The Uneasy Romance Between “Black Lives Matter” And Gun Control

Way before “check your privilege”, we had “check your premises.” The phrase is commonly attributed to Ayn Rand and her novel Atlas Shrugged, which tells us that “Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong.”

It was useful advice sixty years ago, but it is essential advice in an age where the Seven Deadly Sins have been replaced with the Two Deadly-To-Your-Career Sins of “ism” and hypocrisy. We are absolutely obsessed with hypocrisy nowadays. Neal Stephenson offers a thought-provoking reason for that obsession in his novel The Diamond Age: “It was all because of moral relativism. You see, in that sort of a climate, you are not allowed to criticize others–after all, if there is no absolute right and wrong, then what grounds is there for criticism?” I would also suggest that modern Americans find hypocrisy comforting, because it relieves our consciences. Why shouldn’t we indulge in the worst perversions possible and permit ourselves every selfish excess? Those priests and pastors and politicians are even worse! Newt Gingrich divorced his wife, so why should we listen to his opinions about abortion? You get the idea.

Today’s political pundits just adore finding hypocrisy in the actions of their opponents. Mark Zuckerberg says we should have open borders, but he has a ten foot wall around his mansion! Donald Trump says we need to restrict immigration, but his wife was admitted under a special program! While there are plenty of actual cases where people are absolute filthy hypocrites, in many cases we can resolve or dissolve the so-called hypocrisy by checking our premises. Here’s an example: It’s often noted that “pro-life” people are often in favor of capital punishment, while “pro-choice” people are often against it. Aren’t they both hypocrites? Probably not. Pro-life people believe that a fetus is a child, and a child is innocent. On the other hand, a murderer is not innocent, and therefore he can be put to death. On the other side of the matter, pro-choice people often believe that a fetus is “just tissue”, while a murderer on Death Row is a fully-formed human being who deserves humane treatment. There is no contradiction in either of those stances. The perceived hypocrisy is a product of deliberately misunderstanding the other side’s ideas.

There’s quite a bit of discussion among the alt-right about the perceived hypocrisy or stupidity of the Black Lives Matter movement. This meme sums it up: BLM supposedly thinks all police are racist and evil — but they also think that only police should be allowed to have guns! Now that is some serious hypocrisy — enough that I decided to take a closer look at what the BLM position on gun control really is. Turns out that things are not nearly that simple.

You can’t talk about gun control without talking about racism. Slaves were prohibited from owning guns; later on, the “Black Codes” disarmed African-American citizens. In 1938, Nazi Germany simultaneously liberalized gun-control law for ethnic Germans while severely restricting the rights of Jews to own guns. The group Jews For The Preservation Of Firearms Ownership has documented the fact that the 1938 Nazi Weapons Control Act was used as a template for the 1968 Gun Control Act by Senator Thomas Dodd, the bill’s author and primary supporter. Modern history is filled with examples of gun control being used as a policy tool against minorities, political opposition, and urban unrest.

At the same time, the relationship between the African-American community and privately-owned firearms has also been complex. The Black Panthers, seen at the top of this article, believed in arming African-Americans in the fight for civil rights, as did Malcolm X and the Nation of Islam. On the other side of the debate, Black lawmakers and politicians have often been at the forefront of gun-control measures. It is probably no accident that the most restrictive firearms laws in America were passed in cities with a large Black presence — and often by Black Democrats.

Black Lives Matter is not a monolithic organization. In fact, a federal judge has ruled that BLM and its senior people cannot be held liable for the actions of its members. That hasn’t stopped them from accepting millions of dollars in funding. Even the left-wing wife-swappers at Snopes have to admit that George Soros has put a lot of money towards BLM-affiliated groups. Still, there’s no such thing as a “BLM manifesto”…

…until recently, when four of the movement’s leaders created Campaign Zero as a funding clearinghouse and political action group. Campaign Zero has a comprehensively conceived and thoroughly documented platform that includes everything from “limit fines for low-income people” to “make the police pay civil judgments out of their own budgets”. It’s such a massive laundry list that I was more than slightly surprised to see what is not in there: civilian gun control in any way, shape of form. The platform calls for police gun control and for the demilitarization of police, but restricting privately-held weapons is nowhere to be found.

One of Campaign Zero’s founders has responded to calls for BLM to endorse gun control by reiterating BLM’s single purpose of preventing police violence.

“Campaign Zero is a campaign focused on a particular issue: ending police violence in America,” said Sinyangwe. “We don’t ask folks who are fighting for the right to an abortion to also focus on fair wages for women.”
“I would encourage folks who have more insight into the potential racial impact of gun control legislation to present that research to the movement so we can have a more nuanced debate,” Sinyangwe continued.

In other words: we aren’t going to disarm until the police do.

This nimble response from Campaign Zero effectively destroys the perceived hypocrisy of Black Lives Matter with regards to police and gun control. It’s easy to point out in response that there are many, many people on the progressive left who simultaneously support BLM and gun confiscation/control, but when we do that we are slippery-sloping away from the original assertion. The fact of the matter is that the average American citizen believes in a wide variety of contradictory policies regardless of his political affiliation. Very few of us are exempt from at least a little bit of that. It’s not always hypocrisy. Often it’s a simple matter of letting our feelings determine our politics.

So we’ve checked our premises, as Miss Rand would say, and we have found one of them to be incorrect. Black Lives Matter does not support gun control as part of its platform or its agenda. There is no hypocrisy, no contradiction between their desire to reduce police violence and their desire to disarm Black people — because they have not stated a desire to disarm Black people. Plain and simple. I’m not saying that BLM is right, or that their platform is intellectually coherent. I’m just saying that it’s not hypocritical in the above regard.

Unfortunately, we can’t just leave it there, because the Campaign Zero platform doesn’t necessarily stand alone. The people who have funded Campaign Zero fund other things. In fact, a Buzzfeed article suggests that the main funding source behind Campaign Zero is the Open Society Foundation, which has been charged with distributing over $18 billion-with-a-B-dollars given to it by George Soros. Mr. Soros also funds gun control. Either Soros is a hypocrite, or he’s an idiot, or there is a connection that is not immediately apparent.

