Black History Culture : Here's How The Nation Responded When A Black Militia Group Occupied A Government Building

Discussion in 'Black History - Culture - Panafricanism' started by Clyde C Coger Jr, Jan 7, 2016.

  1. Clyde C Coger Jr

    Clyde C Coger Jr going above and beyond PREMIUM MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    39,461
    Likes Received:
    10,421
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Speaker/Teacher/Author
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Home Page:
    Ratings:
    +12,081
    In the Spirit of Sankofa,



    Here's How The Nation Responded When A Black Militia Group Occupied A Government Building

    Nearly 50 years ago, a group of armed Black Panthers entered the California state Capitol to protest a gun control bill



    When armed militants seized a government building in Burns, Oregon, on Saturday, stating their willingness to "kill and be killed" and promising to stay for "years," the official response wascautious and restrained. Many onlookers wondered whether this would still be the case if the militants were people of color instead of white people.

    If you're not familiar with the history of protest in the U.S., you might not know that the armed occupation of government buildings hasn't always been just for white guys. In fact, on May 2, 1967, a group of 30 Black Panthers walked into the California state Capitol building, toting rifles and shotguns and quickly garnering national headlines ...



    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/black-panthers-california-1967_568accfce4b014efe0db2f40

    [​IMG]
    WALT ZEBOSKI/ASSOCIATED PRESS
    A member of the Black Panthers Party stands in the corridor of the California State Capitol Building on May 2, 1967


    ...

     
  2. Clyde C Coger Jr

    Clyde C Coger Jr going above and beyond PREMIUM MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    39,461
    Likes Received:
    10,421
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Speaker/Teacher/Author
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    Home Page:
    Ratings:
    +12,081
    ...

    When the NRA Opposed Open Carry

    In my column last week, I noted that the National Rifle Association had backed away from criticism of the open carry movement in response to objections from Second Amendment activists. Despite differences over tactics, said Chris Cox, the NRA's chief lobbyist, "the National Rifle Association supports open carry…unequivocally." One reason some critics view the NRA as insufficiently zealous in protecting gun rights is that the organization, contrary to its current reputation, has a history of accommodating demands for gun control. Back in 1967, for instance, the NRA supported the Mulford Act, which banned open carrying of loaded firearms in California. The law, a response to the Black Panthers' conspicuous exercise of the right to armed self-defense, also was supported by Gov. Ronald Reagan, whom the NRA endorsed for president in 1980 as a reliable defender of the Second Amendment ...

    https://reason.com/blog/2014/06/17/when-the-nra-opposed-open-carry

    [​IMG]

    WALT ZEBOSKI/ASSOCIATED PRESS
    Assemblyman Willie L. Brown Jr. (D-San Francisco), center, talks to an armed member of the Black Panther Party in the corridor of the California state Capitol


    Mulford's legislation, which became known as the "Panthers Bill," passed with the support of the National Rifle Association, which apparently believed that the whole "good guy with a gun" thing didn't apply to black people. California Gov. Ronald Reagan (R), who would later campaign for president as a steadfast defender of the Second Amendment, signed the bill into law.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/black-panthers-california-1967_568accfce4b014efe0db2f40

    ...
     
  3. bientempo

    bientempo Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    Dominican Republic
    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2009
    Messages:
    737
    Likes Received:
    141
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Dominican Republic
    Ratings:
    +165
    small difference between occupying a state capital building, and a tourist site that is miles from nowhere, and closed.
     
Loading...