.

George H.W. Bush Resigns from the NRA

Letter of Resignation Sent By Bush to Rifle Association - NYTimes.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2013/01/17/the-long-history-of-the-nra-and-the-gop/

Admittedly, it was many years ago, but.....it shows a trend
 
Black Dog said:
I agree. Like I said I know why they said nothing as they are supported by police organizations. I don't think they were being racist necessarily, they were however being cowards. They did not want to upset a large portion of the base. I mean look here in the gun forum. We have pro 2nd amendment people on both sides.
Click to expand...

They haven't even retracted "the only thing that stops a bad guy" statement. What would the NRA statement have been worth out in the world? Would it have meant anything in the Black community <- serious question.
 
Rucker61 said:
They haven't even retracted "the only thing that stops a bad guy" statement. What would the NRA statement have been worth out in the world? Would it have meant anything in the Black community <- serious question.
Click to expand...

I don't know. Everyone is different and I can't speak for all blacks no more than you can speak for your own ethnic group. All I know is I am hurting real bad. Between Terence Crutcher's murder and now this? I am ashamed to be an American right now.
 
Black Dog said:
You saw the video. You are telling me you don't recognize panic when you see it? Castile said "I am not reaching for it" after the officer told him to get his license. So no. The victim was shot because he was a scary black man who said he had a gun. The officer then panicked.



He was a legal CCW holder with a weapon which he declared like he was supposed to, to the officer.
Click to expand...

He wasn't even supposed to. MN doesn't have a duty to inform law though I'd argue it's a good practice to let the officer know. Arguably he got shot for trying to do the right thing.
 
Gaius46 said:
He wasn't even supposed to. MN doesn't have a duty to inform law though I'd argue it's a practice to let the officer know. Arguably he got shot for trying to do the right thing.
Click to expand...

I believe this.
 
ibelsd said:
This is a terrible argument. From watching the video, I feel pretty confident in stating that the cop overreacted. The driver was calm. He was compliant. The officer got scared and shot the guy. I think most cops would have handled the situation without firing a weapon. I think it is fair to acknowledge that this cop reacted poorly and should not be a cop.

Regarding the NRA and why it has remained silent... the truth is that I couldn't find a single instance where the NRA got involved in an incident where a gun owner was shot by police. I don't think this is a black v. white issue. I think it is that the NRA typically does not get involved in these types of issues. If I had to guess, the main reason is that the NRA does not want to alienate law enforcement. Perhaps, though, its just outside of what the NRA does. It is a gun advocacy group. It is worried about gun legislation, not bad policing. Perhaps, if the Castille shooting was the result of some specific policy, then the NRA would have a reason to get involved. However, the most likely explanation is that a cop panicked. What do people want the NRA to say here? Cops! Don't panic....

As is usually the case, people need to get a grip.
Click to expand...

I'd think issues of police interaction with law abiding gun owners would be smack in the middle of the NRA's wheelhouse.

I'd think in a situation like this the NRA at least would start talking about police policy and procedure with respect to how legal gun owners are dealt with on the street.
 
Last edited:
Black Dog said:
You saw the video. You are telling me you don't recognize panic when you see it? Castile said "I am not reaching for it" after the officer told him to get his license. So no. The victim was shot because he was a scary black man who said he had a gun. The officer then panicked.



He was a legal CCW holder with a weapon which he declared like he was supposed to, to the officer.
Click to expand...

the officer was poorly trained and panicked. It was a bad shoot. the department should pay damages because the shooting was a direct result of negligent hiring and training practices. I think the NRA could have done more and I have said as much to my NRA rep
 
Gaius46 said:
I'd think issues of police interaction with law abiding gun owners would be smack in the middle of the NRA's wheelhouse.
Click to expand...

It ain't the Wheelhouse that's the problem, otherwise they would have balked at Ronny Reagan supporting Gun Restrictions in CA ;)
 
Black Dog said:
I don't know. Everyone is different and I can't speak for all blacks no more than you can speak for your own ethnic group. All I know is I am hurting real bad. Between Terence Crutcher's murder and now this? I am ashamed to be an American right now.
Click to expand...

I have said all along this was a bad shoot. BTW the jury just hung on the Ray Tensing case. If the guy who shot this man in Minnesota was acquitted, I cannot see Tensing being convicted. Tensing was a bad shooting too but not nearly as bad as the ST Paul's case
 
Tigerace117 said:
George HW Bush himself apparently disliked their rhetoric.

George H.W. Bush Resigns from the NRA

Letter of Resignation Sent By Bush to Rifle Association - NYTimes.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2013/01/17/the-long-history-of-the-nra-and-the-gop/

Admittedly, it was many years ago, but.....it shows a trend
Click to expand...

Yep. The NRA speaking out to defend someone like Koresh while staying mum when a black guy with a kid and woman in the car gets blasted by a cop while reaching for his license is bad form.
 
TurtleDude said:
I have said all along this was a bad shoot. BTW the jury just hung on the Ray Tensing case. If the guy who shot this man in Minnesota was acquitted, I cannot see Tensing being convicted. Tensing was a bad shooting too but not nearly as bad as the ST Paul's case
Click to expand...

On the surface, it seemed somewhat logical to assume the driver should not have moved a muscle until the cop told him to do so. But, after watching the latest video, I can't help but think this cop really screwed up. Sure, the victim made a mistake. But, damn! I certainly see no reason why that minor mistake should have cost him his life except that the cop panicked and overreacted.
 
TurtleDude said:
the officer was poorly trained and panicked. It was a bad shoot. the department should pay damages because the shooting was a direct result of negligent hiring and training practices. I think the NRA could have done more and I have said as much to my NRA rep
Click to expand...

I read the family is thinking of a 1983 suit against the officer and the city. I'd think they'd have a good shot against the officer but the bar is really high with respect to the city. Have to prove gross negligence in how the department trains its officers.
 
Gaius46 said:
I read the family is thinking of a 1983 suit against the officer and the city. I'd think they'd have a good shot against the officer but the bar is really high with respect to the city. Have to prove gross negligence in how the department trains its officers.
Click to expand...

the suit against the city will be far easier under a theory of respondeat superior
 
TurtleDude said:
the suit against the city will be far easier under a theory of respondeat superior
Click to expand...

That would apply to a 1983 suit as well? From what I read - which is all I really know about the subject - for a 1983 suit to work it's not enough to prove that the officer violated Castile's civil rights. They'd have to prove that city was so grossly negligent in training that the outcome could have been foreseen.

That's at least the opinion of one con law guy I read in interpreting the SC precedents.
 
Gaius46 said:
That would apply to a 1983 suit as well? From what I read - which is all I really know about the subject - for a 1983 suit to work it's not enough to prove that the officer violated Castile's civil rights. They'd have to prove that city was so grossly negligent in training that the outcome could have been foreseen.

That's at least the opinion of one con law guy I read in interpreting the SC precedents.
Click to expand...

its a good idea to sue both the city and the cop individually and create a conflict of interest between the two
 
Black Dog said:
Yes I can. I saw the dash cam video. I am an ex LEO and military, I know panic when I see it. I am a black man and CCW carrier, there is nothing "pretend" about my outrage.
Click to expand...

You know damn well then that you can't see inside the car. And THAT is the problem with cases like this. It all SEEMS like a bad shoot. But I can't know for sure. You can't. You didn't see his hands. Short of a body cam? You really don't have enough for anything but conjecture. And that makes me uneasy. Uneasy in the sense that I don't want the NRA making claims against court findings without conclusive evidence. That sets a bad precedent. They need to tread lightly. Anything they say or do or don't do will be used against them in the court of public opinion.

And just to expand on that:

What happens if they make a habit and we find out from body cameras that in incident x...the officer/CCW/homeowner/store owner panicked because the guy put his hand right on the weapon? Cameras only show a limited perspective. I don't want the NRA making a habit of sticking their foot in their mouthes worse than they already do.
 
Last edited:
blackjack50 said:
You know damn well then that you can't see inside the car. And THAT is the problem with cases like this. It all SEEMS like a bad shoot. But I can't know for sure. You can't. You didn't see his hands. Short of a body cam? You really don't have enough for anything but conjecture. And that makes me uneasy. Uneasy in the sense that I don't want the NRA making claims against court findings without conclusive evidence. That sets a bad precedent. They need to tread lightly. Anything they say or do or don't do will be used against them in the court of public opinion.
Click to expand...

#1 I don't need to see his hands to know he had no reason to pull a gun on an officer...
a. His girlfriend and kid were in the car.
b. He was clam even up to the point the officer freaked out.
c. He was a legal CCW holder and had no reason to assault or pull a weapon on a cop.
d. He had no weapon in his hand at all and was going for his licence which the officer had requested.

#2 Who said anything about the NRA saying anything now? To little, to late.

blackjack50 said:
And just to expand on that:

What happens if they make a habit and we find out from body cameras that in incident x...the officer/CCW/homeowner/store owner panicked because the guy put his hand right on the weapon? Cameras only show a limited perspective. I don't want the NRA making a habit of sticking their foot in their mouthes worse than they already do.
Click to expand...

At this point I don't care what the spineless NRA does. Obviously they only care about their own police interests.
 
Cigar said:
This is a problem for the NRA leadership, most people I know see the obvious regardless if they're an NRA Member or not.
Click to expand...

Please explain how this is a problem for the NRA leadership.
 
calamity said:
Yep. The NRA speaking out to defend someone like Koresh while staying mum when a black guy with a kid and woman in the car gets blasted by a cop while reaching for his license is bad form.
Click to expand...

Maybe it was just the day and age? I don't know. It seems like it was much more in fashion to go over the top in denunciations of "tyranny" in the mid 1990s.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Maybe it was just the day and age? I don't know. It seems like it was much more in fashion to go over the top in denunciations of "tyranny" in the mid 1990s.
Click to expand...

It matters who is president, I imagine. If Obama had ordered agents to open up on the Bundy nuts, the NRA would have had a cow. If Trump orders them to open up on the next BLM protest...crickets.

Shall we all make a bet?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom