[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests)

What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer

Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic?

War in Ukraine Turns on Russia

what happened during total solar eclipse

Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage

Earth is Scorched with Heat

Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman

Vibe Shift

A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound.

Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages

When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements

CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions

This Speech Just Broke the Internet

This AMAZING Math Formula Will Teach You About God!

The GOSPEL of the ALIENS | Fallen Angels | Giants | Anunnaki


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Opinions/Editorials
See other Opinions/Editorials Articles

Title: HereÂ’s Why the NRA is Silent After Cops Killed a Legally Armed Black Man for Stopping a Mass Shooting
Source: Free Thought Project
URL Source: https://thefreethoughtproject.com/nra-silent-death-jemel-roberson/
Published: Nov 14, 2018
Author: Matt Agorist
Post Date: 2018-11-15 10:06:55 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 1437
Comments: 18

Robbins, IL — As TFTP reported on Tuesday, early Sunday morning, a tragedy took place in Illinois after a hero security guard stopped what was quickly becoming a deadly mass shooting, only to be shot by police moments later. Jemel Roberson, 26, was working security at Manny’s Blue Room Sunday morning when his heroism got him killed. He had a permit to carry the legal gun, used it properly to stop a crime, was killed for his pro-Second Amendment actions—by police—and the NRA is dead silent.

The incident began after multiple individuals were asked to leave the bar for being unruly. Witnesses say all the men left and then returned and one came back in with a gun opening fire into the bar. As everyone else ran for cover, Roberson according to witnesses, engaged the shooter with his own gun.

Roberson then apprehended one of the men involved in the shooting and held him at gunpoint as the police showed up. Four people had been shot, but thanks to Roberson, no one else was hit, and those four people were transported to a local hospital and treated for their injuries. Sadly, Roberson would not be so lucky.

At around 4 a.m., police officers from multiple suburban departments responded to the call of shots fired. When they arrived, Roberson was holding one of the men on the ground so he could be apprehended by police.

“He had somebody on the ground with his knee in back, with his gun in his back like, ‘Don’t move,'” witness Adam Harris said.

“Everybody was screaming out, ‘he was a security guard,’ and they basically saw a black man with a gun and killed him,” witness Harris tells WGN TV.

Roberson—who was licensed to carry a firearm—and is a father of a 9-month-old boy, saved an untold number of lives that night only to be gunned down shortly after.

When a good guy with a gun stops a bad guy with a gun, the NRA is all over it. They tweet out the story, pat themselves on the back, praise the guns and the heroism and justify their existence.

They even tweeted a story out on the day Roberson was killed, praising several citizens who stopped shootings by being armed.

The fact is that the NRA tweets regularly about good guys or gals with guns stopping bad guys or gals with guns. But not Roberson.

The NRA refusing to comment on the tragic death of Jemel Roberson is despicable. However, it is not surprising. Roberson was a black man.

Just like the NRA is silent on Roberson’s tragic case, they were silent when Siwatu-Salama Ra, 26, was kidnapped and caged for legally defending her family with a gun.

Ra was a legal gun owner with a concealed carry permit in a state that allows open carry, and when she pulled out her gun, she was defending herself, her mother and her 2-year-old daughter. But she was convicted of felony firearms violations and thrown in prison anyway. The NRA said nothing.

Philando Castile is another tragic case of the NRA choosing to remain silent. Castile was a legal concealed carry permit holder who had committed no crime, was complying with the officer who pulled him over to harass him, and was shot and killed by a cop afraid of his own shadow. Castile had harmed no one, and was killed for practicing his second amendment right. Once again, the NRA said nothing.

On top of being black, Roberson was also killed by police. When cops kill citizens for practicing their second amendment rights, the NRA also chooses to remain silent.

As TFTP reported at the time, Mesa, Arizona police were called over reports of a man with a gun in a legal carry state, and within minutes of their arrival, they opened fire on Daniel Shaver, father of 3 and a husband. Police killed Shaver even though he posed no threat, was complying with their commands to the best of his ability, and was even crying and begging the officers to spare his life. In response, the National Rifle Association remained silent.

