How does Bobby Rush square his antigun stance with his Panther days ?

[dusmcj]

Enquiring minds want to know - has he had a personal moment with some deity and now recants his former gun-toting ways (and does he expect all demographics to follow that new standard) or is he just inconsistent ? Not that his registration bill stands a snowball's chance in hell of passage, but it does raise this interesting question considering his stalwart pro-civil-rights background.

[undeterred]

1. He was my Congressman when I lived in Chicago

and there was nothing radical about him. I really don't believe he beat Obama in the 2000 primary, but things turned out for the best.

[Brazenly Liberal]

2. People learn and grow and change with time

Anyone who still holds ALL the same beliefs s/he held 30 or 40 years ago has wasted 3 or 4 decades.

[Iris]

8. probably should qualify that - "Some people learn and grow..." But good answer! n/t

[dusmcj]

9. that one would seem kind of core, no pun intended

Panthers had something figured out there, seems to me. He's lost track of that, seems to me. What the culture says you do with the tool is a different question, one which he could fruitfully occupy himself with. It's a tragedy when young black people have nothing better to occupy themselves with than a pathetic dialog of pimps, ho's, ghetto "style" and a hearty embrace of the victim role in the poverty-based crime dynamic. And when they are able to represent themselves in this mode on Myspace, it's not a socioeconomic failing, it's a failure of their own culture, particularly of its elders down to and including their parents. Figuring out that the white man's system is based on money and you can have that without playing the white man's game - brilliant. Wasting that advantage on bling, dissipation and self-indulgence (just like the white man) ? Stupid. Weak. Time for new leadership. It always was the right choice to not just become dumb middle-class economic liberal motherfuckers just like whitey, Change or no.

[jody]

3. Please provide a link to the bill that concerns you. n/t

[dusmcj]

6. HR45 IIRC n/t

[jody]

7. You might want to browse the two DU threads below.

Anybody want to circulate a petition against HR45?

H.R 45 new Gun registration/license bill

[dusmcj]

10. thanks, the cultural dynamics of Bobby's choices weren't explored enough though

what was the converting event, or did none happen, and if not, is he just being a politician, is he too lazy to resolve contradictions in his life story, or does he want most people to have to register their guns (vs. all) ?

[jody]

13. You raise a valid point so please add your thoughts there as well as here in your thread.

:hi:

[villager]

4. Because he's seen the damage guns can do?

Makes sense to me....

[bluestateguy]

5. Gun control is racist

Gun control leaves black and Hispanic communities disarmed and at the mercy of the white-dominated, well-armed police departments. Prissy upper crust white liberals in their townhouses, gated communities and private security guarded luxury apartments demand ever more gun control, and don't have to face the consequences of that policy position.

[RaleighNCDUer]

15. Which is, of course, why the citizens in DC wanted strong gun control

and the white, gated community types overturned it.

[jody]

19. Do you have a credible source for current DC citizens' position on the RKBA for self defense? nt

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jody]

23. I'll take that as a "no" . Do you have any more unsupported assertions you wish to share? n/t

[dusmcj]

24. Dude, I pay the NRA to be a troll (now that was _satire_, children)

if you're tired of the rednecks in your neck of the woods, imagine how tired they are of you. Try going shooting with them sometime, you may find you enjoy it. America's first freedom, shots heard round the world and all that, you know ?

[Occam Bandage]

11. That was like forty years ago.

People change over decades.

[dusmcj]

14. seems like a core value he's flipped on

if you're willing to go to the wall, and among other things operate in an extralegal mode in defence of your individual and collective civil rights, that's a pretty radical choice, just steps away from fully going underground. How far back along the continuum of overthrower vs. facilitator has Bobby chosen to now place himself ?

[Occam Bandage]

16. There's a lot of people who did and thought things in the '60s they've since put aside.

I don't think this is particularly special.

[RaleighNCDUer]

22. He never advocated an extra-legal mode of defense.

At a time when cops were gunning down black activists, he advocated blacks arming themselves.

Today, the inner cities are armed to the point of suicide. As circumstances change, so do attitudes.

[EmilyAnne]

30. "Core value?" I think of a core value as something broader, like equal rights for all people,

humane treatment of prisoners, being honest, etc.

Things have changed in 40 years. Guns are being used in different ways today, it seems. They are being used to literally destroy entire communities.

I am not saying that I agree or disagree with him. Just saying that I can see why people could change their minds on something like this.

I need to read up on his opinions, what sort of controls he is in favor of, etc.

[dusmcj]

33. when defending yourself was illegal, self-defence was a core value

Hence the 2nd amendment being somewhat revolutionary, since at the time, people still weren't sure whether monarchs did not in fact rule by divine right, and if they did, then you had no business defending against their application of force to you, since standing directly behind them was God, who you were not supposed to offend. Somewhat oversimplified but it gets the point across.

The sad fact is that at various times in human history force has needed to be utilized to neutralize groups of people behaving unjustly. This is not something we will evolve out of since we are not infallible and since injustice arises from unethical pursuit of self-interest, which we are all capable of engaging in, since we are not infallible.

We have no idea how good we have it here. On the other hand, bad times which necessitated the above are not a thing of the past; we just need to turn on the news and listen about Darfur, oil wars, human slavery, etc. to know that the power to neutralize these behaviors is very much needed today.

[EmilyAnne]

34. Very good points.

Believe me, I do know how very good we have it after living Russia and Mexico for a few years. In my opinion, having an overarching rule of law is essential for a country to even approach being just. Of course, Russia and Mexico are nothing compared to Darfur.

Then again, I also lived in Madrid and I saw how good people there seemed to have it.

[ddeclue]

38. SOO??? 40 years is a long time... he can't change his mind ever?

This is such a contrived nontroversy...

[annabanana]

12. Learned the hard way?

seems reasonable

[xchrom]

17. is there some reason -- he shouldn't change?

i don't really care -- he supports a position i do when it comes to guns.

[jody]

18. Perhaps Rush knew in his earlier years that he was responsible for his actions but now he believes

that a gun, an inanimate tool, is really possessed with supernatural, demonic forces just waiting to burst forth to wound and kill any unsuspecting human in the vicinity.

That's the myth implicit in gun-grabber justification for banning handguns, semiautomatic firearms, and all firearms.

[RaleighNCDUer]

25. Talk about unsupported assertions. nt

[jody]

26. "unsupported assertions", you bet! That's why I began the subject with "Perhaps" but apparently

you ignored that word which is defined as "maybe; possibly".

Have a nice day. :hi:

[RaleighNCDUer]

27. Where is the qualification in

"That's the myth implicit in gun-grabber justification for banning handguns, semiautomatic firearms, and all firearms."?

BTW, you didn't need to alert on me because I did NOT say you were a troll - apparently you read no better than you write.

[jody]

29. Have a good evening and goodbye. n/t

[aikoaiko]

20. Becaue now he is a part of the estabishment that hires people with guns to protect them.

[madrchsod]

28. "his Panther days?"------"gun toting ways"

maybe you should do a simple google search before you write such crap...

former member of chicago SDS

[dusmcj]

31. how's bout wikipedia ?

The BPP sought to oppose police brutality through neighborhood patrols (an approach since adopted by groups such as Copwatch). Police officers were often followed by armed Black Panthers who sought at times to aid African-Americans who were alleged victims of police brutality and perceived racial prejudice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_panthers

I knew I wasn't just imagining things (that a central premise if you will of the BPP was that in the face of institutionalized white violence against the black community, that community had a right and really an obligation to arm itself in order to exercise self-defence if needed).

