[suture]

Twice in Minnesota a black with a legal firearm was murdered by police with no consequences for the police. The right to a firearm is not, in practice or in law, at all similar to the right of free speech. The government, with impunity, murders legally armed people. It’s not really a right when people of the wrong race or creed get killed for being armed.

Gun control will quickly occur once black men arm themselves and the courts will concur. Similar to how religious freedom arguments get ignored when the Satanic Church makes them.

[Throwawayaerlei]

"Gun control will quickly occur once black men arm themselves"

Are you really that ignorant about current gun ownership patterns in the US (OK, the biggest new group is black women, but...)? How many black men in Chicago for example use their legally owned and Shall Issue concealed carry licenses to defend themselves, and everyone but people like you are cool with that, US V2.0 gun culture, the NRA which is more V1.0, the local authorities etc.? It doesn't even count as more than local news, except we RKBA activists try to collate all such reports.

"Similar to how religious freedom arguments get ignored when the Satanic Church makes them."

Citations? Because I'm not getting the impression you have any knowledge of what's happening with the law and facts in the US at all. Except of course the government impunity through judge made "qualified immunity" and rigging of the game, which applies to all races and creeds. Ask us what we think about Eric Garner's fate while or in times past engaging in one of the oldest American traditions, unjust tax evasion.

[suture]

You can find citations yourself. It’s easy to do.

When large numbers of black men walk around with AR-15s there will be calls for gun control. The last time black men overtly armed themselves in 70s there was a call for gun control. Reagan even called for gun control when that happened.

[Throwawayaerlei]

"When large numbers of black men walk around with AR-15s there will be calls for gun control."

Again, you show your complete ignorance of the American situation, except of course for some responses to the Black Panthers et. al. in the Black Power era. But what you're also lacking along with religious freedom citations is knowledge of any laws passed as a result. Reagan didn't just "call" for gun control, he signed a bill to outlaw open carry and maybe more in the statehouse or whatever.

Strange thing, but you've also missed how attitudes towards blacks and other minorities in the US have evolved in the half century since then.

[anigbrowl]

Can you please leave off with the snide 'are you really that ignorant' on every post and address people more respectfully, even if you disagree with them? Thanks.

[Throwawayaerlei]

It's an opportunely for them to prove they're not bald faced liars, or living in a bubble if in the US, or if outside the US as so many are, to admit they in fact do not know anything above the slogan level of the topics under discussion. In the face of calumniates that reach the point of blood libel, "disagree" is far too weak a word.

There is no respectful way to point out someone is either so ignorant they have no place in a discussion or are arguing in bad faith. For the general stuff, they just have to learn a few things, like how many blacks legally own arms, and how the vast majority of gun owners are entirely cool with that. For the specialized knowledge I've been providing my own citation as well as in other discussions pointers to for example the absolutely essential to know about Anti-Federalists.

And I'll ask you this personally: do you really believe someone who claims to believe "the Satanic Church" is legally discriminated against is worth doing anything other than asking for citations, which he refuses to provide?

[anigbrowl]

Please, chill out and read the HN guidelines. This is a You problem. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html