P5 Guy
Member
https://www.npr.org/2019/07/10/7384...mp-black-gun-group-considers-getting-politica
More pressure on politicians for gun rights is a great thing!
More pressure on politicians for gun rights is a great thing!
Why does it have to be black or white ? Just gun owners ; )
Y/D
Why does it have to be black or white ? Just gun owners ; )
No one on this thread so far has questioned the importance of breaking stereotypes. What we have questioned is the long term wisdom of segregating gun owners into different advocacy organizations based on their skin color.If you can't see the importance of breaking stereotypes of gunowners we've lost the culture struggle.
But gun culture is already largely segregated, especially in the eyes of the general public. By publicly encouraging non-whites to become more involved in the gun culture, we’re trying to counteract that segregation.No one on this thread so far has questioned the importance of breaking stereotypes. What we have questioned is the long term wisdom of segregating gun owners into different advocacy organizations based on their skin color.
I don't see how naming an organization after the continental origin of some of the ancestors of it's target members is going to help, long term, with desegregation. Would the goal then be for skin color segregated organizations like this to shut down at some point, once we've reached some mystical level of unity? How does separating people into different groups based on the color of their skin help to bring them together in a common goal?But gun culture is already largely segregated, especially in the eyes of the general public. By publicly encouraging non-whites to become more involved in the gun culture, we’re trying to counteract that segregation.
I look forward to the day when groups like this that target specific minority demographics aren’t needed, but we’re not there yet.
the impression that gun people, of all skin tones, are racially biased,
But again I'll ask, how does separating gun owners based on skin color change that? That still contributes to the impression that gun owners are "racist". I suppose it depends on the goal. If the goal is purely to give the impression that people of African descent are interested in guns, then sure, having segregated organizations might help. If the goal is to unify "gun people", then it seems like segregation is a lot less helpful.The sticking point is that the Antis use racism in very specific ways against gun owners to paint the impression that only racist rednecks are interested in guns vs. gun owners segregate themselves because the groups are racist.
having segregated organizations
It certainly is, as it should be. People should have the right to form organizations based on whatever parameters they choose, including "race" (again, whatever that is). If a group of people wanted to form an organization called "White Gun Owners of America", that should be their right, and yet the response from most in the "gun community", including many posters in this thread, would be, I suspect, very negative. My response would be very negative as well. I think that White Gun Owners of America is extremely distasteful and excludes people that it should not. Even if people with darker skin were allowed to join, the name and marketing literature would not encourage that. For some reason, the public in general, including many in the "gun community" are fine with and even encourage organizations that exclude (or at least discourage membership from) people of European descent, but they're not ok with an organization that discourages membership from people of African descent. Seems hypocritical.It's their RIGHT to form a group, with ANY perameters, on ANY subject, including coffee cup collectors assoc. (hehe)
I know a number of folks with lighter skin tones who are generally uncomfortable with people who have African ancestry. If those folks were new shooters, would you be ok with a class specifically marketed as "Pistol Shooting 101 for White People"?I guess my point is that a new shooter is likely a bit nervous in the first place, so being able to at least start in an environment of folks of similar background makes things more comfortable.
It certainly is, as it should be. People should have the right to form organizations based on whatever parameters they choose, including "race" (again, whatever that is). If a group of people wanted to form an organization called "White Gun Owners of America", that should be their right, and yet the response from most in the "gun community", including many posters in this thread, would be, I suspect, very negative. My response would be very negative as well. I think that White Gun Owners of America is extremely distasteful and excludes people that it should not. Even if people with darker skin were allowed to join, the name and marketing literature would not encourage that. For some reason, the public in general, including many in the "gun community" are fine with and even encourage organizations that exclude (or at least discourage membership from) people of European descent, but they're not ok with an organization that discourages membership from people of African descent. Seems hypocritical.