I was a youngster when these things were taking place, but I'm not completely ignorant of the history here. Not to get into a dicksize war over creds, but how does the above jive with your experience specifically of any interactions you may have had with BPP ? (How closely did SDS interoperate with BPP in your particular environment ?) Also, are you an ex-member of the original SDS from "the Sixties", or of the recent revival ?

[dusmcj]

32. or are you daring me to state that Bobby got busted on weaps charges in relation to his BPP affil ?

On second reading, the aim of your post is less clear. I'm more interested in the cultural dynamics here. If we're going to go prancing around about whether Bobby was a Panther, and if he got busted on weapons charges, then you're not what you seem (and what your SDS cred claim implies). Help us out here ?


Ahh yes, and - your handle. Misread slightly, it is the same as Hindi/Urdu for mofo - what's the derivation in your case ? Just curious. Tx.

[Karenina]

35. William Ayers redux.

:eyes:

[dusmcj]

36. is that a negative ? I'm interested in an apparent inconsistency in Bobby's politics

There were good reasons for the radicalization of an assortment of demographics 40 years ago. Questions of when it becomes appropriate to choose extralegal means to oppose an unethical system are complex and not what I'm asking about here. (And as some of the posters have pointed out, the Panther policy of acquiring arms for legitimate self-defence against government institutions acting illegally (i.e. against institutionalized police brutality) was not on its face extralegal to begin with, although it did call the question of the state's monopoly on the use of deadly force.)

What I'm interested in is how an ex-radical who partook of a group that recognized the primacy of the right to self-defence against injustice perpetrating violence on the innocent, can now seemingly abandon that premise and instead propose mandatory universal registration of the means to such defence with the very institutions that were his opposition 40 years ago. Again, certain possibilities come to mind - he is compromised by his own investment in the system, he has had a change of heart and would today not prescribe arming the black community to protect itself against institutional violence (because he no longer believes it is a correct solution or because the threat against the community today is different) he views advocating gun control for the mainstream as providing some tactical advantage, and if so, to which demographics or political factions, or something else ? The inconsistency is glaring.

One thing which the black community needs to state publicly, for its own sake, is that it is not advocating gun control for what it views as a white reactionary mainstream, but is not interested in adopting such a broad nonviolent path for itself. And if instead the loud calls for gun control from those who see the decimation of their community by violence in urban centers are based on those observations, then they still need to come to grips with questions of, why is that community currently unable of providing its people with cultural leadership which leads them away from a socioeconomic victim mentality when the degree of access to the benefits of the economy such as they are has changed drastically in the last 40 years, what of the personal responsibility of perpetrators and the absence of strong cultural mores that crime is not a legitimate path to advancement, and finally, how does the community position itself with respect to the question, what _is_ the public's right to bear arms, both for sport and for self-defence, which question applies to the black community just as much as to any other.

Behind this is the universality of the question, how do we understand the individual right to self-defence ? If I get a response that if there weren't social injustice, people wouldn't commit crime and so we should just passively suffer the consequences of our collective guilt, the originators of such commentary are part of the problem and I have nothing to say to them except that they should fear for any political influence they may have. Otherwise, we would do well to remember that while the Panthers chose to arm themselves 40 years ago to protect their people against illegitimate use of institutional power against them, 200 years ago peaceful civilians who happened to be white were doing the same thing to protect themselves against an illegitimate monarchy, and only a few hundred years before that, the possession of arms for self-defence, nevermind the raising of them, was illegal, since the government by definition was in the right. So no, these are not just issues to toss away, just because we are fantasizing that we are about to evolve away from the failings of human nature and will no longer have need to protect ourselves against the illegitimate behavior of those who are ethically weak.

[Karenina]

39. Grow up. Write him and ask HIM.

We all have "inconsistencies." Alex Keatons grow up into Hawkeyes when their experiences take them down the road they detoured away from earlier. Boutras-Ghali said, "Only stupid people never change their minds."

[ddeclue]

37. He's 40 years older?

Gees let's hold people responsible for things they said 40 years ago...

:eyes: