Wikipedia tells us that “Randy Pullen is a Republican Party activist. He is a former Chairman of the Arizona Republican Party; he served as chairman from 2007 to 2011. He is Chairman of WageWatch, a former Arizona Republican National Committeeman, and former Treasurer of the Republican National Committee.” If this Democrat debate-inspired tweet is genuine – and we have every reason to believe it is – Pullen is also a honest-to-God gun-grabbing dupe. Is he not aware of the racist roots of gun control? The problem isn’t blacks with guns, it’s black (and other) criminals with guns. For a his (to be charitable) embarrassingly careless tweet, he’s our gun zero of the day.
So law abiding African-Americans should have no right to self-defense because they are…..black?
I bet he’s in favor counting them as only 3/5s of a white American, too.
The 3/5 compromise was an antislavery policy…
Sshhh don’t let historical facts interfere with joke making.
So it’s a nasty compromise that came about because one party thought they were less than human and would only bend so far. How dose that make it right? It’s still abhorrent to consider someone less than a whole human being just because political bickering years ago put such ideas to paper.
Actually, it was a compromise to keep the slave states from using the (non-voting) slave population as a proxy to increase their representation, and therefore the voting power, in congress.
What sort of nonsense were you taught?
All politicians are swine, no pearls, not ever.
Taking guns away from ANY law abiding citizen is nothing more than giving criminals and crazies of any color carte blanche to do as they want.
As Bugs would say “What a Maroon”.
Idjit.
I think this was a poorly executed attempt at satire. Sadly, there’s no satire buttons on keyboards.
The dems will say the opinion was from a republican’t and racism squared, whereas the dem/progressive tyranny is for our own good.
It’s not racist if it’s true The statistics support his statement as unconstitutional as it may be.
It will be classified as proof republicans, read anyone not a socialist, are raciest.
Omg god that’s so racis…oh wait..that’s so true.
No, its not true, in that the proposition can be BOTH true, and racist….which it is.
No, its racist because it would deny blacks who aren’t criminals their RKBA for just happening to be the same skin color as most criminals. Its racist because in order to enforce such a proposition it would necessitate classifying the population along binary lines of race. What would would you even distinguish those lines – would you have to limit mixed race backs to a smaller caliber than non-mixed whites, do you get a higher capacity magazine the lighter your skin is, or do you get prohibited for any percentage of black racial characteristics? And other than the fact that if violates a fundamental right, how would this proposal be any different than taking the Driver’s Licenses away from anyone who drinks alcohol, because some percentage of the drinking population chooses to drive drunk.
Not only does that proposal violate the principle of “Innocent Until Proven Guilty”, it does so purely on the basis of race, all the while ignoring the ACTUAL demographic that is the problem….CRIMINALS of ANY RACE!
I’d also like to add that TTAGss comment system is the biggest POS on the internet in my present experience.
The problem is that too many politicians are subscribing to the LibSoc theory that we’d be safer if we took all the guns away from all the people — except, of course, from the LibSocs and their Praetorian Guards and military.
Fact is, what we _should_ be doing is taking all the violent criminals away from the guns.
Instead:
“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn’t do it. I sure as hell wouldn’t want to live in a society where the only people allowed guns are the police and the military.”
–William S. Burroughs; Grand Street, no. 37 & The War Universe (1992)
Seriously people. Did you stop to think that he is being facetious?
I hope you are right.
If it were, it wouldn’t be the first article today reporting on a joke.
Who else caught that torx-bit story?
Doesn’t matter if he was or wasn’t, it plays right into the (sometimes correct) narrative of “racist Republicans”. Without context, there’s no real way to tell if it was satire or not. He’s not winning over any new Republicans, only pushing away more potential supporters and furthering the bad racial image the GOP already has. Like it or not, it is an important aspect.
If you are an ethical citizen, you should be able to buy any firearm whether you’re white, black, brown, plaid, or purple.
Also, slightly off topic but I love how certain statists claim that gang violence will go away when there are no more guns. Gangs in the Philippines and parts of Africa get along just fine with machetes.
I’m pretty sure his point, which is a quite valid one, is that 94% of black murder victims are killed by black assailants. His manner of articulating that point leaves… a lot to be desired. Calling it a poor attempt at satire is being generous.
Dumb, but true.
He was being facetious — and Bloomberg said it first. Bloomberg claimed that 95 percent of murders fall into a specific category: male, minority and between the ages of 15 and 25. And that “we” had to take their guns way to save their lives. Look it up.
Remarkable, isn’t it, that when the Little Tin God from New York City says it, it’s a thoughtful comment. When a Republic from Arizona posts it, he’s a racist.
Of course both were correct in their observation just as both were incorrect in their conclusion.
Yeah. ..”funny”. All bullshit pc aside..the truth is that the blacks thugs are out of control. As are all color of thugs. But fuck it. The blacks lead the race. No pun intended.
If the tweet was sincere it was at best a poor attempt at satire. Unfortunately I am not inclined to believe the best in this situation. Horrible statement, no room for that garbage in polite society.
I missed the “z” in the title and almost face palmed at you, RF. Nice change-up.
Satire or not, this guy is a moron and exemplifies some of the biggest problems with the modern GOP.
What he said was more or less confirmed by a Justice of the Florida Supreme Court in a 1941 decision concerning the concealed carry of a revolver. He wrote that the law requiring a permit to carry a pistol was intended to prevent African Americans from being armed, as there were many killings in the logging camps of North Florida. He went on to write that the law was never intended to apply to the White citizens of Florida.
Reverse psychology, people. Now people advocating gun-control will be aligning themselves with anti-black sentiments.
I just hope there was a high degree of sarcasm which was lost in there.
Oh, see, this is exactly what Bloomberg wants anyways, so this won’t be much of an issue.
They DO kill many times more of their own than the cops do…hes right that they are their own worst enemy…but I don’t believe that anyones rights should be infringed on because of their race (or for any other reason).
His attempt at satire, if that is what it was, is very poorly written. Can’t tell if he is talking about guns, blacks or blacks with guns that are the problem. He needs a remedial class in writing texts that are not confusing.
Doh!
Wow talk about a stupid clueless sonuvabitch……..
Nothing that Mayor Bloomberg hasn’t already pointed out:
“Bloomberg claimed that 95 percent of murders fall into a specific category: male, minority and between the ages of 15 and 25. Cities need to get guns out of this group’s hands and keep them alive, he said.
“These kids think they’re going to get killed anyway because all their friends are getting killed,” Bloomberg said. “They just don’t have any long-term focus or anything. It’s a joke to have a gun. It’s a joke to pull a trigger.”
http://www.aspentimes.com/news/14957190-113/michael-bloomberg-calls-colorados-decision-on-legal-pot-stupid
And he too is wrong because he is, depending on how you look at it, either citing an incomplete demographic picture, or creating a demographic out traits that a great many other people share in common.
“male, minority and between the ages of 15 and 25” – all of these would cover many other people who don’t share the most important (and missing) part of the demographic…gang- affiliated criminals. You know who else is male, minority and between the ages of 15 and 25? Athletes. Am I to believe that most gun-homicides are perpetrated by Athletes?
Any policy based on an incomplete criteria will necessarily inflict itself on a great many innocent people.
To be fair his straight D student mistress probably typed that while he was snorting blow off her body. Only thing he did wrong was not logging out.
Excuse will be;
a) OMFG!!! Haxxxed
b) Twas satire.
c) Overzealous intern.
d) Trying to expand the dialogue.
Comments are closed.