[Marxism] Gun regulation - update on Canada

[Ken Hiebert via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Mountain Equipment Co-op, which has 22 locations in Canada, has yielded to a 
campaign to drop products from Vista Outdoor.  Vista Outdoor manufactures 
sports equipment, but is also involved in manufacturing semi-automatic weapons.
In 2009 a campaign to persuade MEC to drop Israeli products failed.
ken h

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/mec-vista-outdoor-1.4557071 


Mountain Equipment Co-op says it will stop selling products from Vista Outdoor, 
bowing to pressure to distance itself from the sports and recreation company, 
which also makes guns and ammunition, after last month's school shooting in 
Florida.


https://bdsmovement.net/news/resolution-boycott-israel-defeated-mountain-equipment-co-op-agm
 


Resolution to Boycott Israel defeated at Mountain Equipment Co-op AGM

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation?

[Tim Nelson via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Hi comrades

I come at this issue as a complete outsider, being British and not
American, so please let me know if I'm missing any cultural nuances.

However, the idea that the freedom to purchase fire arms somehow breaks the
state's monopoly on force rings false to me. The state may allow an
individual the immediate power of using lethal force, but it still reserves
the right to adjudicate afterwards. Therefore, a black person who uses
their "right" to use said force ends up in prison/executed, George
Zimmerman goes free, etc.

Am I correct in saying that the root of the "right to bear arms" is
essentially rooted in a petty bourgeois concern in preserving property
rights? It strikes me that even if this wasn't the original intention of
the Second Amendment, it certainly seems to be how that "right" is used.

I'm entirely in favour of the working class having recourse to force, but
that doesn't mean I am in favour of an individual, even a working class
individual, having the right to use force whenever it suits them. For "the
class" to have recourse to force requires them to have said recourse
COLLECTIVELY. Any decision to use force should be subject to democratic
procedures decided on by the class, which means it should be the
prerogative of working class organisations.

Any other approach, which centres the rights of the "individual" strikes me
as a little Proudhonist.

Tim N

On 28 Feb 2018 15:12, "Mark Lause via Marxism" 
wrote:

>   POSTING RULES & NOTES  
> #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
> #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
> *
>
>  You can't parcel realities like this inside your head and not realize that
> they have a very material meaning.
>
> Does anyone seriously suggest that we need to defend the profitability of
> the gun manufacturers in the sale of military-grade 21st century weapons to
> anyone with the $$$ in order to protect the rights of the workers to take
> their muzzle loaders to the defense of the barricades?
>
> And this does not really exaggerate the issue at all, because the working
> class will never win (or match) an arms race with the capitalist state.
> Not this side of Fantasyland.
>
> We are going to have to win with numbers and politics.
>
> In the interim, students (and faculty and staff) have the right to have a
> safe place in which to learn and work.  Any attempt to let the capitalist
> class off the hook over its responsibility to meet certain minimal
> standards of safety in any workplace is incomprehensible.
>
> ML
>
> PS: If they force teachers to have arms--and I work where such silliness is
> not out of the question--I already have put in my request in for a
> bazooka.
> _
> Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
> Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/
> options/marxism/nelsontim86%40gmail.com
>
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation

[Ken Hiebert via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

DW has asked me to tell the list where I disagree with the article in Socialist 
Action.  I will deal with the two parts of the article that I find the weakest. 
 They are at the end of the article.  

* * * * * *

From Socialist Action
https://socialistaction.org/2018/02/25/gun-control-workers-militias-how-socialists-view-the-issues/
 


Meanwhile, liberal gun controllers continue to whine about gun violence on a 
small scale while refusing to demand democratic control of the huge forces of 
force and violence that carry out U.S. foreign policy and that can be used 
against us domestically at any time if the ruling class only dares.