The organization’s website defines the NRA as “America’s foremost defender of Second Amendment rights,” and paints the picture of an association that has been committed to educating and protecting Americans’ Second Amendment rights since the 1870s. However, the NRA also notes that it is “widely recognized today as a major political force,” and it appears that politics are keeping the NRA from defending the Second Amendment rights of Americans who are killed by police as well as being black.

As journalist Radley Balko noted on Twitter after the officer who murdered Shaver was acquitted, “The insanely heavy-handed police response to Daniel Shaver came after someone reported seeing him with a rifle. (it was a pellet gun). Arizona is open carry, including for long guns. So the NRA will denounce this verdict and demand better training for Mesa police, right?

Wrong. Just like the NRA was silent on Castile, Ra, and Shaver, they will also be predictably silent on Roberson.

The fact of the matter is that Second Amendment protections have often been denied to black citizens. Martin Luther King, Jr. couldn’t even get a concealed carry permit after his life was threatened. The NRA has historically not commented on individual or mass shootings. However, the NRA does have a close if fraught relationship with American police forces.

If the NRA actually cared about the Second Amendment and Americans’ civil liberties—instead of just how much money can be raised and how much public support can be garnered from powerful politicians—then it would be adamantly speaking out about the unjust killing of Jemel Roberson. But they are not and this exposes their true colors.

“This was going to be my baby’s first Christmas with his dad and now he’s going to miss out on everything,” said Avontea Boose, the mother of Roberson’s child.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 9.

#8. To: Deckard, misterwhite, A K A Stone, GrandIsland (#0)

Illinois is one of the most anti-carry states in the union. The below 2013 Chicago Tribune article indicated 55,000 people in Illinois had concealed carry licenses. About 49,000 of those were law enforcement officers, retired officers, or auxiliary police. That left about "6,000 people authorized to carry a weapon as private detectives, armored truck guards and other private security workers." That's for the entire state. The Illinois CCL is in short supply. Compare to about 13,000 NYC taxi medallions.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2013-01-30-ct-met-concealed-carry-20130130-story.html

Illinois' legal guns: Who's got them

By Matthew Walberg, Chicago Tribune reporter
January 30, 2013

As Illinois lawmakers wrestle with the volatile issue of carrying concealed firearms, the question might arise: How many residents can currently do so?

According to a Tribune analysis, about 1 out of every 234 people.

Records show that about 55,000 men and women — most of them law enforcement officers — are authorized by state or federal law to carry weapons in public in Illinois.

[...]

Law enforcement officers

The most recent available data from the U.S. Department of Justice in June 2012 indicates about 43,000 state, local and federal law enforcement officers work in Illinois, not including security and police forces at the state's three main military bases.

[...]

Retired officers

Retired law enforcement officers also are allowed to carry firearms under the federal law if they meet the qualifications, abide by similar restrictions for current officers and register with either their former department or the Illinois Retired Officer Concealed Carry program.

The program offered by the Illinois Law Enforcement Training and Standards Board maintains a roster of about 5,000 retired officers who have obtained the permit.

[...]

Auxiliary police

[...]

There are about 1,000 auxiliary police officers, in more than 80 local governments, according to data from the Law Enforcement Training and Standards Board.

It is unclear how many auxiliary officers have been granted permission to carry weapons. The roster of the law enforcement board reflects only that the person has completed state-mandated firearms training.

[...]

'Conservator of the peace'

Another exception to Illinois' weapons ban was carved out for elected or appointed municipal officials in 1872, enabling them to carry firearms, make arrests and interview suspects, and even hold them in custody.

[nc - total one (1) - 400 hour training program]

[...]

Private detectives/security guards

Outside the public sector, there are nearly 6,000 people authorized to carry a weapon as private detectives, armored truck guards and other private security workers, according to the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, which oversees such professions.

In order to work as a private armed guard, a FOID card is required as well as a Permanent Employee Registration Card, which requires a criminal background check and fingerprinting.