Turns out the connection is hidden in plain sight. The Campaign Zero platform calls for drastically increased federal oversight and control of local policing. It also calls for a significant lowering of the bar for Department of Justice involvement in local policing. It stops short of calling for a federalized police force, but only in the sense that it would continue to permit local police to run their own budgets — until, of course, they are bankrupted by civil action, at which time the feds would have to step in.

George Soros is also interested in federal oversight of police. A leaked memo from the Open Society people appears to suggest that a “national movement” should take place to implement federally-provided guidelines for local police. I don’t think the memo calls for federal police, despite what Breitbart thinks. I do think it calls for federal oversight to a degree that local autonomy would be effectively eradicated.

Now we see how everything dovetails. Campaign Zero calls for strong federal involvement in policing, which is an explicit desire of Mr. Soros. The desired final state is a disarmed citizenry and a federally-managed police force. From the Campaign Zero perspective, that federal management allows strict enforcement of race-related guidelines. From the Soros perspective, a federally managed police force is immune to the rebellious actions of a David Clarke or Joe Arpaio. It will do what it is told, particularly in the event of civil unrest.

Why would you want total gun control and total Federal police control? It depends on whether you are watching the Blue or the Red movie. The Blue movie says that a disarmed population with Federal police oversight would be safer, free from racism, and free from police abuse. The Red movie says that a disarmed population would be stomped into the ground by the boot of a federally guided police force. Nothing I can write on this website would convince you to change whichever one of these movies makes sense to you.

I will say this, however: In the end, it all comes down to capital and labor. If you’re on the side of capital, you should probably get on board with the Soros agenda, because your interests will be protected. If you are on the side of labor, then you should strongly consider whether or not you support a combination of events that would allow you to be effortlessly dispossessed the minute another person or group is willing to do your job for less. Doesn’t that suggest that the Democrats should be fighting against gun control and the Republicans should be supporting it? Doesn’t the whole thing seem thoroughly contradictory? I should probably do some checking of my premises — but that will have to wait until another day.

85 Replies to “The Uneasy Romance Between “Black Lives Matter” And Gun Control”

    • Bigtruckseriesreview

      It gets so boring hearing people talk about George Soros.

      I know Fox News has most of you programmed to spout the Soros rhetoric but let me let you in on a secret.


      For the most part, BLM is a “flash mob”.

      Some are there to actively protest.
      Some are there to simply watch.
      Some are there to take out aggression.
      Some are opportunistic thieves and looters.

      The whole anti-semitic ranting against the Jewish boogeyman behind it all theme is BOOOOOORING.

      More Fox news forced-down the throat propagandist LIES like the whole Bill Ayers waste of time.

      So much more nuanced than accepting the fact that police treatment of Black suspects and civilians in general has been bullying behavior which in many cases borders on racist.

      • Jack BaruthJack Baruth Post author

        Uh huh, and the tea party people didn’t necessarily know the Koch brothers. If someone funds your efforts and directs your purpose, how relevant is it that you could pick them out of a lineup?

        Supposedly the Russians spent three million bucks on the election. Soros spent fifty million. I dislike conspiracy theories as much as the next guy but there’s nothing secret or concealed about what he does.

        • Mopar4wd

          True and it’s a good talking point but connecting every activity of a certain political spectrum on one donor is kind of missing the point. It;s a good foot note but it’s over used on both sides. I lean left but really I don;t know what Soros end goal is. Due you assume everyone that attended a Tea Party Rally was onboard with Kochs game plan of bigger corporate profits at all costs?

      • Ronnie Schreiber

        Sorry, but George Soros doesn’t qualify as a victim of Jew-hatred just because he was born a Jew. Soros has made it abundantly clear that he has no affiliation, religiously, ethnically, or really in any fashion at all with the Jewish community. His behavior as a teen during World War II, helping authorities seize Jewish property, was morally questionable at best. His behaviors as an adult, his support of hard leftist causes, have jeopardized the Jewish community at large.

        While I’m loathe to use the argument from authority, I do think that I know just a little bit more than you do about Jews and Jew haters, both external and those who express selbsthass. Soros’ character is unfortunately an archetype in Jewish history. On Monday morning I was at the bris, the ritual circumcision, of my third grandson, Yehoshua Ozer, may he grow to learn Torah, be married under a chuppah, and perform good things. I doubt that any of Soros’ grandsons, if he has them, have ever had an actual bris. He chooses to not be part of the covenant, he doesn’t get to claim to be persecuted because he’s a Jew.

        In a few seconds I could put together a minyan of observant Jews that I personally know who are highly critical of Soros and his actions. Are they “anti-semites” too?

        Speaking of which, the accurate terms are “Jew-hater” and “Jew-hatred”. “Anti-semitism” was a euphemism coined by a 19th century Jew-hater who wanted to put a scientific face on his hatred, stealing a term from linguistics.

  1. Dirty Dingus McGee

    It’s conundrums like this that make almost want to start drinking to excess again.

    Which is more evil; the corrupt local police dept, or the “by the book of a jillion laws” federale’s?

  2. dave

    Translation for the cheap seats: Baruth, like all neocons, uses BLM as a euphemism that means “all niggers.” BLM isn’t a thing. It has no structure or hierarchy, and it’s entire membership consists of whoever shows up to a rally or calls themselves a member that day.

    “It is probably no accident that the most restrictive firearms laws in America were passed in cities with a large Black presence — and often by Black Democrats”

    False. The most restrictive laws were passed by CA Governor Saint Reagan, with the full backing of the NRA. And please feel free to point out the black Democrat Governor of New Jersey who passed the second most restrictive gun laws in the country. Don’t worry, I’ll wait. Not to mention noted black Democrat Richard Daley who was responsible for gun control in Chicago.

    The roots of gun control are for whites to keep guns out of the hands of blacks. You people feel free to turn in your guns, but legal or not I’ll hold on to mine. You never know when history might repeat itself

    • Jack BaruthJack Baruth Post author

      There are two labels I don’t like in this post, and they both start with “n”.