POSTSCRIPT

In a Jan. 4, 1990, speech, Fidel Castro stated: “To some of the Western 
countries that question democracy in Cuba, we can say: There can be no 
democracy superior to that where the workers, the peasants, and the students 
have the weapons. They have the weapons. To all those from countries that 
question democracy in Cuba we can say: Give weapons to the workers, give 
weapons to the peasants, give weapons to the students, and we’ll see whether 
tear gas will be hurled against workers on strike, against an organization that 
struggles for peace, against the students….

“I believe that the supreme test of democracy is arming the people! When 
defense becomes the task of the entire people and weapons become the 
prerogative of the entire people, then they can talk about democracy. Until 
then, they can talk about specialized police forces and armies; to crush the 
people whenever the people protest against the abuses and injustices of the 
bourgeois system, whether in a Third World capitalist country or in a developed 
capitalist country.” —G.B.


* * * * * *

I think it is a mistake to say that those who decry school shootings “…whine 
about gun violence on a small scale…”.  If we are to approach the young people 
who are going into action on this issue, we should avoid labelling them as 
whiners.  Of course, if we think they are too reactionary to merit us 
approaching them, then we can call them whatever we want.  Beyond calling them 
whiners we could also accuse them of being privileged white children out of 
touch with the reality that many others have to face.
When we consider what is gun violence on a small scale it is worth remembering 
that the shootings at Kent State left four dead and at Jackson State two were 
killed.
These shootings provoked a massive reaction across the US.  Why should the 
shooting at Parkland provoke a lesser reaction?

As for Cuba, I am ignorant of exactly how working people in Cuba have access 
too guns.  Do they have the guns in their homes or do they access them at their 
places of work?  One thing I am sure of is that individuals in Cuba cannot go 
into a retail outlet and buy an assault weapon.

Further on Socialist Action.
Socialist Action has an affiliate in Canada.  They use the same name and they 
sell the same paper.  In the Socialist Action newsletter that I received today 
they did draw attention to the current article and to another one on gun 
control.
But, to the best of my knowledge, Socialist Action in Canada has not 
specifically addressed the question of gun control when it has been debated in 
Canada.  Perhaps someone more knowledgeable can correct me on this.
They will have an opportunity to address this issue again as there its 
currently a petition campaign addressed to Mountain Equipment Co-op asking them 
to drop products from Vista Outdoors, a US company that manufactures 
semi-automatic weapons among other things.

  ken h
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation?

[Mark Lause via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

 You can't parcel realities like this inside your head and not realize that
they have a very material meaning.

Does anyone seriously suggest that we need to defend the profitability of
the gun manufacturers in the sale of military-grade 21st century weapons to
anyone with the $$$ in order to protect the rights of the workers to take
their muzzle loaders to the defense of the barricades?

And this does not really exaggerate the issue at all, because the working
class will never win (or match) an arms race with the capitalist state.
Not this side of Fantasyland.

We are going to have to win with numbers and politics.

In the interim, students (and faculty and staff) have the right to have a
safe place in which to learn and work.  Any attempt to let the capitalist
class off the hook over its responsibility to meet certain minimal
standards of safety in any workplace is incomprehensible.

ML

PS: If they force teachers to have arms--and I work where such silliness is
not out of the question--I already have put in my request in for a
bazooka.
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation,

[Tristan Sloughter via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

> Liberals and the leaders of almost every gun control organization that has 
> help organize or supported
> the recent student demonstrations are indeed anti-gun and want to ban guns, 
> full stop.

Who? Every time I see a liberal politician talk about gun control they start by 
talking about how much they love guns.

Maybe there are organizations pushing for disarming cops, repealing the second 
amendment and a federal buy-back program, but I'm guessing they are very small 
and powerless, if they exist at all.

Which is very much an issue and you claiming that liberal leaders are pushing 
changes that will actually make a difference just helps re-enforce the right 
wings narrative. Except for the ban on semi-automatic weapons. That would make 
a difference in the number of dead kids in school shoots. I have no idea how 
anyone can oppose that. 

Beyond that I don't see liberal leaders offering much to support. They put 
forward crap like focusing on the "terror watch list" or city hand gun bans 
that do nothing because you can simply skip over to the suburbs to pick one up.

The idea that it is more guns that the country needs would be laughable if it 
wasn't so sad and deadly. 

Also, I don't know that DW said this but it is something I often hear, that 
guns will help against police murder. Where does that come from? 

We need socialist gun control organizations that push for disarming cops, not 
socialists seemingly saying the Black men murdered by cops who "thought" they 
had a gun would have been alive if they actually did have guns. 
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation

[John Reimann via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

David once again misunderstands what I was saying.

In the first place, regarding the alleged need to have guns to stand up to
a repressive government: The far right most certainly takes that position,
but they are not alone. I don't know where David has been, but I've seen
many on the left take a similar position. It is an absolute fantasy which
distracts from the classic Marxist position of winning over the "workers in
uniform" (most importantly the National Guard, but NOT the police, who are
not workers in uniform).

David goes on at great length about Robert Williams and similar figures. I
don't know what that has to do with what I wrote, unless he is implying
that I believe in nonviolence as a principle. I never implied anything of
the sort.

Most telling about what he writes is his comment that the (armed) Redneck
Revolt "were in Charlettesville [sic] during the car attack by the racist
far right." Far from strengthening his argument, it does the exact
opposite! What good did an armed group do there to prevent attacks on the
anti-racists? None, whatsoever!

We have to think this through. Imagine workers going on strike in an open
carry state, one where bearers of arms are allowed to shoot somebody who
presents a "danger" to them. Imagine open carry scabs trying to go through
a picket line and being confronted by striking workers. David can say,
"yes, but the strikers could carry guns too," but the reality is that in
most of those situations they would not be using the guns first. They would
be trying to block the scabs through physical resistance, through force of
numbers. In such a situation, the scabs would be completely legal in
shooting strikers. Yes, I know, they've done that many times before, but
the open carry laws and the "self defense" laws make that much, much easier.

There's another, all too real instance: Ferguson. There, shortly after the
first few days of the mass protests, the Oath Keepers descended, offering
guns to the "good people of Ferguson." What good would that have done? The
police unleashed tear gas barrage after tear gas barrage at night and used
the excuse that they'd heard gunshots. (I was there; the police were
lying.) The presence of guns on the part of the protesters would not have
helped in the least.

All this talk of guns, by the way, serves as a distraction from what was
really absent: The role of the unions, meaning the organized working class
(what little of it remains). One UAW member I met there told me that his
local leadership had told him, "This is not our fight". Can you imagine?
Had the union leadership turned its membership out, that would have made
the difference, not guns on the part of a few individuals.

John Reimann

-- 
*“How can we expect righteousness to prevail when there is hardly anyone
willing to give himself up individually to a righteous cause? Such a fine
sunny day, and I have to go, but what does my death matter, if through us
thousands of people are awakened and stirred to action?” *Sophie Scholl,
executed by the Nazis 2/22/1943. She was 21 years old.
Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com also on Facebook
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation?

[DW via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Not dealing with these folks, students from Florida here, I'm dealing with
YOU who supposedly are not brain dead knee jerk liberalsall who should
know better but clearly don't. With these students it's a wholly different
one born from tragedy. It also requires not being condensing jerks to them
as well..it means being honest and discussing all the issues surrounding
*their* demands.

D.
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation,

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On 2/24/18 9:50 PM, DW via Marxism wrote:

Redneck Revolt is one of several armed leftwing militias growing around the
U.S. It's especially big in the mid-Atlantic states, or so it seems. They
were in Charlettesville during the car attack by the racist far right. They
opened carried their ARs (among other weapons) but also provided the first
on the spot medical care provided by their medic's division. They were
instrumental in getting the 3% Militia to withdraw and, to denounce the KKK
torch parade that was openly racist and fascist. They were the ones that
guarded that Church under threat from the armed right wingers. Not because
they pointed guns at them but because they could speak a common language.
Some even quit the 3% and joined Redneck revolt. GOOD.


