“Visibly Armed, They Patrolled the Streets to Protect the Public from ICE. Now Their Gun Licenses are Being Revoked,” The Trace reported May 20. “Philadelphia says it pulled the licenses of Black Lions because of their “character and reputation.” The group argues it’s retaliation for policing the police.”
“The Trace?”, gun owners active in protecting the right to keep and bear arms might well ask. The group funded by anti-gun billionaire Michael Bloomberg that poses as a legitimate journalism outlet while spreading anti-gun propaganda designed to abet citizen disarmament edicts?
Why would we believe anything they say?
Noting the number of times this correspondent has called them out on just those charges, it’s a legitimate question, so it pays to corroborate the information from other sources. It’s also curious that in this case, the focus of The Trace is not to cheer this on as a “commonsense gun safety law,” and that’s especially contradictory considering the sentiments of its benefactor when it comes to armed minorities.
Noting the Black Lions “(formerly the Philadelphia chapter of the Black Panther Party) identify with revolutionary socialist and Black nationalist traditions, which are heavily rooted in Marxist principles,” it’s also fair to ask why the hell Second Amendment advocates should give a damn if their licenses are revoked. After all, one of the purposes of the Militia as envisioned by the Founders was “to suppress Insurrections,” and it certainly looks like they have the potential and the inclination to threaten Constitutional rule of law, especially if political tensions being egged on by racist Democrat demagogues erupt into widespread collectivist violence.
Live Inventory Price Checker
|
|
PSA PA-15 16" Nitride A2 Mid-Length 5.56 NATO MOE EPT AR-15 Rifle, FDE | Palmetto State Armory | $ 549.99 |
|
|
|
PSA PA-15 20" Nitride Rifle-Length 5.56 NATO Classic AR-15 Rifle W/Carry Handle, Black | Palmetto State Armory | $ 599.99 |
|
|
|
PSA PA-15 16" Nitride M4 Carbine 5.56 NATO Classic AR-15 13.5" M-Lok Railed Rifle | Palmetto State Armory | $ 549.99 |
|
|
|
PSA PA-15 16"Nitride M4 Carbine 5.56 NATO MOE EPT AR-15 Rifle, FDE | Palmetto State Armory | $ 549.99 $ 459.99 |
|
It’s because the Constitutional rule of law says the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, and that efforts to disarm citizens can only be legitimate if it has been proven – with full due process – that they cannot be trusted with a gun (meaning they shouldn’t be trusted with unfettered access to the rest of us).
The whole concept of prior restraint licensing and the reason for revocation given, “character and reputation,” are tyrannical affronts to everything the Republic is supposed to stand for, and a government powerful enough to enforce such diktats is much more of a fearsome threat than the one it’s “protecting” from. Just don’t forget that what the government can do to the Black Lions, it will do to whomever it can. (It’s ironic that the communist system they would impose on all ultimately relies on a disarmed populace. It never seems to evolve beyond Marx’s dictatorship of the proletariat and into the stateless Nirvana he promised.)
“We condemn any program that involves enforcing unconstitutional ‘laws’, even if such ‘laws’ are enforced only against violent criminals,” the Project Exile Condemnation Coalition declared in 2001. “Unconstitutional ‘laws’ are illegal, harmful to public safety, tyrannical, and are inevitably enforced against ordinary, non-criminal citizens.”
If the Black Lions are threatening and victimizing people and obstructing immigration law enforcement, go after the ones doing it with the laws against it. Otherwise, leave them alone to run food assistance programs, give out clothes to the needy, and, yes, patrol the streets while armed.
The Eagle could stand to learn from that.
Federal Lawsuit Challenges Illinois FOID Card Gun Licensing Law
About David Codrea:
David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.
Personally, if I was part of a group that decided to conduct armed patrols to protect people who are in the country ILLEGALLY and threaten ICE, I would disassociate myself IMMEDIATELY. Those who are willing to go along and threaten ICE absolutely should face criminal charges as domestic terrorists.
Disarming these guys is the same “logic” that Reagan was said to have used in increasing restrictions on open carry in Cali, around the late 60’s or early 70’s. People didn’t want “scary” Black Panthers walking around openly armed. Personally, I would much rather live in a society where EVERYbody could legally carry (open or concealed) than one where only the police can.
Rights denied for one are rights denied for all.
I’ve been to Philadelphia. I don’t think that there’s many people of good “character and reputation” in that city. It’s like the 3% rule, but upside down.
Did you know that Samuel Jackson supported and was part of the Black Panther Party in his younger days? He denies that now and the news and articles have been changed to fix history to what they want it to be. They say only white people can be racist. The Black Panther Party is an example of that being a lie. That is why I hate the Black Power symbol and it is still used today whenever they get involved with anything. Think about the thug that was using phony money that the police caught, detained, put in a paddy… Read more »
I am often faced with an accusation of “You would change your mind if we were talking about members of the Black Panthers!” when supporting the right to carry. Of course they are wrong, but they can not grasp why. I find this accusation to be more indicative of the accusers inability to reconcile rights with privileges and rooted in the inability to determine abuse potential in an otherwise peaceable action. The former is something we deal with all the time when folks drop the “But you need a license to drive!” argument, openly displaying that their education in civics… Read more »
I don’t like that my initial reaction was, these guys are seeking confrontations with federal agents and should lose their carry rights. But moments into your explanation of why they should not, I thought, “Of course they should not.” Prior restraint because I don’t like their politics or beliefs is not sufficient to deprive them of their constitutional rights. How easy it is for me to forget my principles? Dang it. Thanks for the lesson. You’re 100% right.
What is meant by, “Protect the Public from ICE”? The public is never in danger from ICE! That agency protects the public by enforcing Federal immigration law.
ICE would not now have such a prominent role had the Creepy Joe administration not opened the border to ten or more million unvetted illegal aliens.
So the typical who helped elect and enforce liberals where they live openly threaten to break the law with their guns and get their liberal government permits removed by the same liberals who are still in charge and I’m supposed to care just because they are black?
Absolute nonsense
So by this logic, they could say a mason, or an eagle or elk, or any other group or club could be denied just be cause someone in that group might do something?
I read the article: The Trace reported May 20. This is a valid use of our 2nd Amendment right. There is the state’s Uniform Firearms Act, which says that a license can be revoked if “an individual whose character and reputation are such that the individual would be likely to act in a ‘manner dangerous to public safety.” From reading the article in The Trace, I see no such issue of public safety. If it comes down to defending one’s self and endangering the public in the process, since the police can do that, you should be able to also.… Read more »