      (The second is “neocon”, which I am not.)

      Chicago is more restrictive than California, New York is more restrictive still, Washington D.C. was worst of all. Did you forget Mayor Barry in that list of white people?

      I’m not going to censor this comment because I think you’re entitled to speak your mind. Try to give me the benefit of the doubt. I assure you that I have no interest in disarming Black America.

    • Disinterested-Observer

      The first gun control laws after the civil war were intended to disarm Italians and Irish. History didn’t start in 1965.

      • dave

        This is a stupid comment. Blacks weren’t even considered people at the time of the drafting of the 2nd amendment. Prohibition on blacks owning guns was reiterated multiple times by the US government via the Militia Acts and Black Codes, because they wanted to prevent an uprising. California’s gun laws were created specifically for the Black Panther party. I have no fucks to give for Irish and Italians who voluntarily came here to be subjected to US laws.

        • Ronnie Schreiber

          Free blacks were indeed considered people at the time of the drafting of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

          From the Heritage Foundation:

          “The infamous three-fifths clause, which more nonsense has been written than any other clause, does not declare that a black person is worth 60 percent of a white person. It says that for purposes of determining the number of representatives for each state in the House (and direct taxes), the government would count only three-fifths of the slaves, and not all of them, as the Southern states, who wanted to gain more seats, had insisted. The 60,000 or so free blacks in the North and the South were counted on par with whites.

          Contrary to a popular misconception, the Constitution also does not say that only white males who owned property could vote. The Constitution defers to the states to determine who shall be eligible to vote (Article I, Section 2, Clause 1). It is a little known fact of American history that black citizens were voting in perhaps as many as 10 states at the time of the founding (the precise number is unclear, but only Georgia, South Carolina, and Virginia explicitly restricted suffrage to whites).”

          • dave

            You and Jack can keep your racist Heritage Foundation links, aka the think tank that publishes studies claiming that Black people have genetically inferior IQ’s. Blacks were not considered people under CHATTEL MOTHERFUCKING SLAVERY which lasted centuries in case you didn’t realize. Being considered people for the purposes of representation doesn’t really mean shit when you’re getting beaten and raped every single day for the rest of your life.

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth Post author


            I appreciate your readership and your commentary but you are starting to frustrate me. You said that Africans didn’t have the vote; there is evidence that some of them did. So then you move the goalposts to talk about the rest of slavery. That’s fine but it’s an appeal to emotion rather than reason, which means that grownups of any color don’t take it seriously. If you want to tell us how bad slavery is, I don’t think you will find any opposing viewpoints.

            As for how long chattel slavery lasted, in the United States it was enshrined in law from 1720 to the end of the Civil War. Ironically, the 1720 decision that made slavery legal concerned an African slave who was the property of a “free black”, but that’s obviously an exception. Prior to 1720, it was accepted that Africans had the right to earn their freedom and become free blacks.

            Slavery continues in Africa today, with ( over six million Africans currently enslaved in their home continent. That’s about half of the total number given by Henry Louis Gates for the entire North American slave trade ( In 1860, there were 4.4 million Africans in the country, 3.9 million of whom were slaves. I mention this for context. America didn’t invent slavery, but it ended slavery within its borders a long time ago. Slavery continues to exist in the present day across the globe.

            Dr. Gates also notes that more than a million Europeans were enslaved in Africa at the time of the Triple Triangle trade. “In 1650,” his source adds, “more English were enslaved in Africa than Africans enslaved in English colonies.”

            I also want to address your claim that “195 people murdered by police so far in 2018.” The link you provide leads to a lot of “white man with a gun was shot” descriptions. Were all of these people MURDERED? If I point a gun at my local sheriff’s deputy, and he shoots me in response, is that MURDER?

            The funny thing is that you and Ronnie are on the same side when it comes to the police — and Ronnie is doing something about it. He has been calling attention to police abuse in his neighborhood for years. He has gone so far as to ride his bicycle up to cops and confront them about the actions he’s witnessed. Have you ever done anything like that? How many formal written complaints have you filed about the police? I suspect Ronnie is way ahead of you.

            If you want to have a scrap about slavery and black oppression, you’re yelling in the wrong hallway. There are plenty of black readers here and very few KKK members. As far as IQ and race, I don’t see what good comes from opening that can of worms. The science on race and IQ is as settled as global warming. The question is what causes the difference. Is it racist testing, is it genes, is it something else? I’m not a biologist so I don’t know. Here’s a group of scientists who basically pin it on racist discrimination, if that helps:

          • arbuckle

            “The science on race and IQ is as settled as global warming.”

            I see what you did there.

          • dave

            “You said that Africans didn’t have the vote; there is evidence that some of them did. ”

            The problem is the caucacity of mentioning the .001% of people who could allegedly vote while ignoring the 99.999% enslaved. Did all of those alleged voting blacks vote to end slavery? How did that work out? Don’t worry, I’ll wait.

            “As for how long chattel slavery lasted, in the United States it was enshrined in law from 1720 to the end of the Civil War.”

            That was the end of De Jure slavery. De Facto slavery existed throughout the Black Codes and Jim Crow up until 1965.

            “Prior to 1720, it was accepted that Africans had the right to earn their freedom and become free blacks.”

            “It was accepted” – accepted by whom? Just because it was on paper to satisfy a statutory requirement doesn’t mean it happened. Or maybe you believe also believe in separate but equal since it looked good on paper at the time. Earning your freedom was virtually impossible, since you couldn’t earn money. You could get your freedom via things like the meritorious manumission laws which were made for slaves to rat on others who were planning to escape. And then there were kidnapping clubs which would take free blacks and sell them back into slavery. Both Richard Riker (of Riker’s Island fame) and famous anti-abolitionist Francis Scott Key were members.

            All of the remaining slavery talk is goalpost-moving on your part and doesn’t need to be addressed.

            “The science on race and IQ is as settled as global warming. ”

            I hope your pet BTSR realizes you think he’s just a dumb low-IQ nigger compared to you. But I’m glad you at least acknowledge the soft bigotry of low expectations in trying to pretend-explain it away via unknown third party factors.

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth Post author

            I really don’t want to argue slavery with you.

            To begin with, you’re arguing from emotion.

            Furthermore, I have nothing to do with slavery. My family arrived from Germany — on both sides — well after the slavery question was settled. I don’t have any slave-owner ancestors. I have never personally benefited from slavery. The closest I ever came to race-based anything was when my doctoral application was rejected because my university wanted to spend a decade focusing on minority literature. I’m the minority in my day job; whites account for one in five people around me.

            I doubt BTSR considers himself to be anybody’s pet. He earns more money than I do and enjoys a more vibrant life in a more expensive part of the country. If you’d bother to read the published papers on race and IQ instead of fulminating against them you would realize that they deal with very broad averages. As for how his IQ and mine compare… My IQ is effectively off the charts statistically speaking; I am about one in a half million. Only once in my life have I met someone who clearly thought faster than I did — it was Richard Stallman. With that said, I’m sure there’s a black guy out there with a higher IQ. The math requires it. It probably isn’t Neil deGrasse Tyson, but it’s someone. Might even be BigTrucks. He’s figured out how to make money on YouTube. A lot of smart people have failed at that.

          • dave

            “I really don’t want to argue slavery with you.”

            Good. Because you can’t. You only have recycled talking points from Breitbart/Stormfront/Heartiste.

            “To begin with, you’re arguing from emotion.”

            Just because you keep saying this doesn’t make it true. I have facts and proof. You and Ronnie have selective quotes that ignore the entirety of history in favor of meaningless edge cases that were only statutory in nature but had no actual effect in real life.

            “Furthermore, I have nothing to do with slavery. My family arrived from Germany — on both sides — well after the slavery question was settled. I don’t have any slave-owner ancestors. I have never personally benefited from slavery.”

            Stop. Let me help you here. All white people speak from this same bullshit script when they want to pretend they pulled themselves up by their bootstraps. In the late 1800’s, people from from Europe came to America after crossing the Atlantic became cheap. Most were penniless and the government feared they would become a permanent underclass, of which America already had one. In the 1910’s, Madison Grant called them ‘alien races’ and proved they had low IQ’s via skull measurements and IQ tests (sound familiar?). Hitler sent him a love letter, feel free to google it. In the 1930’s, enough ‘aliens’ could vote so FDR made them part of the white working class, which he needed to win. Your family and millions of others were then employed via the make-work programs of the New Deal, of which virtually all of the jobs and benefits accrued to whites. They were allowed to join whites-only labor unions that locked out black labor. Then they were allowed to fight for the country in WW2, and come home to the GI Bill to get FHA loans in the suburbs where blacks weren’t allowed to live and a subsidized education in universities blacks weren’t allowed to go to. After the war, all ‘aliens’ were considered white, and now 70 years later their grandchildren tell blacks that their grandparents came to America with $25 in their pocket, pulling themselves up by their bootstraps.

            Meanwhile, on the black side of town, blacks weren’t allowed to work at most jobs or join labor unions since that was seen as taking jobs from whites. Samuel Gompers said that Blacks were a “convenient whip placed in the hands of the employers to cow the white man.” Blacks weren’t allowed to own property, and deed restrictions disallowed whites from selling their property to blacks. Blacks also couldn’t get bank loans and black homes were unable to be insured or backed by the FHA. We were locked out of property ownership and the chance to build generational wealth. The GI Bill didn’t apply to us, so we couldn’t get housing or education benefits. There were no White Codes for your family, and no Jakob Crow laws preventing them from building wealth. Your family was free to live wherever they wanted in the US, have children considered US citizens thanks to a law designed to benefit slaves, go to college, put their money in banks, sit in the front of the bus, and drink out of whatever water fountain they wanted to. Your destitute family off the boat was still held in higher regard than the highest free black person whose family had been here for two centuries. But please tell me again how you’re a rugged individualist who never benefited from anything.

            “I’m the minority in my day job; whites account for one in five people around me.”

            I didn’t create H1B laws, and I live in Austin which is much more of a tech city than Nowheresville, Ohio, so don’t look at me. Besides, when they take my job again, I don’t have a journalist or race car driver career to fall back on. Probably because my IQ is too low. It’s settled science.

            Your pointless screeds on IQ are the same as Madison Grant’s and Hitler’s. Maybe you should consider that it was a death sentence for blacks to know how to read or write. Teaching blacks to read was punishable by law, and blacks who taught themselves to read or were considered too smart were summarily executed. Couldn’t risk a slave revolt or another underground railroad from slaves who were too clever for their own good. They wanted the biggest, dumbest, strongest stock so they could use them to breed bigger slaves. Now 100 years later, their grandchildren read the Bell Curve and talk about the settled science of low IQ blacks and wonder why we’re over-represented in athletics.

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth Post author

            I have to say that you’ve managed to get pretty much everything about my family wrong: we came here with adequate funding and were business owners in New York during FDR’s New Deal. There’s a school named after one of my great-grandfathers because he gave so much charity to his community. The least successful member of my family to this date is probably the person with whom you’re talking.

            We’ve gotten to a point in this discussion where you are directly channeling Jimmy the Greek about race, athletics, and IQ. I have no interest in making you any angrier than you are. Nor do I have any personal investment in the race-and-IQ discussion.

            Maybe you should stop and think a moment about the fact that you and I have more in common than either of us do with the one-percenters of any race, and that this constant agitation about slavery and racism and the lost opportunities of 1935 on your part makes you… hmm, what’s the phrase.. a convenient whip placed in the hands of the oligarchy to cow the white laborer. As long as you and I are willing to argue about race, the party above our heads will go on unabated. As long as you feel separated from me because of what happened to your distant ancestors, you won’t ever reach any level of political consciousness that matters. As long as you agitate about a couple hundred police killings a year, the consolidation of police and military power will continue unquestioned while you ignore the forest for the trees.

            You feel oppressed because you’re Black? I feel oppressed because I’m old, because I’m white in an era where the employment law is written to penalize white men, because I’m Christian in an age of atheism, because I’m a Midwesterner in a country where the dialogue happens in planes over our head. Shall I go on? Shall we just air all our worthless fucking grievances until the end of time? Or are we smarter than that?

          • dave

            Perhaps you feel your grievances are worthless, but 450+ years of oppression is not easily forgotten. Especially since it still impacts us today. If you think it’s hard to be white in corporate America, you should see what it’s like to be black.

          • Bigtruckseriesreview

            “I hope your pet BTSR realizes you think he’s just a dumb low-IQ nigger compared to you. But I’m glad you at least acknowledge the soft bigotry of low expectations in trying to pretend-explain it away via unknown third party factors.”


            #1 I’m trying to figure out how the fuck we got to this point? What’s with the constant dropping of the N-bomb? The only person here who I have to actually wonder about is YOU. I don’t detect any hostility towards me from Jack. The real soft bigotry of low expectations is coming from YOU.

            a) because I honestly don’t care what anyone thinks about me or what I do or say.

            b) because I’m well established, wealthy and I don’t legitimize IQ tests.

            Intelligence is the ability of an organism to adapt to its dynamic environment using tools, resources and planning to continue being successful. (My Definition – I don’t really care what the “professionals” think).

            c) because I do whatever I want to do regardless my detractors – with complete impunity.

            Jack is a better man than I am because I wouldn’t tolerate your continued racebaiting for even a second.

            I honestly don’t care what color you are.

            You are interjecting a variable that needn’t be there.

          • Ronnie Schreiber

            “Perhaps you feel your grievances are worthless, but 450+ years of oppression is not easily forgotten.

            Jungian racial memory?

            You sure you want to play oppression olympics?

            “450 years of oppression”. That’s all? Just 450 years? When you get to two millenia get back to me and we’ll compare notes.

            Surely the extermination of my grandfather’s entire extended family was a walk in the park compared to Jim Crow. The machine-gunning of 34,000 in two days at Babi Yar pales in comparison to the lynching of 1/10th that number of blacks over the course of a century in America. Redlining in the United States was worse than the Warsaw ghetto.

        • Dirty Dingus McGee

          ” I have no fucks to give for Irish and Italians who voluntarily came here to be subjected to US laws.”

          If you give no fucks about other folks, why should they give any fucks for you?

          • Dirty Dingus McGee

            I have noticed over the years that those who are friendless, are so due to their own wishes or actions.

          • Ronnie Schreiber

            “The slave trade is the ruling principle of my people. It is the source and the glory of their wealth…the mother lulls the child to sleep with notes of triumph over an enemy reduced to slavery…” – King Gezo of Dahomey (modern day Benin).

            After Britain started to suppress the Atlantic slave trade in 1807, the king of Bonny (part of modern day Nigeria) objected:

            “We think this trade must go on. That is the verdict of our oracle and the priests. They say that your country, however great, can never stop a trade ordained by God himself.”

          • Dirty Dingus McGee

            Dave sez “They don’t. We have no friends”.

            I think your hatred has you blinded. I guess the many white folks who have fought, and died, for civil rights were just wasting their time? I somehow don’t think that they felt that way. You can go right ahead and hate anyone who isn’t black, that’s your business. But by painting every non black as a racist, black hating piece of shit, you are no different than a Klansman.

    • stingray65

      “The gun has been called the great equalizer, meaning that a small person with a gun is equal to a large person, but it is a great equalizer in another way, too. It insures that the people are the equal of their government whenever that government forgets that it is servant and not master of the governed. When the British forgot that they got a revolution. And, as a result, we Americans got a Constitution; a Constitution that, as those who wrote it were determined, would keep men free. If we give up part of that Constitution we give up part of our freedom and increase the chance that we will lose it all.” ~Ronald Reagan

    • bigtruckseriesreview

      “The roots of gun control are for whites to keep guns out of the hands of blacks. You people feel free to turn in your guns, but legal or not I’ll hold on to mine. You never know when history might repeat itself”


      So let me make THIS GOVERNMENT and its underlings a promise.

      Not only will I NEVER DISARM, but I will buy EVEN MORE GUNS. Specifically the ones that they fear the most.


      FN 5/7


      And I’ll use YOUTUBE MONEY to pay for it.

      • Lh

        Count me among Dave and Big trucks…..both my parents were Back Panther party members so it should be clear my opinion wrt armed Blacks. Big trucks, you should consider Eastern Bloc stuff. I carried an m16 in the desert and the damn thing has to be surgically clean to ensure reliable function. My current stable of a Finnish M39 and a Dragunov are far more robust, reliable, and considerably harder hitting at far greater ranges plus my logistics are simplified because they use the same round

        • Jack BaruthJack Baruth Post author

          Holy shit, we have a Dragunov owner on the site.

          What’s your experience been with extraction reliability?

          • Lsh

            Yes…My M39 is definitely the favored son… Antique receiver, nice burled wartime stock. I always find a reason to have it out.

        • silentsod

          DS Arms SA58 patterned after the FN FAL (Right Arm of the Free World) is my personal cup of tea. Such a sweet shooting rifle and the adjustable gas system means you can change the action to cycle with a lot of violence if you want.

          Dad has taken to running a civilian Tavor and I don’t know if it was the suppressor or not but I did not experience great reliability in the short time that I used it. I haven’t had the chance to use it without suppressor and he wasn’t complaining about reliability but I was unimpressed.

  3. JustPassinThru

    A good, solid attempt at parsing this conundrum. And you are right, it depends on which side of the divide you stand and which color flag you fly. I will no more convince someone who accepts alternate truths, than he will convince me. I of course think my position is more defensible – that’s why I hold it. And the same can probably be said of him….he believes he’s examined both sides.

    We should both check our premises. I know I check my own regularly. Do my opponents flying the Other Flag?

    I disagree in your last breakdown, of it being between Labor and Capital. Soros does not represent capital; capital flourishes in an open, transparent market with Price Discovery. Soros is no entrepreneur; he GAMES the System. He made his wealth, first through arbitrage and later, with huge resources, with open manipulation. As he sold the Pound short and nearly bankrupted the Bank of England.