They are complete idiots and so are all these recycled White Panthers, 
Young Patriots from the 60s.

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation?

[Dennis Brasky via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Right on!

On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 8:49 PM, Ken Hiebert via Marxism
>
>
> On this issue of gun control I am most interested in the question of how
> we should respond to the anti-NRA movement among high school students.  Do
> we think this is mainly a reactionary movement?
> If a counter movement develops in the high schools opposed to further
> restrictions, who should be reach out to?  Who should we try to find common
> ground with?
> If we want to find common ground with the anti-NRA young people we should
> probably avoid phrases like “...the anti-gun brain dead liberals…"
>
> ken h
>
>
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation,

[DW via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

John, this is not about a fantasy world like some young Maoists who revel
in trying to organize the peasantry in the US in some Prolonged People's
War. This is much more down to earth. And it really is political.

Redneck Revolt is one of several armed leftwing militias growing around the
U.S. It's especially big in the mid-Atlantic states, or so it seems. They
were in Charlettesville during the car attack by the racist far right. They
opened carried their ARs (among other weapons) but also provided the first
on the spot medical care provided by their medic's division. They were
instrumental in getting the 3% Militia to withdraw and, to denounce the KKK
torch parade that was openly racist and fascist. They were the ones that
guarded that Church under threat from the armed right wingers. Not because
they pointed guns at them but because they could speak a common language.
Some even quit the 3% and joined Redneck revolt. GOOD.

The issue of workers owning guns has little to do with "The Revolution".
Putting it that way shows you are out of touch with leftwing gun owners and
activists and take a mechanical view of the discussions now under way. On
your comments on Facebook and other places I responded that I support many
of the regulations being asked for by the Florida students who marched this
last week. I am for actually discussing them as well. But I also noted to
that many here, including yourself, are rapidly abandoning long held
positions held by the Socialist Left on gun control. This is, IMO, an
adaptation to liberal gun control advocacy. Liberals and the leaders of
almost every gun control organization that has help organize or supported
the recent student demonstrations are indeed anti-gun and want to ban guns,
full stop. They view every regulation toward doing this as a step in the
direction of a fake "gun free society".

I noted I support them even though it is a concession to the liberals AND
the state...when socialists would rather have the government control *all
the guns* I begin to wonder what is going through people's head. I make
these concessions (I've listed them previously here and on FB) knowing full
well that these ARE concessions. That doing so in FACT makes the state
stronger. Every gun control organization (and the Democrats who benefit the
most from these regulations in a partisan way) has far more faith in the
FBI and ATF than they do in the 99.99% of the people who own guns. I do not
but it IS a concession to this line of thought. It means, ultimately, gun
confiscation. It is in fact telling workers and oppressed...do NOT arm
yourself because *only* organizing mass action (something we of course
prioritize) protests will protect you when you are assaulted by racists and
that we should strengthen the local cops (you know...the ones who are
murdering Black youth left and right) and FBI. No Marxist should *ever*
support that. Do you consider the political consequences of "winning" a ban
on ARs or all weapons for that matter?

Also, unlike everything other country in the world...we have far more guns
of all types in circulation. Including the ARs that everyone on the left
seems bent of banning. Few would ever be turned in and certainly not by the
racist right wing which IS well armed and will stay well armed. These
militias have 10s of thousands of members and there are 100 million gun
owners in the US. Do you believe that banning weapons...which is where this
clearly leading and was demanded by many of the students at the recent
marches...will actually work?

