House Democrat: NRA has “invoked racist sensitivities”
Before yesterday’s White House press conference, where series of executive orders and try an anti-gun legislative package were announced by President Obama, the National Rifle Association (NRA) launched a web ad doubling-down on its proposal to put armed guards in schools.
At the opening of the ad, the narrator asks, “Are the president’s kids more important than yours?” — pointing to the fact that Obama sends his kids to a school with armed guards (that would be the Secret Service, by the way, though the ad doesn’t point that out). The NRA shifted to the tax issue and the issue of fairness, stating that Obama “is just another elitist when it comes to fair share of security.”
It seems that Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) isn’t too happy about the NRA’s pushback against Obama’s push for gun control measures. During an interview with Daniel Malloy of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Johnson, the same guy who worried that Guam would capsize, claimed that the NRA had “invoked racist sensativites” for opposing Obama.
“First of all, first of all, first of all he is a black. And as a black person being the President of the United States, that’s something that they still cannot get over,” Johnson told Malloy. When asked if the NRA was racist, Johnson replied, “I think they have invoked racist sensitivities. They are not, they are certainly not free of those kinds of tactics to win their battle.”
I wonder what Rep. Johnson, who is my representative, would say to Big Boi, who just recently explained that the Second Amendment is “for the American people to have a means of defense against a tyrannical government” and hinted at disapproval of an assault weapons ban. He’s clearly a racist.
How about Charles Hicks, son of civil rights activist Robert Hicks? The Washington Post recently explained that Hicks will march on Martin Luther King Day in support of the Second Amendment, which was frequently used my minorities, including his father, to fight off the Ku Klux Klan. Hick explained, “I’m convinced that without our guns, my family and many other black people would not be alive today.”
And let’s not forget that the first gun control laws, which are so frequently and fiercely pushed by the left, have very racist past. Georgia Garry, a gun rights group of which I am a member, has documented this in detail in the “The Racist Roots of Gun Control,” a document that was submitted as an amicus brief in the landmark Supreme Court case, District of Columbia v. Heller.
“The former states of the Confederacy, many of which had recognized the right to carry arms openly before the Civil War, developed a very sudden willingness to qualify that right,” explains Georgia Carry. Reversing an 1859 decision in Cockrum v. State that recognized the right to keep and bears arms (before the end of slavery), Georgia Carry notes that “by 1872, the Texas Supreme Court denied that there was any right to carry any weapon for self-defense under either the state or federal constitutions — and made no attempt to explain or justify why the Cockrum decision was no longer valid.”
Imagine that you had kept a race a slaves for a few hundreds years, treating them as property and making them work in rough conditions when then, suddenly, they’re given freedom. Texas obviously wasn’t alone in denying minorities their right to keep in bear arms. Most — if not all — former Confederate states passed some sort of gun control measures aimed at keeping minorities from owning weapons.
It’s not racist to disagree with President Obama or his policies. This sort of rhetoric is, however, another sign that the left has no leg to stand on as they are pushing gun control proposals. They can’t have an honest debate about the issue, so they distract.