    Soros represents unfettered government power. Neo-Feudalism; wearing a collectivist veneer to make it attractive to those on the dark side of the Bell Curve.

    It is not LABOR who want controlled borders and Rule of Law – but traditional Americans with American values; who know America is a special and relatively-fragile place. No matter how big our hearts are, we cannot bring everyone in – to do so would not make them Americans but make America a Third World cesspool.

    And America is not Magic Dirt. It is the IDEALS that ruled the United States that made it special. Any nation or area are welcome to them – they can adopt our Constitution outright; and if their citizens accept Rule of Law and live by it, they have Little America.

    Many regions have done just that, to some extent – Australia; Israel; Japan, which borrowed much of our concepts and flourished until the Financialists took control in the 1990s.

    Mexico is backwards, not because of tainted soil but because the government is corrupt and the people, at best, do not try to expel the corruption. At worst, you can say the people are as corrupt, if not in power, that they tolerate, accept, and even vote to continue the backwards, corrupt government and the poverty that results.

    Good luck closing this can of worms back up, Jack.

  4. SIV

    In this case, the Red Movie is correct.

    I could be wrong ( I doubt it), but Campaign Zero struck me from the (not so recent) beginning as being a clever front-group to win-over/recruit those with a civil-libertarian bent to BLM. It completely contradicts the human-microphone intersectional Marxism of much of the rest of the “movement”. I recall one of the CZ “founders” later making some statements that pretty much confirmed it.

    • stingray65

      “If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more ‎violence. If the Jews put ‎down their weapons ‎today, there would be no ‎more Israel’‎”

      ― Benjamin Netanyahu

      • JustPassinThru

        Neither will happen, of course; but the point Netanyahu was making, was of the disparate aims of the Israelis and the Arabs. It is basic – the aggressor and the defender.

        The Constitutionally-recognized right to Keep and Bear Arms is an extension of Natural Law – the Right to Life. Arms enable those on the defensive, to protect their Right to Life.

        And firearms do not cause aggression. Someone who intends malice will use what tools he has – and it is done around the world, using knives, swords, spikes, hammers, clubs….fire, homemade bombs, poison, large aircraft.

        Disarming the law-abiding, only invites malicious aggression. INCLUDING those who are within government, or who will later secret themselves within.

  5. Bigtruckseriesreview

    As a Black male gun owner, specifically: AR-15, Desert Eagle .50, Kimber .45, S&W revolvers, etc, let me be the first to say that I will NEVER DISARM.

    For whatever reason those militias out there, the police and people living not far from me have an AR-15, I NEED ONE TO. (In fact I have a few of them).

    The one I still need to get is the M82A1 .50 cal just in case a Jumbo Jet tries to break into my house.

    I ABSOLUTELY want semi automatic rifles specifically because they are like pistols with the power of a shotgun and range of a rifle.

    Police are terrified of the weapons we have specifically because the bullets penetrate their vests and the 30-round clips provide sustained firepower – while the design allows for the best target tracking during transition.

    The 2nd Amendment has NOTHING to do with hunting.

    The 2nd Amendment is thereto allow the people to protect themselves from the threat of a tyrannical government.

    IE: when Hoover sent the FBI to MURDER Huey P Newton.

    IE: when Janet Reno INCINERATED David Koresh on Live TV.

    The reason there is so much crime in Black communities is because Black law abiding citizens have been left unarmed and at the mercy of armed criminals (and the police).

    Meanwhile, Whites have asymmetrically kept their rights to bear arms in predominately White states and their crime is typically lower because they actively KILL criminals.

    GUN CONTROL IS RACIST (The Racist Roots of Gun Control by Clayton E. Cramer).

    Gun Control laws were enacted to keep guns out of the hands of freed slaves.

    I WISH TO GOD I could go back in time and give GLOCK 18 or AR-15 to freed slaves prior to their lynchings cause I GUARANTEE that those KKK members would be faced with a shootout they couldn’t win.

    I wish I could give every rape victim one of my Glocks. I guarantee you that BULLETS turn RAPE into NOT RAPE.


    MY DESERT EAGLE keeps me FREE.

    MY AR-15 keeps me FREE.


    It isn’t “just a rifle”. It’s a symbol of militaristic power and innovation made to the gun which culminated in a perfect long-range freedom dispensing tool.

    [note: the video clip accompanying this post absolutely expresses the beliefs and ideologies of this poster]

  6. stingray65

    Movies can be total fiction or “based on a true story”. Blue movies are almost always total fiction, while red movies are almost always based on a true story (although artist license is sometimes present). A human fetus is not “tissue” but a human life according to the vast majority of biologists, and the more research that is done the more this is unquestioned (the confirmed pain threshold for fetuses have moved from 20 weeks to 8 weeks). Thus the blue movie justifications for abortion and capital punishment are based on hypocrisy, while the red movie is based on a true story.

    BLM is also based on the fiction that blacks are unfairly targeted for arrest and shot for “being black” by racist police, even when the “offending” police are blacks, the police chief is black, and the mayor is black (see Baltimore). The blue movie says that blacks represent 13% of the population, but get arrested/shot 50% of the time, and the only possible explanation for the disparity is police racism. The red movie says that blacks represent 13% of the population, but commit 50%+ of the crime (most of it against fellow blacks), and the red movie is correct according to all statistical analysis of official crime statistics (actually blacks are arrested and shot by police a bit less than their crime rate would predict). Given the large number of black felons (and black mentally ill), a large proportion should be ineligible for gun ownership under existing gun control laws, but many still end up with guns because they buy or steal them illegally (a blue movie surprise – criminals don’t follow laws), or get “clean” friends or family to buy guns for them “legally”, although such straw purchases are also against the law. Yet straw purchasers and felons found with an illegal gun are rarely prosecuted, mostly because such arrests would also be considered racist (instead blue state DAs throw the book at the middle-class legal gun owner from Idaho or Indiana passing through DC or Jersey, and pulled over for speeding and found to have an illegal in DC/Jersey gun in the car). Gun crime and mass-shootings would be greatly reduced if existing gun laws were enforced and concerns about skin color were eradicated.

    The 2nd amendment protects the right to own a gun no matter what color your skin is, and if you want to keep your right don’t do the crime. Similarly, no matter what the color of your skin, you will greatly reduce your chances of having a bad experience with the police if you follow these simple rules: 1) don’t commit crimes, 2) don’t hang out with people that commit crimes, 3) be polite and respectful when interacting with the police. I have no sympathy for truly racist police (a very rare bird) or police that abuse their authority (not nearly as rare and the reason for the 2nd amendment), but to believe the blue movie about BLM is truly delusional.

  7. hank chinaski

    I think I’d get picked up for brandishing if I did that.

    Didn’t Soros live under Soviet control in Hungary? I guess he’s ok as long as it’s *his* boot on your neck.

  8. Spud Boy

    I could count on one hand the number or interactions I’ve had with the police over the last 25 years. The best way to avoid them is simply to obey the law, which doesn’t seem to be that difficult for 95% of the population.

    It’s best to avoid them because the Police are ass holes to everyone–white, black, brown, it doesn’t matter. It’s the type of “profession” that attracts bullies and sociopaths.

    And the police must arm themselves in proportion to what they may encounter among the people they are policing. So when you have people like BTR with his AR-15 penis extension, you have to bring equal or greater fire power when you roll over to his neighborhood to investigate a crime.

    Finally, we wouldn’t have any problem with the police if not for children raised with no father at home. Having had no discipline from the start, urban youth take out their resentment on the daddy-they-never-had embodied in the local police officer.

    • ScottS

      “It’s best to avoid them because the Police are ass holes to everyone–white, black, brown, it doesn’t matter. It’s the type of “profession” that attracts bullies and sociopaths.”

      Seriously? Can you provide some supporting evidence for this statement? Maybe you should volunteer to ride with some police officers during a night shift. If you walk a mile in those shoes, you may find some different words to describe police officers.

      • Disinterested-Observer

        Anecdotes aren’t data, but based on some shitheel giving my dad a ticket at 11pm for “running a red light” -actually making a right on red, perfectly legal where he lives, while taking my mom home from chemo, I am going to say that a fair number of them are assholes. I had some lunatic hassle me for over an hour at 3am because I made the mistake of taking rte 1 instead of the Jersey turnpike. I cordially asked some punk what they were up to in my own neighborhood only to have him respond “Nothing! What’s up with you?” I have family members who are cops, I am sympathetic to them, but there is no reason for them to assume that non-threatening people are a threat. If they can’t tell the difference between a crackhead and an man walking his dog with a baby stroller then maybe they need to be in a different line of work.

        • ScottS

          ”I am going to say that a fair number of them are assholes.”

          So, help me quantify “a fair number”. Is it 25%, 50%? How many? I really don’t have the patience for this kind of uninformed shit. I am very aware that there are people in the LE profession that should not be there. I vividly remember several incidences when I was young that could and nearly did negatively color my view of law enforcement for life. Fortunately, as I grew older, more mature and more educated, I got past it. Today I count among my close friends and dead friends several police officers. I am intimately familiar with the work they do and risk involved. A veteran cop doesn’t “assume” anything, and there are no guarantees of coming home alive at the end of the day.

          Scott Johnson (on the right) is the one I miss the most. Scott wasn’t an asshole and neither was Gabe Rich.

      • Ark-med

        What attracts sociopaths to some police organizations is probably the protection that police unions might offer, or the sometimes deferential treatment they enjoy in certain jurisdictions. Because news of these “bad apples” sometimes getting off easy becomes repetitively, luridly broadcast, it generalizes that perception.
        Take away the corrupt parts of union protections, and there might be an amelioration in perception.

        • ScottS

          I was starting to feel in the minority here in bringing a balancing voice for law enforcement officers. And, yes, I am familiar with Paul Craig Roberts’ similar views to yours on police.

          I notice that you use the term sociopath and not psychopath, and I will assume you are aware of the subtle, but important differences. Several years ago the British psychologist Kevin Dutton published a survey that ranked the 10 jobs with the highest concentration of “psychopaths”. BTW, the test is still available online. Police officer comes in at #7 in Dutton’s survey, and this data point often cited in news stories in a very negative way. Here is the full list:

          1. CEO
          2. Lawyer
          3. Media (TV/Radio)
          4. Salesperson
          5. Surgeon
          6. Journalist
          7. Police Officer
          8. Clergyperson
          9. Chef
          10. Civil Servant

          Most people would be surprised at some of the professions that make the top 10, but sociopathic traits are not always negative and this may account for the natural attraction of certain people to particular career paths. My own score in Dutton’s test places me in the “psychopathy” category, although not by much. Looking back on my life, I would tell you I may not have been the most compassionate cop when I was 22 years old and today I would second guess that I have the pure reflexive instincts to survive on the street. Do you see any similarities to racing drivers? I entered the military shortly after high school and I learned that military organizations have a remarkable track record of making disciplined, effective fighters out of emotional, testosterone-driven young men. Police organizations face a very similar situation where they need physically and mentally capable young people to carry out the often harsh and difficult work of policing and enforcement. It is not a career you enter at age 40. Our special forces organizations are full of people who would score in the “psychopathy” category, so we are in fact dependent on people with these traits for our safety and security. As with any group, there are police officers with excessive sociopathic traits that are manifested in antisocial behavior both on the job and at home. As the law enforcement profession matures and adapts to a changing society, I expect to see the level of screening and training increase and improve. This activity has been ongoing for a long time I am certain that we have better police forces than we did 30 years ago. Police organizations are still far behind the military in developing leadership, and I would agree with you that management and unions have at times been culpable in sheltering bad cops and fostering negative work environments. This is one of the key reasons I favor elected law enforcement officials versus appointed ones. State and municipal police personnel don’t work for the voters and are much more politically influenced.

          • Jack BaruthJack Baruth Post author

            Orwell wrote that

            “Those who ‘abjure’ violence can do so only because others are committing violence on their behalf.”

    • Will

      A solidly ignorant take about guns and police. Well done! I think the Gawker commenting section is for you.