Arming by activists is first and foremost a *political act*. Even when
workers armed in the 1930s (and before) and later when the Decons armed and
Robert F. William, did so...at no point did they serious think that they
would take on the state. Who believed that? No...every act like this puts
the *political onus* on the State that there is a *political price to pay*
if they get into an armed fight with armed citizens. See Wacko, in fact,
more recently. When workers and the oppressed here did so the did it
because there was no choice and not to do so would of jeopardized them.
These are not exceptions but rather the rule when things begin to get
rough. Any gun control measure will generally leave lots of people unarmed.
The people who will remain armed, as the liberals want, are the cops, the
State and the FBI/DEA/ATF. *Because that is what they WANT*. NOT to note
this is irresponsible even if by dint of recent events are forced backward
to support some gun control methods. The actual racists and KKK types will
NEVER disarm. To assume they will is terribly niave. As we discuss this to
ignore the consequences is 

Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation

[John Reimann via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

When I posed the question originally, I didn't mention the issue of
workers' self defense against the police and the state in general. Those
who raise this issue - and those who claim that "we" need guns to defend
"ourselves" against a repressive state - are simply playing make believe.
No amount of AR 50's and other assault weapons will stand up to the arsenal
that just the local police have, never mind the National Guard. It's like
the Native Americans fighting with bows and arrows against the cavalry with
their Gatling guns. That issue is simply make-believe.

John Reimann

-- 
*“How can we expect righteousness to prevail when there is hardly anyone
willing to give himself up individually to a righteous cause? Such a fine
sunny day, and I have to go, but what does my death matter, if through us
thousands of people are awakened and stirred to action?” *Sophie Scholl,
executed by the Nazis 2/22/1943. She was 21 years old.
Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com also on Facebook
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation?

[Ken Hiebert via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

DW says, " Black rights were won without guns? Really?"

What I said was,  "Black civil rights and voting rights were won (to the extent 
that they were won) mostly with out guns.”
The word “mostly” is not just a weasel word.  I was aware that guns did play a 
role, for example the Deacons of Defence.
Nevertheless I must concede that DW has cited examples I was unaware of, the 
presence of guns in the headquarters of the SCLC,  and the experience in 
Chattanooga. I am glad to learn something new, even if it I have to do so in a 
very public way.

Does my suggestion that black civil rights and voting rights were won mostly 
without guns survive this new information?  I think there is room for argument.

The young people who sat in at lunch counters, did they carry guns?
The marchers from Selma to Montgomery, did they carry guns?
I am sure that the March on /Washington in 1963 was carried out without guns, 
although I cannot say that none of the demonstrators carried guns on their way 
to the march.  If I were compelled to speculate I’d say that for the most part 
they did not carry guns.  Perhaps someone can correct me on this point.
The three civil rights workers murdered in Mississippi, were they carrying 
guns?  Should they have been?  Would they have survived if they had been 
carrying guns?


On this issue of gun control I am most interested in the question of how we 
should respond to the anti-NRA movement among high school students.  Do we 
think this is mainly a reactionary movement?  
If a counter movement develops in the high schools opposed to further 
restrictions, who should be reach out to?  Who should we try to find common 
ground with?
If we want to find common ground with the anti-NRA young people we should 
probably avoid phrases like “...the anti-gun brain dead liberals…"

ken h



_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation?

[Saman Sepehri via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

DRUM's take on Panthers is interesting.  That said...History of when and where 
(Slavery/ radical reconstruction etc.) is really not relevant. Where we are 
today, the concrete shape the call (against NRA , Trump's Tone deaf 
attitude,and Rubio being put on the spot by a student about whether he will 
pledge not to take a penny from NRA) is more relevent. Concrete matters. 
History is good to shed light on it. But history  is not the determinent. The 
concerete---i.e the PRESENT is the determinant.





  From: Louis Proyect via Marxism <marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu>
 To: Saman Sepehri <p70vo...@yahoo.com> 
 Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2018 3:10 PM
 Subject: Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation?
   
  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On 2/24/18 3:31 PM, DW via Marxism wrote:
> The Black Panthers*ended*  police harassment in Oakland before the NRA
> supported Mulford Act was passed banning such practices (which resulted
> immediately in the OPD harassing young Black men again in the largely Black
> neighborhoods of Oakland).

It was also their fetishizing of weapons that helped lead to their demise.
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/p70volkl%40yahoo.com


   
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation?

[Jeffrey Masko via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Posted this on our RR FB page...

http://www.mockingbirdpaper.com/content/my-guns-saved-my-life-when-state-and-liberals-left-me-die

On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 12:31 PM, DW via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

>   POSTING RULES & NOTES  
> #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
> #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
> *
>
> Gawd...such one sided bullshit. Black rights were won without guns? Really?
> The fact that the SCLC leadership kept assault rifles in their headquarters
> was...irrelevant? That many Blacks were armed was "without guns". The fact
> is it is hard to prove a negative but I suspect many klan attacks did *not*
> happen because they knew Black people were *armed* often in violation of
> RACIST gun control laws. Ken you should no better than to peddle such crap.
> The Black Panthers *ended* police harassment in Oakland before the NRA
> supported Mulford Act was passed banning such practices (which resulted
> immediately in the OPD harassing young Black men again in the largely Black
> neighborhoods of Oakland). Armed Blacks confronted *regularly* the White
> Leagues and armed Whites throughout Reconstruction. By now, Ken, et al, you
> should of all read about the "Racist Roots of Gun Control". An excellent
> article. [
> http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/civil-rights/
> 347324-the-racist-origin-of-gun-control-laws
> ]
>
> Louis...no...it is not true that only the Mpls strikes were workers armed.
> Actually they were not armed then. It was afterwards they, and many other
> unions organized such guard groups. The fact is that as a push back against
> armed scabs and the cops, racist mobs, the oppressed *always* armed. How?
> They owned guns to begin with and if the gun control laws were not enacted
> (always against Blacks and the oppressed) they could go out an purchase
> them. The last mass arming of Blacks was in 1980 during the Chattanooga
> riots where armed, Black veterans mostly, formed an ad-hoc militia and
> pushed the white racist sheriffs out of the Black community. Also, all
> petty crime stopped cold during these 3 days. They could not of done this
> without being armed and at that time, with the latest in weapons including
> ARs.
>
> Second of all, Louis, the anti-gun brain dead liberals that many here are
> adapting too DO want your .30-30 banned. They want ALL guns banned. And
> they are quite open about this. They see every incremental gun control
> measure as a forward step in that direction. THEY have more faith in the
> State to handle weapons than civilians and want more cops, more FBI and ATF
> to take charge. That is "Marxism"? Gawwdd.
>
> It is not 1936 or 1980. While gun ownership has been fairly constant,
> including the AR-15 (which started as the "Black Rifle" craze during the
> Reagan administration), for almost 3 decades. Yet...it's only be the last
> few years that these massacres have taken place. Why is that? Columbine
> occured sans AR-15s (the used pistols and shotguns). The facts are that 97%
> of all the 36,000 () gun deaths are not made by military looking
> AR-type rifles. And that 61% of those 36,000 last year (JAMA) are not from
> violent attacks but from...suicides. The real deaths of children and young
> people come from hand guns. But that is not the emotional push button we
> see...EVER. It's only about these relatively few and particularly ugly
> school massacres.
>
> I accept that some things ought to be done. I do support raising the age to
> 21 for hand gun or rifle purchases. All firearms. I'm also for actual
> licensing with proof-of-proficiency in safety handling. Lastly I'm for
> better background checks and establishing a "cannot purchase list"
> administered by qualified mental health experts (school counselors,
> psychologists, therapists, etc) but with a right to challenge. This "could"
> reduce but not eliminate such massacres. Nor would banning AR type rifles
> or large capacity magazines. It might help some but with so many such
> firearms in circulation, few would turn them in and fewer still would
> register what they have. And why should they? THEY are not the criminals.
> Disturbed people commit these crimes. And that is where the problem will
> lie:  gun bans ... which is exactly the agenda of the anti-gun crowd.
>
> All those positions I outlined above are huge fucking concessions to the
> state. They give the government...the FBI and the ATF (the new found lovers
> of the 

Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation?

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On 2/24/18 3:31 PM, DW via Marxism wrote:

The Black Panthers*ended*  police harassment in Oakland before the NRA
supported Mulford Act was passed banning such practices (which resulted
immediately in the OPD harassing young Black men again in the largely Black
neighborhoods of Oakland).


It was also their fetishizing of weapons that helped lead to their demise.
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation?

[DW via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Gawd...such one sided bullshit. Black rights were won without guns? Really?
The fact that the SCLC leadership kept assault rifles in their headquarters
was...irrelevant? That many Blacks were armed was "without guns". The fact
is it is hard to prove a negative but I suspect many klan attacks did *not*
happen because they knew Black people were *armed* often in violation of
RACIST gun control laws. Ken you should no better than to peddle such crap.
The Black Panthers *ended* police harassment in Oakland before the NRA
supported Mulford Act was passed banning such practices (which resulted
immediately in the OPD harassing young Black men again in the largely Black
neighborhoods of Oakland). Armed Blacks confronted *regularly* the White
Leagues and armed Whites throughout Reconstruction. By now, Ken, et al, you
should of all read about the "Racist Roots of Gun Control". An excellent
article. [
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/civil-rights/347324-the-racist-origin-of-gun-control-laws
]

Louis...no...it is not true that only the Mpls strikes were workers armed.
Actually they were not armed then. It was afterwards they, and many other
unions organized such guard groups. The fact is that as a push back against
armed scabs and the cops, racist mobs, the oppressed *always* armed. How?
They owned guns to begin with and if the gun control laws were not enacted
(always against Blacks and the oppressed) they could go out an purchase
them. The last mass arming of Blacks was in 1980 during the Chattanooga
riots where armed, Black veterans mostly, formed an ad-hoc militia and
pushed the white racist sheriffs out of the Black community. Also, all
petty crime stopped cold during these 3 days. They could not of done this
without being armed and at that time, with the latest in weapons including
ARs.

Second of all, Louis, the anti-gun brain dead liberals that many here are
adapting too DO want your .30-30 banned. They want ALL guns banned. And
they are quite open about this. They see every incremental gun control
measure as a forward step in that direction. THEY have more faith in the
State to handle weapons than civilians and want more cops, more FBI and ATF
to take charge. That is "Marxism"? Gawwdd.

It is not 1936 or 1980. While gun ownership has been fairly constant,
including the AR-15 (which started as the "Black Rifle" craze during the
Reagan administration), for almost 3 decades. Yet...it's only be the last
few years that these massacres have taken place. Why is that? Columbine
occured sans AR-15s (the used pistols and shotguns). The facts are that 97%
of all the 36,000 () gun deaths are not made by military looking
AR-type rifles. And that 61% of those 36,000 last year (JAMA) are not from
violent attacks but from...suicides. The real deaths of children and young
people come from hand guns. But that is not the emotional push button we
see...EVER. It's only about these relatively few and particularly ugly
school massacres.

I accept that some things ought to be done. I do support raising the age to
21 for hand gun or rifle purchases. All firearms. I'm also for actual
licensing with proof-of-proficiency in safety handling. Lastly I'm for
better background checks and establishing a "cannot purchase list"
administered by qualified mental health experts (school counselors,
psychologists, therapists, etc) but with a right to challenge. This "could"
reduce but not eliminate such massacres. Nor would banning AR type rifles
or large capacity magazines. It might help some but with so many such
firearms in circulation, few would turn them in and fewer still would
register what they have. And why should they? THEY are not the criminals.
Disturbed people commit these crimes. And that is where the problem will
lie:  gun bans ... which is exactly the agenda of the anti-gun crowd.

