Over in Ferguson, Missouri (a suburb of St. Louis) folks are protesting the killing of an 18 year old, unarmed black kid by the police. Evidently, (according to witnesses) he was shot while his hands were up and he was holding a cell phone. There's been some looting, rioting and I hear the cops have instituted a "no-fly zone" in the area! I also caught the end result of a Seattle security guard pepper-spraying a black youth who was in conflict with a shirtless white guy.
Now contrast that with young white men in Texas and their new hobby of taking their long guns out to public places. What could be scary about young, white men with assault weapons? The answer is: Sandy Hook, Boulder, Columbine- oh, too many to mention. If I were to see a young white male with a AR-15 in my neighborhood, I'd hope there was a black youth with a cell phone nearby to phone the cops. And, as someone pointed out elsewhere on the internet, in a conflict between a shirted and a shirtless person, IT IS ALWAYS THE SHIRTLESS PERSON WHO IS AT FAULT! ALWAYS. See: Any episode of COPS. I can only note that this is true except in shirts/skins pick-up basketball games. Even the dumbest security guard should be able to pick the aggressor in that shopping mall match-up.
Where is Wayne LaPierre, the spokesmodel for the NRA? It's damn near a police riot in Ferguson but he's not calling for black folks to arm themselves. How about the militia that protected deadbeat Cliven Bundy's cows from the Federal gubmint? They are still there, I guess, ensuring the right of a millionaire, Christian rancher to hang into his money. Come on- did anybody really think those assholes were taking up for the common man? I guarantee those guys will be back embracing gubmint once there's another "R" in the White House. Did you ever notice these militias only prosper under democrat presidents? They hibernate whenever there is a Bush in the White House, as does talk of "big government".
Well, I think that will change with the next "R". I've been asking why 'they' let us have guns for a long time now. I've long known the answer to this rhetorical question.
The guns are for us, to be used by us, against us. We might be a republican president away from civil war. Maybe just a republican senate away? We already are halfway there with elected legislators practicing slightly-civil disobedience against the black democrat that has twice now been the people's choice. What happens when both houses of Congress leave him no choice but executive privilege?My guess is they'll view him as uppity and totalitarian.
What else might it take? A couple of more Fergusons where black folks react badly to law enforcement? Maybe another Sandy Hook where liberals react badly to rampant gunplay and the NRA spokesmodel intimates that guns will be confiscated so, buy more? It's all been adding up for a few decades now. There will be blood. What's at stake? Money, of course. Just not for us. Nobody gets that. This revolution isn't about us. It's all about them. We're just the participants. It's the way life works for the 99% of us.
No comments:
Post a Comment