    • bigtruckseriesreview

      “So when you have people like BTR with his AR-15 penis extension”

      Actually I prefer to call it the MARTYR MACHINE.

      It makes MARTYRS.

      Nice try tho!

      Cute wording. I think I’ll use it on someone without referencing where I got it.

  9. Jeff Zekas

    Most cops do not want to shoot you. Black, white, Hispanic, Asian, none of that matters. What matters: are you aiming a gun at me (there never was a “Hands up, don’t shoot”– the suspect was reaching for the officer’s gun). Yes, there are asshole cops. And asshold right turning drivers. And asshole plumbers. And asshole NFL players. And asshole cashiers. And asshole rappers. And asshole programmers. But if a cop is an asshole, you can file a citizen’s complaint. When a cop shoots, he gets suspended, and investigated by BOTH the feds and the DA and the State Attorney General. Most cops are just people, trying to go home to mama. As for guns: red or blue, the fact is, criminals will ALWAYS get gun, cos THEY don’t buy their guns at BiMart, but on the black market. Gun control means: taking guns from folks who already follow the law. And, contrary to one opinion, cops CAN tell the difference between a crackhead and a man walking his dog. But, nowadays, even teens carry guns, and every homeless man I’ve ever met carries a knife. One of my buddies, a 93 year old grandma, carries a .357 Smith and Wesson in her purse. So, even “harmless” people aren’t always as harmless as they seem.

    • Dirty Dingus McGee

      “Most cops do not want to shoot you”

      Uhhhh, possibly not, but they sure do act it sometime. I have had many interactions with LEO in my 60 years, 90% of them unpleasant. In times past, think 30-40 years ago, in many places it was more Mayberry than Robo Cop. These days, EVERYONE is a suspect no matter how the interaction starts. And police sure do seem to have a different attitude these days. If you want an eye opening read, try Radley Balko’s; Rise Of The Warrior Cop.

      Here is the Cliff Notes summary from Wikipedia (no in depth info on Infogalactic), but the entire book is worth a read.

      • Kevin Jaeger

        I agree with this. While I would like to agree with some of the BLM message as I think there really is a problem with police shooting far too many people, ultimately BLM is exactly the bunch of losers Bigtrucks says they are.

        We do indeed have a problem with police attitudes and behavior. But I’m convinced BLM is of no assistance whatsoever in this matter.

        • Dirty Dingus McGee

          Based on my totally non scientific observations, most cops reflect the attitudes of their local leaders, be they political or departmental. If a community declares a “war on drugs”, traffic stops to search for drugs goes up. If the homeless become a problem, anyone dressed in less than business attire is “checked out”. If you’re a younger person driving an expensive car, you are going to catch the attention of the police more often than a middle age person that “looks like they can afford” that vehicle.. If you wear a motorcycle club patch, your chances of getting pulled over, questioned and photographed, go up by 100%(based on personal experience).

          I don’t see any of this changing, no matter who protest’s it. The camels nose came into the tent many years ago, now damn near the whole camel is inside.


      • ScottS

        I think Balko’s book is important in that it draws attention to the changing nature of civil law enforcement. Balko’s interpretation of the 3rd amendment to the constitution is almost completely off base and exposes a certain antiauthority bias. I have been pretty close to police training and SWAT/Sniper training in particular for about 20 years. It is naive to think that police could be effective in modern society using 1960’s technology and tactics. I will admit to having a little antiauthority bais myself, but exposure to the real inner workings of police training and tactics has actually led me to be more aligned with the theory that the United States may actually be “under-policed”. As a nation, we have been far more willing to invest in prisons and prison infrastructure while expecting law enforcement to perform miracles with comparatively little investment and funding. Of course, you can’t simply hire more cops and not follow through with the necessary investments in training. If you care to read it this short article has some surprising data.

        • Dirty Dingus McGee

          Interesting read.

          I agree that there are far more prisons than there should be, and there are thousands locked down that are there on BS charges and sentences. I do disagree with the statement that we need more police. I would like to see better training (perhaps national standards), better psychological screening to weed out the bullies and power trippers, better accountability, and bad cops losing the protections they currently receive. If you screw up in Jones county, you shouldn’t be able to just hop over to Smith county and start fresh. In other professions a black mark follows you wherever you go. Cops, not so much.

    • everybodyhatesscott

      BLM has picked a few awful cases. As you said “the hands up don’t shoot” was a complete lie but the cops have also just shot people who weren’t armed and who weren’t breaking the law. And the cops walked. The problem isn’t the asshole cops as much as the ‘good’ cops ALWAYS seem to cover for the assholes.

      Here’s a white guy who is flat out murdered by the police.

      There’s one with a black guy that’s equally as bad but I can’t remember his name and i don’t want to trigger the filter with 2 links.

      • Kevin Jaeger

        The Daniel Shaver murder was a horrific example and there have been some equally awful examples where the victims were black.

        I wish they could all be treated equally seriously and not get conflated with the sad stories where the shootings were necessary or at least justified.

        But BLM makes that impossible.

        • Kevin Jaeger

          Yes, the Christopher Roupe shooting was also inexcusable by any standard. I guess without the video that one or the Justine Damond shooting don’t draw as much attention, even though they are atrocities themselves.

  10. Panzer

    I remember when I read a very informative article in Playboy a couple of years back about the historical connection between gun control legislation and racism. Including CA’s ban on open carry after the Black Panthers marched on Sacramento with their Shotguns and the wording of the 1968 GCA which specifically talked about reducing gun violence in the inner cities (you know, where most black people live) by taking away certain types of guns.
    It always made me chuckle seeing how that history got memoryholed by the blue tribe in the 2A debates. Because of course there can be no possibility of gun control being racist, because that would mean liberal policy contradicts itself, and the mind of a fanati- sorry, dem voter – could never accept such a such a thing 😂

    • Mopar4wd

      Well except in that case it was a bipartisan effort signed in place by the GOP. With that you could take it as the GOP want’s racist gun control and the Dems want universal gun control.

  11. Panzer

    Also wanted to add, thanks for another great article Jack, it’s good to see this issue getting aired again 👍


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *