New Black Panther Party says to carry arms in Cleveland if legal

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Ouze**

So, I'm putting this as it's own thread instead of in the political thread because this topic encompasses more than just the actual RNC event - it also covers rallies leading up to it.

New Black Panther Party says to carry arms in Cleveland if legal
BY NED PARKER

The New Black Panther Party, a "black power" movement, will carry firearms for self-defense during rallies in Cleveland ahead of next week's Republican convention, if allowed under Ohio law, the group's chairman said.

The plan by the group this weekend comes as police in Cleveland brace for an influx of groups that plan demonstrations before and during the presidential nominating convention.

During the attack last week in Dallas that killed five police officers, law enforcement officials said demonstrators carrying rifles led them to initially believe they were under attack by multiple shooters.

Several other groups, including some supporters of presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, have said they will carry weapons in Cleveland.

"If it is an open state to carry, we will exercise our second amendment rights because there are other groups threatening to be there that are threatening to do harm to us," Hashim Nzinga, chairman of the New Black Panther Party, told Reuters in a telephone interview.

"If that state allows us to bear arms, the Panthers and the others who can legally bear arms will bear arms."

Nzinga said he condemned the Dallas shootings.

Officials in Ohio have said it will be legal for protesters to carry weapons at demonstrations outside the convention under that state’s "open carry" law, which allows civilians to carry guns in public.

"Black power" groups promote defense against racial oppression, with some advocating for the establishment of armed self-defense groups, black social institutions and a self-sufficient economy.

The New Black Panther Party has long called for a separate black nation. But Nzinga said the movement was now focused on protecting black Americans' rights.

Academics say the New Black Panther Party remains marginal and largely representative of an older generation, in their 30s and 40s, rather than younger activists drawn to groups such as the anti-racism Black Lives Matter movement.

The New Black Panther Party was founded in 1989 and adopted a more radical approach than the 1960s Black Panther Party. Members of the original group have denounced the New Black Panther Party as racist, but Nzinga says his movement includes original Black Panthers.

The Southern Poverty Law Center, a hate group watchdog, describes the New Black Panther Party as “a virulently racist and anti-Semitic organization whose leaders have encouraged violence against whites, Jews and law enforcement officers."

RELATED VIDEO
Video
Cleveland police chief: Prepared for open-carry at RNC
The center tracks years of public statements by the New Black Panther Party and other groups. Nzinga denied the group was racist but said it was a fact that Jews control Hollywood and the U.S. media.

The center said the group is not known to have carried out any violent attacks. The black shooter in the Dallas killings "liked" the New Black Panthers and other black nationalist groups on Facebook but was not a member.

"THERE TO PROTECT"

Nzinga said he expected “a couple hundred” members of the New Black Panther Party to participate in and protect a black unity rally -- the "National Convention of the Oppressed" -- that is scheduled to begin in Cleveland on Thursday evening and end on Monday morning. Nzinga said he and the Panthers plan to leave Cleveland on Sunday, the day before the convention officially opens.

“We are there to protect ... We are not trying to do anything else,” he said. "We are going to carry out some of these great legal rights we have -- to assemble, to protest and (to exercise) freedom of speech.”

Nzinga says his group has grown amid racial tensions in the wake of a series of high-profile police killings of black men in the past two years. The Southern Poverty Law Center says the number of black militant chapters around the country grew from 113 in 2014 to 180 in 2015.

The center says there are 892 hate groups total nationwide. It says white hate groups, such as the Aryan Brotherhood, have a much longer track record of carrying out violent attacks than black nationalist groups.

Nzinga said his group has 36 chapters nationwide but declined to reveal membership numbers.

“I have people literally calling me saying this is the first time in my life I protested and I loved it.” Nzinga told Reuters. "They want to be a part of something. They tried to be a part of the system and the system let them down so they want to be part of a rebellion.”

(Reporting By Ned Parker; additional reporting by Daniel Trotta; editing by Stuart Grudgings.; Editing by David Rohde and Stuart Grudgings)

It will be interesting to see if the supporters of open carry extend this to the New Black Panthers - after all, the NRA was OK with open carry right up until the (original) Black Panthers started doing it. But, as we have heard ad nauseum, an armed society is a polite society, yes?

I personally wouldn't support them open carrying because I think open carry is a stupid idea whether it's at a political rally or someone at Chipotle with an AK over their shoulder. I think you have a constitutional right to open carry but that doesn't make it a good idea.

**d-usa**

Ouze wrote:

New Black Panther Party says to carry arms in Cleveland if legal
BY NED PARKER

The New Black Panther Party, a "black power" movement, will carry firearms for self-defense during rallies in Cleveland ahead of next week's Republican convention, if allowed under Ohio law, the group's chairman said.

You'd think they would spend a minute to Google the law to see what it says before making big statements about it

**Ustrello**

But will tom hanks ruin their black panther party by mistake?

**whembly**

*meh*

As long as they're legally able to open carry, let 'em.

**Ouze**

Ustrello wrote:
But will tom hanks ruin their black panther party by mistake?

I love that movie

**Vaktathi**

I'm generally not a huge fan of open carry for a number of reasons. If used as part of a protest in a planned, safe, meaningful, and not in a directly threatening fashion (don't walk about loaded and carrying at low ready...seriously), I can accept that, but please be intelligent about it.

Ultimately however, there's a line amongst some groups that tends to hold true, which is that the fastest way to get gun control passed is to have minorities start carrying weapons. I'm not sure I totally buy that, but Black Panthers carrying on the steps of the CA legislature killed open carry in CA (courtesy of Ronald Reagan

) and started that state on its long and strong push for gun control. I find this distressing, as our rights, including those pertaining to firearms, should apply and be utilized by people of all backgrounds equally.

**Breotan**

Let them open carry. It will mean they have to be more responsible than they might otherwise be. For example, the Black Panthers love provoking and intimidating people. Unfortunately for them, most states attach things like "five additional years" for even the smallest of crimes committed while in possession of a firearm, whether it is used or not.

**Ahtman**

AFAIK the Black Panthers and the New Black Panthers are separate groups with the latter taking their name from the former, but adding the 'New' to it.

**d-usa**

Ahtman wrote:
AFAIK the Black Panthers and the New Black Panthers are separate groups with the latter taking their name from the former, but adding the 'New' to it.

I'm not sure about this.

I think I have heard that the Black Panthers have been concerned about their membership numbers, so they came up with the New Black Panthers to create some noise in the media. Once the open carry protest and other actions get people upset about the change, they will probably merge and become Black Panthers Classic.

**Frazzled**

Ustrello wrote:
But will tom hanks ruin their black panther party by mistake?

Boom! Thread win.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Given that, historically, most gun control measures in the USA were designed to stop African - Americans from getting their hands on firearms, it will be interesting to see if the usual suspects support 2nd amendment rights for every American, or just a select few...

**Frazzled**

If it is legal there, sure, why not?

Whats the issue?

**redleger**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Given that, historically, most gun control measures in the USA were designed to stop African - Americans from getting their hands on firearms, it will be interesting to see if the usual suspects support 2nd amendment rights for every American, or just a select few...

Given that you are not an American citizen, do you have any data to back that up?

**Nostromodamus**

whembly wrote:
*meh*

As long as they're legally able to open carry, let 'em.

Yup.

As long as it's lawful, I've got no problem with it.

**motyak**

Being or not being of a certain nationality has nothing to do with a user's permissions to post on this forum. Let's nip that line of argument in the bud right now. Find a better one.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

redleger wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Given that, historically, most gun control measures in the USA were designed to stop African - Americans from getting their hands on firearms, it will be interesting to see if the usual suspects support 2nd amendment rights for every American, or just a select few...

Given that you are not an American citizen, do you have any data to back that up?

Data? You're pulling my leg!!!

Reaching over to my bookcase, I open my American history textbooks and what do I see:

Take aim! 1831. In the aftermath of the Nat Turner rebellion, Tennesse passes gun control laws that stops freemen from owning guns. No such law was passed stop white Americans from owning guns...Arkansas followed in 1836, Florida in 1838...

Boom! southern states deny African Americans the right to own arms following the civil war and the reconstruction period.

"In the period after the American Civil War, blacks rushed to buy firearms and formed militias to protect their newfound rights. Anti-slavery activists like William Lloyd Garrison were indignant that African Americans had their right to bear arms curtailed. In a publication issued shortly after the war, the African Methodist Episcopal Church – noted the importance of the Second Amendment to African Americans: ‘We have several times alluded to the fact that the Constitution of the United States guarantees to every citizen the right to keep and bear arms."

And here's more:

"A stark illustration of the racist precedents for the idea of ‘gun culture’ can be found in an article in the Atlanta Journal, written after the Atlanta race riot of 1906: ‘Disarm the negroes… A good negro is contaminated by the possession of a weapon in a time like this; a bad negro is made very much worse the moment he places a pistol in his pocket...."

Bang! Ronald Reagan, hero of the right, as governor of California, brings in restrictive firearm controls to stop those African Americans wearing berets from getting their hands on guns.

"It is also worth remembering that the first act of the Black Panthers in the 1960s was to protest against a gun-control proposal – the Mulford Act (1967) – being put through the California legislature specifically to stop armed Panther patrols. Carrying shotguns and rifles, the Panthers continually promoted armed self-defence. Arrayed against them were Republicans Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.."

But wait! Reagan and Nixon were heroes of the right, heroes and defenders of civil liberty, were they not? Or is this just a myth?

Fire! The NRA, during the 1960s, that fearless defender of the 2nd amendment, backed the Mulford act...

Well, I never... Who would have thought that an organisation tasked with defending the right to bear arms should itself back gun control against certain sections of American society...

I'm not having a go at you, but I do like America, its people, and I love American history...

Sadly, though, the history of the 2nd amendment is littered with clear examples of measures being passed to deny Black Americans their constitutional rights...and that in itself is anti-American...

**Ketara**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
redleger wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Given that, historically, most gun control measures in the USA were designed to stop African - Americans from getting their hands on firearms, it will be interesting to see if the usual suspects support 2nd amendment rights for every American, or just a select few...

Given that you are not an American citizen, do you have any data to back that up?

Data? You're pulling my leg!!!

Reaching over to my bookcase...

Exalted. I've no idea if anything you posted was accurate or not, but I approve of scholarship wherever it comes from.

**Frazzled**

redleger wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Given that, historically, most gun control measures in the USA were designed to stop African - Americans from getting their hands on firearms, it will be interesting to see if the usual suspects support 2nd amendment rights for every American, or just a select few...

Given that you are not an American citizen, do you have any data to back that up?

That is a correct statement in many regions: the South and West.
South: antifirearm regs expanded post ACW. Initially they were limited to slaves but expanded afterwards for wink wink nudge nudge reasons.
California and West: real antigun legislation appeared with the Black Panthers.

EDIT: I see the aforementioned Brit already ninja'd me...like a color sergeant out of Zulu shouting "Get to work or I'll wear your guts for garters you dogs!"
Ah, that was refreshing.

**kronk**

Just because you can do a thing, doesn't mean you should do a thing.

I mean, why? Are they in fear for their lives while shopping for discount picture frames? Is someone going to attack them while they browse through the Star Wars aisle?

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Frazzled wrote:
redleger wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Given that, historically, most gun control measures in the USA were designed to stop African - Americans from getting their hands on firearms, it will be interesting to see if the usual suspects support 2nd amendment rights for every American, or just a select few...

Given that you are not an American citizen, do you have any data to back that up?

That is a correct statement in many regions: the South and West.
South: antifirearm regs expanded post ACW. Initially they were limited to slaves but expanded afterwards for wink wink nudge nudge reasons.
California and West: real antigun legislation appeared with the Black Panthers.

EDIT: I see the aforementioned Brit already ninja'd me...like a color sergeant out of Zulu shouting "Get to work or I'll wear your guts for garters you dogs!"
Ah, that was refreshing.

Frazz, I don't have to tell you, or any other American dakka member that American history, like British history, has events that were quite frankly, downright shameful and disgusting - that's human nature.

Nor should modern Americans be made to feel guilty for the actions of their ancestors. None the less, the 2nd amendment is the birthright of every American, be they democrat, republican, black, white, Hispanic, Native American, etc etc

If these new black panthers want to exercise their constitutional rights and open carry in areas where it is legally permitted, , let them do so, and let all defenders of liberty in the USA support them, regardless if you support their politics or not.

To this outsider, that's the American way...

**jmurph**

I dislike open carry in general and heated political rallies seem to be a terrible place to have weapons floating around. But if the NRA is other than rabidly enthusiastic about it, I smell the overwhelming stench of hypocrisy. Besides, they are just a gun manufacturers lobby anyway, so, presumably, open warfare on America's streets would be pretty good for business.

**Frazzled**

Those cute fuzzy toys are coming right at us!

**hotsauceman1**

Correct me if im wrong, but Open Carry only applies to public places?
If I was a business owner/land owner would I be in my rights to say I would ban serving of people who bring weapons into my business?
Or does open carry apply to everything.

**kronk**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
Correct me if im wrong, but Open Carry only applies to public places?
If I was a business owner/land owner would I be in my rights to say I would ban serving of people who bring weapons into my business?
Or does open carry apply to everything.

Public places, excluding no gun zones (schools, courthouses, etc).

Businesses can refuse service for a number of reasons. "No shoes, no service", can install "15 round magazines or less aisles", or even just say "Don't bring your fething gun in here, thanks."

**Col. Dash**

If legal I have no real issue with these guys carrying in public as is their right. If something goes down, those weapons need to hit the ground fast, lest police think they are a part of it. I see no reason for them to do so other than they want to do their typically thuggish intimidation thing they are so well known for. Although usually when I have seen the videos, I tend to chuckle at their "mean and serious" war faces. Look up the Trayvon Martin case and the interviews with the Panthers outside the courthouse, they are hilarious in how serious they take themselves trying to show how tough they are to the viewers.

Open carry with long arms is stupid and I am a gun nut. The only reason I can see it having practical purpose is hiking, camping or something like that where you may have to deal with hostile wildlife and even then one would think a pistol would be better. These guys that do it in stores and so forth just to make a scene give the rest of us a bad name. I can understand open carry of pistols, CCWs dig in, they are hot, etc. Much more practical to not have to reach under the shirt to grab a weapon. On the other hand, everyone knows you are carrying so you become any potential bad guy's first target, surprise!

Concealed is far more useful on almost every level. No one knows you have it, no one panics, and you aren't a target by default. Open carry with concealed gives you that much more protection if it gets revealed.

**Jihadin**

About to start Open Carry. Using my holster I used on my deployments. Not sure which side arm I want to carry though. Thinking a 10mm or just go with a 45..

**Prestor Jon**

I don't have any issue with the New Black Panthers or anybody else exercising their 2A rights in a lawful and safe manner.

There are a ton of crappy gun control laws still on the books here in NC that are just a holdover from Jim Crow legislation. Why do county sherrifs need to issue concealed carry permits when the permit is a state license? Because they needed a mechanism to make sure that only the white, I mean, right people got them.

**Rosebuddy**

kronk wrote:
Just because you can do a thing, doesn't mean you should do a thing.

I mean, why? Are they in fear for their lives while shopping for discount picture frames? Is someone going to attack them while they browse through the Star Wars aisle?

Clearly you've never collected toys. Those scalpers can be downright vicious.

**Frazzled**

Jihadin wrote:
About to start Open Carry. Using my holster I used on my deployments. Not sure which side arm I want to carry though. Thinking a 10mm or just go with a 45..

Immortal Budha say 10mm kick like ticked off mule, shoot what god* gave you instead.

*John Moses Browning.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Rosebuddy wrote:
kronk wrote:
Just because you can do a thing, doesn't mean you should do a thing.

I mean, why? Are they in fear for their lives while shopping for discount picture frames? Is someone going to attack them while they browse through the Star Wars aisle?

Clearly you've never collected toys. Those scalpers can be downright vicious.

Thats nothing. I'd like link Fatman and Snowboots at a restaurant from a year back, but I can't link youtube/photo from here, and more importantly, what is seen cannot be unseen.

**Asterios**

kronk wrote:
Just because you can do a thing, doesn't mean you should do a thing.

I mean, why? Are they in fear for their lives while shopping for discount picture frames? Is someone going to attack them while they browse through the Star Wars aisle?

if you ever been to some store when they open you would understand, them scalpers are maniacs and dangerous at times.

as to the Black Panther's open/carrying at the RNC i'm of 2 minds on this, I do believe in the 2nd. amendment and the right to open carry, but on the other hand I have a bad feeling about this at highly stressful events and lets face it wherever Trump shows up things get out of hand mighty fast by protesters.