A state-approved firearms training course also must be passed to obtain a Firearm Training Certificate. Then the employer must apply for a Firearm Control Card on the employee's behalf.

The employee may carry a firearm only while at work, according to department spokeswoman Sue Hofer.

The private security guard exemption has sometimes been viewed as a way to bypass Illinois' firearms restrictions.

[...]

Don Mastrianni, owner of Illinois Gun Works in Elmwood Park, said he regularly encounters people who think their work as a security guard makes it lawful for them to carry a gun whenever they want.

"There's an awful lot of people that come in here and want to take the (Firearm Control Card) class," Mastrianni said. "I have people come in every day who ask, 'Does this mean I can carry?'"

His answer?

"No," he said. "It's not bypass for concealed carry. No matter what people try to think, FCC doesn't mean concealed carry."

[...]

nolu chan  posted on  2018-11-15   15:43:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: nolu chan (#8)

The below 2013 Chicago Tribune article indicated 55,000 people in Illinois had concealed carry licenses.

Well, Illinois didn't pass and implement Concealed Carry until 2014. As of May 31, 2017, Illinois has issued 243,245 Concealed Carry Licenses.

misterwhite  posted on  2018-11-15   16:15:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 9.

#14. To: misterwhite (#9)

Well, Illinois didn't pass and implement Concealed Carry until 2014.

I believe you are almost entirely correct; there were concealed carry statutory provisions in 2013, but I don't doubt implementation carried into 2014. I figured the only thing which could explain the rapid turnaround was a court opinion requiring Illinois to comply with the constitution.

Five years after Heller and three years after McDonald incorporated Heller against the states, the Illinois statutory provisions regarding concealed carry were struck down as unconstitutional under Heller. Two Illinois federal cases, one in the Central District and the other in the Southern District, had dismissed challenges to the constitutionality of the statutes for failure to state a claim, finding that "the Supreme court had not yet adddressed whether the Second Amendment creates a right of self-defense outside the home." The two cases were combined by the Seventh Circuit and are cited as Moore v. Madigan.

The Circuit Court found the statutory provisions unconstitutional by their opinion of December 11, 2012, however, they STAYED the MANDATE for 180 days to allow the legislature to craft a new gun law, and later granted a 30 day extension. Both houses passed new legislation, but the governor vetoed it. Absent replacement legislation, the mandate would have gone into effect, and the existing law been rendered null and void. Everyone could have engaged in concealed carry. The legislature overrode the veto.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore_v._Madigan

On June 3, 2013, the Illinois Legislature passed a "shall-issue" concealed-carry bill, which would allow handgun owners with a valid FOID who paid a $150 fee and attended 16 hours of training to obtain a concealed-carry license. In a compromise between representatives of the Chicago area and other large cities, and those from smaller cities and rural areas, the bill preempts any local ordinances governing possession and use of handguns, allows storage of a handgun by a person with a carry permit in an automobile, even if that vehicle is parked in an otherwise prohibited place, and allows concealed carry into food service establishments that make less than 50% of their revenue from sales of alcohol "by the drink" (a common delineation point in the laws of many States between "restaurants" and "bars"). However, in concession to the interests of the Chicago area, mass transit areas and vehicles as well as two dozen other specific types of places are designated "gun-free". The bill passed both the State House and Senate by large margins (89-28 and 45-12 respectively, well over the 2/3 margin required to override a veto), but as of June 11, still awaited action by Governor Patrick Quinn, named in Moore and who supports an appeal to SCOTUS.

On June 4, the 7th Circuit issued one 30-day extension of the original stay, allowing Governor Quinn and his staff time to review the law passed by the Legislature and decide on a course of action. The 7th Circuit's ruling invalidating current Illinois law will now not take effect until July 9, 2013. The court indicated it would not extend the stay again, so were the law not passed, in order for the State to maintain the ban, SCOTUS would have had to stay the Circuit Court's ruling.

On July 9, 2013 the Illinois General Assembly voted to override Governor Quinn's veto of the bill passed in early June, now giving Illinois a legal framework for issuing concealed carry permits. Illinois was the last U.S. state to allow concealed carry of guns.

- - - - - - - - - -

Moore v Madigan 12-1269, 12-1788, (7th Cir, 11 Dec 2012) Mandate stayed for 180 days (concealed carry)

Moore at 2-4:

The appellants contend that the Illinois law violates the Second Amendment as interpreted in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), and held applicable to the states in McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020 (2010). Heller held that the Second Amendment protects “the right of law-abiding, responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home.” 554 U.S. at 635. But the Supreme Court has not yet addressed the question whether the Second Amendment creates a right of self-defense outside the home. The district courts ruled that it does not, and so dismissed the two suits for failure to state a claim.

The parties and the amici curiae have treated us to hundreds of pages of argument, in nine briefs. The main focus of these submissions is history. The supporters of the Illinois law present historical evidence that there was no generally recognized private right to carry arms in public in 1791, the year the Second Amendment was ratified—the critical year for determining the amendment’s historical meaning, according to McDonald v. City of Chicago, supra, 130 S. Ct. at 3035 and n. 14. Similar evidence against the existence of an eighteenthcentury right to have weapons in the home for purposes of self-defense rather than just militia duty had of course been presented to the Supreme Court in the Heller case. See, e.g., Saul Cornell, A Well-Regulated Militia 2–4, 58–65 (2006); Lois G. Schwoerer, “To Hold and Bear Arms: The English Perspective,” 76 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 27, 34–38 (2000); Don Higginbotham, “The Second Amendment in Historical Context,” 16 Constitutional Commentary 263, 265 (1999). The District of Columbia had argued that “the original understanding of the Second Amendment was neither an individual right of self-defense nor a collective right of the states, but rather a civic right that guaranteed that citizens would be able to keep and bear those arms needed to meet their legal obligation to participate in a well-regulated militia.” Cornell, supra, at 2; see also Paul Finkelman, “ ’A Well Regulated Militia’: The Second Amendment in Historical Perspective,” 76 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 195, 213–14 (2000); Don Higginbotham, “The Federalized Militia Debate: A Neglected Aspect of Second Amendment Scholarship,” 55 William & Mary Q. 39, 47–50 (1998); Roy G. Weatherup, “Standing Armies and Armed Citizens: An Historical Analysis of the Second Amendment,” 2 Hastings Constitutional L.Q. 961, 994–95 (1975).

The Supreme Court rejected the argument. The appellees ask us to repudiate the Court’s historical analysis. That we can’t do. Nor can we ignore the implication of the analysis that the constitutional right of armed selfdefense is broader than the right to have a gun in one’s home.

Moore at 20-21:

We are disinclined to engage in another round of historical analysis to determine whether eighteenth-century America understood the Second Amendment to include a right to bear guns outside the home. The Supreme Court has decided that the amendment confers a right to bear arms for self-defense, which is as important outside the home as inside. The theoretical and empirical evidence (which overall is inconclusive) is consistent with concluding that a right to carry firearms in public may promote self-defense. Illinois had to provide us with more than merely a rational basis for believing that its uniquely sweeping ban is justified by an increase in public safety. It has failed to meet this burden. The Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Second Amendment therefore compels us to reverse the decisions in the two cases before us and remand them to their respective district courts for the entry of declarations of unconstitutionality and permanent injunctions. Nevertheless we order our mandate stayed for 180 days to allow the Illinois legislature to craft a new gun law that will impose reasonable limitations, consistent with the public safety and the Second Amendment as interpreted in this opinion, on the carrying of guns in public.

REVERSED AND REMANDED, WITH DIRECTIONS;

BUT MANDATE STAYED FOR 180 DAYS.

- - - - - - - - - -

https://www.scribd.com/document/393335849/Moore-v-Madigan-12-1269-12-1788-7th-Cir-11-Dec-2012-MANDATE-STAYED-for-180-DAYS-Concealed-Carry

nolu chan  posted on  2018-11-16 01:17:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 9.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com