All those positions I outlined above are huge fucking concessions to the
state. They give the government...the FBI and the ATF (the new found lovers
of the Democratic liberal and gun control crowd) more power, databases and
addresses of gun owners. In this sense, technically, the NRA is 100%
correct: it makes it easier for the State to confiscate any weapon. But I'm
willing to make that concession...and it IS a concession...because of the
current climate. But no socialist should ever support gun confiscation.

David
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation?

[Ken Hiebert via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

One of the arguments around guns is offered by the NRA (and perhaps others).
They say without gun rights we are prey to losing our rights in general.

What is the actual experience?  Black civil rights and voting rights were won 
(to the extent that they were won) mostly with out guns.
Gay rights won were won without guns.

Or take a negative example where rights were lost.  Would Japanese people in 
the  US and Canada have been better able to defend their rights in World War II 
if they had a higher instance of gun ownership?

ken h
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Gun regulation?

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On 2/24/18 10:59 AM, John Reimann via Marxism wrote:

Sure, the issue of gun regulations of some sort only touches the surface of
the issue of mass shootings. What really needs to be addressed are the
issues of prevalent violence, alienation, narcissism, and the cheapening of
human life in US society. But given its prominence, we can't afford to
ignore the issue of gun regulation nor have a knee-jerk reaction.
Your thoughts?

John Reimann



For some reason, Trotskyists have had a pat answer to this question 
based on a dogmatic understanding of the need for workers self-defense. 
In reality, the only use of such weapons occurred during the Minneapolis 
strikes when hunting rifles were stored at teamster headquarters. I 
doubt that we'll ever reach a point where a 30-30 is illegal.


Back in the 30s, you didn't have deranged 19 year olds taking a 
semiautomatic weapon to a high school and opening fire on their peers. 
The underlying issue is the mental/societal breakdown taking place 
against a backdrop of economic decline and the glorification of violence 
through video games, TV shows, and the reality of imperial war.



_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Gun regulation?

[John Reimann via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I think socialists need to have a serious discussion about this campaign of
the youth in the US against the NRA and against assault weapons.

On the one hand, there are the arguments that the original gun laws were
introduced to take guns away from the newly freed slaves in the South after
the Civil War. And in the 1970s, gun laws in California were tightened up
to at least partially disarm the Black Panther Party. Equally important is
the fact that with up to 8 million assault weapons floating around in the
US, you're never going to get them out of circulation, so what is likely to
happen is that the far right, including fascist groups, would be the ones
who end up with them. In other words, you can't trust the capitalist state
to regulate guns.

Then there's the other arguments:
In the first place, while it's true that you can't trust the capitalist
state, still, we have all sorts of government regulations that we don't
want to see dismantled - environmental regulations, for example. Or who
would advocate eliminating speed limits, even though we know that they're
selectively enforced and used in a racist way? How about driving and auto
ownership - should that be completely deregulated? As for assault weapons:
Aren't there some limits we would advocate? Are we okay with people owning
mortars, bazookas, rpg's? How about owning a batch of sarin gas? If we just
say "no, no, no, no", do we really want to end up sounding exactly like the
NRA?

Sure, the issue of gun regulations of some sort only touches the surface of
the issue of mass shootings. What really needs to be addressed are the
issues of prevalent violence, alienation, narcissism, and the cheapening of
human life in US society. But given its prominence, we can't afford to
ignore the issue of gun regulation nor have a knee-jerk reaction.
Your thoughts?

John Reimann

-- 
*“How can we expect righteousness to prevail when there is hardly anyone
willing to give himself up individually to a righteous cause? Such a fine
sunny day, and I have to go, but what does my death matter, if through us
thousands of people are awakened and stirred to action?” *Sophie Scholl,
executed by the Nazis 2/22/1943. She was 21 years old.
Check out:https:http://oaklandsocialist.com also on Facebook
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com