Gun Rights

This Republican Senator Calls Three Black Men Peacefully Carrying Long Guns 'Mob Rule'

A Second Amendment hypocrite with a plan to undermine federalism

|

This week Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R–Ga.) described a handful of protesters carrying guns in public as "mob rule."

Is Loeffler the rare conservative politician with a history of calling for expanded gun controls? That doesn't appear the case. Here's a tweet from her from January expressing appreciation for National Rifle Association President Carolyn Meadows:

What could possibly make a pro-gun-rights senator suddenly take such a dim view of citizens' rights to bear arms? Watch this Wednesday segment from the Fox show America's Newsroom, and the answer becomes apparent pretty quickly:

As you can see, Fox interviewed Loeffler amid a montage of young, armed black people protesting police abuse in Atlanta, where a cop recently shot and killed Rayshard Brooks. Another Fox host, Sean Hannity, reported on Tuesday that there were "at least three men brandishing long guns" near the Wendy's where the incident happened.

Hannity, Fox, and Loeffler all represented this as evidence of the dangers of defunding police. Indeed, one young man with a gun (who seemed perfectly polite and respectful) told Fox he was carrying a 12-gauge shotgun because he didn't believe police officers would protect him, adding that cops were not going to be "allowed" in this space. Asked what he'd do if police rolled up and ordered him to drop his weapon, the man insisted he had the legal right under the Second Amendment of the Constitution to bear arms: "And at no point will I allow my right to be disturbed." Good for him!

Carrying long guns in public is legal in Georgia, by the way (with exceptions for a few places like courts and schools). Fox does not actually accuse any of these men of breaking any laws. But they clearly intend viewers to see these men as a threat—and not just because they have put up barricades and hope to shut out the police, but because they're bearing arms. By contrast, when a predominantly white group of protesters showed up at Michigan's capitol in April to protest the state's COVID-19 rules, Fox's coverage was reasonably neutral and factual, giving voice to critics but pointing out that guns were legally allowed in the state Capitol building.

Loeffler isn't just a hypocrite about gun rights. She's trying to undermine another value conservatives are supposed to believe in: federalism. The senator is introducing legislation that would reduce federal transportation funding from states and municipalities that cut funding to law enforcement, unless they can show a "clear budgetary need." The idea that the states and cities should have to get permission from the U.S. government to make a budget decision is, of course, absolutely anathema to local rule. It's up to a community's citizens to determine how much money their police department should receive—not the U.S. Senate or the Department of Transportation.

Bonus video: ReasonTV on the importance of defending open carry rights in black communities to defend civil rights:

Advertisement

NEXT: The Feds Sent More than 1 Million Coronavirus Stimulus Payments to Dead People, GAO Says

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. >>at least three men brandishing long guns

    jokes about Senator Kelly getting excited are too easy here.

    1. Make $6,000-$8,000 A Month Online With No Prior Experience Or Skills Required. RSd
      Be Your Own Boss And for more info visit any tab this site Thanks a lot just open this link…………………………Go to this link

    2. Loeffler or Shackford?

      1. If these same “three lack men peacefully carrying long guns” were standing outside Shackford’s house saying who could and couldn’t come and go in his neighborhood, he would have called 911 a long time ago instead of writing mendacious bullshit here.

    3. RINO of the first order. Has she been through a primary yet? Hopefully she won’t get chosen.

  2. Vote everyone out.
    Everyone, every time.

  3. If unlawful, armed occupation of public property by thugs is not mob rule, what is?

    Also
    oeffler isn’t just a hypocrite about gun rights. She’s trying to undermine another value conservatives are supposed to believe in: federalism. The senator is introducing legislation that would reduce federal transportation funding from states and municipalities that cut funding to law enforcement, unless they can show a “clear budgetary need.” The idea that the states and cities should have to get permission from the U.S. government to make a budget decision is, of course, absolutely anathema to local rule.

    Cutting funding is not the same as “denying permission” or whatever it is Shackford is trying to imply here. And what is the likelihood of this bullshit legislation going anywhere? Why should we even give a fuck when there is literal anarchy in American cities?

    I’m almost done with this rag. Hopefully Gillespie can start a spin-off.

      1. Here’s Jeff and his fifty sockpuppets, to bid you farewell, Stack.

      2. Are you finally going to commit suicide Pedo Jeffy?

      3. Make 6,000 dollar to 8,000 dollar A Month Online With No Prior Experience Or Skills Required. Be Your Own Boss AndChoose Your Own Work Hours. Click For Full Details.

    1. Well…….bye!

      1. I make a big amount online work . How ??? Just u can done also with this site and u can do it Easily 2 step one is open link next is Click on Tech so u can done Easily now u can do it also  here     Click it here   <<<<<<

    2. Hurry up and get ‘er done! Do not “almost”. Do.

    3. On the one hand I tend to agree that there is a difference between being armed and going to the state house to protest, and being armed and declaring that the city may not enter a piece of land under its jurisdiction. That is definitely a mob.

      On the other hand, you very well know that federal funding is used quite often to change the behavior of states. And doing so is absolutely an end run around the federalist regime our founders envisioned when they delegated most powers to the states. A republican who is using funding to change states’ behavior is not a federalist and is a hypocrite if they claim to value federalism.

      1. “If unlawful, armed occupation of public property by thugs is not mob rule, what is?”

        Let’s ask Ammon Bundy and his supporters if they consider armed occupation of public property “mob rule”

        And what make them “thugs” exactly??? Or are we all supposed to pretend that isn’t a racist framing?

        1. Where do you live in Chicago, Tom?

        2. Armed occupation of public property is Mob rule in my book.

          I have no problem saying I agree with someone’s motivations. I have no problem saying that violation of the NAP is violation of the NAP- even if it was being done for a reason I agree with.

          In this case, while the Republican’s and Hannity’s rhetoric may be hyperbolic, it is also correct- these people are using the threat of force (their openly carried guns) to deprive someone of the full use of their property. *shrug*

        3. Since the building the Bundys took over was empty, at least they didn’t take hostages. That makes them better than CHAZ.

          They were certainly guilty of tresspassing, though.

          1. The federal government has ZERO-Rights to State Land.

          2. The reason the charges for trespassing were largely dropped/dismissed was because the fibbies et al refused to tell the judge how many undercovers there were or what their participation in the planning and execution of the plan was.

        4. Last I checked Wendy’s wasn’t “public property” and that makes all the difference in the world.

          Are these long gun carriers there to prevent a hostile take-over by some other outside party?? or are they the hostile take-over party to begin with???

          I believe they are there doing a hostile take-over of property that isn’t theirs and that is !!- completely opposite -!! to what Ammon Bundy and his supporters did when Obama was STEALING state land all over the country side.

        5. Let’s ask Ammon Bundy and his supporters if they consider armed occupation of public property “mob rule”

          Excellent point. So you’re saying state and federal cops are justified in opening fire on the black guys in Georgia and killing one of them while he has his hands up like they did LaVoy Finicum, right?

          1. ….. and never-mind the 30 some-odd shots fired at them before they even got close to the road block. It must have been open season on white pickups who are on their way to the county sheriffs office.

        6. You mean the criminal charges that were dropped because of federal malfeasance and the fibbies et al refusing to tell the judge how deep their undercovers were or what their participation in the planning and execution of said events were?

          1. I don’t have anywhere near that clout as these ppl but I’m even getting flack from Google games for spreading Infowars links on their stupid games world chat lines… whatever…???? I’m trying as best I can givin my current situation …???? Click For Full Details.

        7. Haha. You can pretend anything you want, Tom. Maybe smollett was telling the truth, and everything is so terrible and racist.

        8. My last month cheque was for 1500 dollars… All i did was easy on-line work from comfort at home for 3-4 hours/day that I got from this agency I discovered over the net and they paid me for it 95 usd each hour. Click For Full Details.

      2. you very well know that federal funding is used quite often to change the behavior of states. And doing so is absolutely an end run around the federalist regime our founders envisioned when they delegated most powers to the states.

        No, the federal funding itself is the end run around the founders’ envisioned system, and this is the result. The republican is a hypocrite, of course. But she’s a hypocrite because she’s not trying to end the accumulation of money and power at the federal level, not because she’s playing the same game democrats have been playing for decades.

      3. Loeffler is a hypocrite and she sucks. I hope Collins beats her, but at least she’s not a Marxist.
        Ironically, Loeffler is the exact type of Chamber of Commerce republican Reason deigns to praise when talking about those horrible populists and nationalists.
        Reason is also a hypocrite.
        And few people in the world could possibly be more hypocritical than Scott Shackford and his propaganda promoting the Russia collusion hoax as he opposes FBI bs in other cases.

    4. What about armed occupation by non-thugs? The guy pictured doesn’t look particularly thuggish.

      Mob rule would be when a mob actually rules. I don’t really think blocking off a Wendy’s parking lot counts.

      1. What if it was your Wendy’s?

        1. This core value is woefully missing from this article. Are these people with guns from the neighborhood or invited by the property owners or are they just showing up because it’s a photogenic place to throw up the black power fist?

          If they’re legitimately from the neighborhood or were asked by the owner of the Wendy’s or neighbors to police the area, I agree they’re absolutely within their rights to be doing what they’re doing but there’s no indication of that one way or the other. And if they aren’t it would be Brown and Dalmia levels of stupid for Reason to be advocating on their behalf.

          1. but there’s no indication of that one way or the other.

            So the onus is on them to prove their innocence? If you’re not the owner of the Wendy’s, then it’s really none of your business (or Loeffler’s)

            1. So the onus is on them to prove their innocence?

              No, shit-for-brains, the onus is on Shackford to paint a complete and honest story.

              If I stand with a gun at the end of your driveway on public property I’m just a gunman on public property. That doesn’t mean I’m not breaking any laws.

              (or Loeffler’s)

              Unless her constituents who live there have phoned her up and said “Do something about these dumbasses.” then it’s literally her business.

              I bet you’ve got an interesting story that no one wants to hear about the time you figured out whether your brain had an on/off switch and you just couldn’t find it or didn’t have switch at all.

            2. The moment Leo admits he’s just a trueman bot

            3. People have no right to expect public accomodations law to be abided by?

            1. See below, journalists are (or claim to be) “allowed” to enter at gunpoint. A gunfight ensues when a woman, supposedly a medic or EMT, gets shot in the leg and no investigation will take place because the BLM protesters ran the police off as soon as the woman was in the ambulance.

              It’s not even the Wild West because innocent women are being shot in the street but Reason wants to pretend that the issue is three guys carrying carrying rifles. Dumber than Custer.

              Just like with the passive aggression, it doesn’t seem to dawn on Reason that every time they commit a lie of omission like this eventually even their honest stances will only drive people to their opposition.

              1. The incident where the woman got shot was a few days ago

                1. I’m not sure what to make of this statement.

                  Oh, gunfights and innocent bystanders on the weekend followed by days of occupation by armed men, I’m sure one has nothing to do with the other. My mistake, this is obviously a cut-and-dry 2A public association issue, by all means, carry on!

              2. “every time they commit a lie of omission like this eventually even their honest stances will only drive people to their opposition.”

                Stupidity, rank dishonesty, or goal directed behavior?

          2. My Boy pal makes $seventy five/hour at the internet. She has been without a assignment for six months however remaining month her pay have become $16453 genuinely working at the internet for some hours. Click For Full Details.

        2. Well, then I would hope the police would come and remove trespassers. If they don’t, it’s probably not worth taking matters into my own hands unless I am physically threatened.

          But I don’t know what that has to do with the definition of mob rule.

          1. Oh shit Zeb is defintion policing again, he’s pissed!

            1. Yeah, watch out, you don’t know what I might do next.

          2. The police aren’t coming on account of the riotous crowds. In their absence are these morons brandishing guns. What do you propose we call the situation?

            1. What do you propose we call the situation?

              “Libertarianism”, perhaps, since it fits the exact definition.

              1. Fucking morons like you are lucky to be able to spell ‘libertarianism’ much less define it. Usually libertarians respect private property and this is the opposite of that.

            2. I was promised competing professional defense organizations, not half-literate lunatics.

      2. I dont really have a problem with the guys at Wendy’s. I wholeheartedly support their 2nd amendment rights, and their motivation is reasonable.
        I hope they act responsibly

        1. The guys seem reasonable, but if you are going to declare a place that you do not own a “No Go” zone to anyone, and you are going to use the threat of force to back you up, you aren’t being peaceful. You are not being any more peaceful than a mobster who complements your beautiful business, and comments on what a shame it would be if something were to happen to it.

          I fully respect these people’s motivations, but I also have to call a spade a spade. (wait is that a problematic metaphor?)

          1. it’s a funny one.

          2. True.
            And blanket denial of the area to police is… problematic.
            Even with the best of intentions, they have put neighborhoods there in a bit of jeopardy

      3. I don’t really think blocking off a Wendy’s parking lot counts.

        Petty mob rule then.

        To be fair I haven’t been keeping up with all the protests; I don’t know what the situation in Georgia is like. I don’t care. I know Minneapolis and Seattle are out of control.

        1. Yeah, you could probably call the Seattle thing mob rule.

          1. pssst! Zeb come here a second

            *no one needs your fucking permission to call anything anything ever*

            ok now git!

            1. Jesus Christ, dude, you are capable of saying interesting things from time to time. Why do you spend so much of your time just being shitty?

              1. It’s an easy impulse to indulge when surrounded by literally drooling fucking retards like you.

                1. I’m starting to think Zeb is Jeff’s tweener younger brother.

          2. probably?!?!

    5. If it’s public property (and streets and sidewalks pretty universally are), then precisely how is “occupation” of it be unlawful?

      Remember that the article already notes that being armed on those streets and sidewalks is explicitly lawful.

      1. If it’s public property (and streets and sidewalks pretty universally are), then precisely how is “occupation” of it be unlawful?

        Are you this stupid naturally or does it take effort?

        1. I could ask you the same. Do you really want a standard of enforcement so loose that merely walking down the street could be interpreted as “unlawful occupation”?

          Note, by the way, that I was responding to StackOfCoins’ very sweeping assertion. He did not narrow his comment with any fact-specific details. Nor does the article above provide them. The picture shows a guy with a rifle standing in a street. Just how hard do you have to work to read things into other people’s comments just so you can take offense?

          1. Do you really want a standard of enforcement so loose that merely walking down the street could be interpreted as “unlawful occupation”?

            You literally just loosened the definition yourself. You equated the armed gunmen preventing people from walking down the street (and see other news sources, they are preventing all kinds of people from walking down the street) with the people who are walking down the street unarmed.

            StackOfCoins isn’t a lawyer or a judge or a police officer. His post will never be quoted in a court of law to convict someone occupying a street corner. The people to whom he’s referring will almost certainly never see the inside of a courtroom for the acts you guys are cobbling in to straw men. Meanwhile, the straw men you’re cobbling together intentionally or not, are defending armed gunmen who are participating in firefights and running off the police when someone gets shot.

            1. For someone complaining about strawmen, you’re sure throwing up a lot of them. There’s nothing about violence in the article above. Nor are there any reports of the people in the article above preventing anyone else from using the streets – at least, no more than is normal in any political protest.

              1. There’s nothing about violence in the article above.

                And there’s nothing about violence in my post.

                And violence isn’t the only way to break the law, even by exceedingly libertarian standards.

                Nor are there any reports of the people in the article above preventing anyone else from using the streets

                You wouldn’t know even if there were.

                no more than is normal in any political protest.

                And, even if they were the ones shooting people in the street, you wouldn’t care.

                You’re as much of a shiftless shitbag as any officer who wants to beat people up and terrorize them under the color of law.

      2. The restriction on others on the use of the public space would be what makes the occupation unlawful. I can’t decide to build a house in the local park and run off everyone that comes by in the same way these individuals can’t ban the police and others from city streets.

        1. Libertarians for homesteading on the interstate!

          1. Libertarians eaten by wolves on the Connecticut Turnpike!

      3. Preventing others from using it is legal…how?

    6. If the left turns pro gun this morning the right will be calling for gun registration and confiscation by lunch. All we have is the “I’m against what they’re for” party running against the “I’m against what they’re for” party.

      And federal funding of local buses is unconstitutional, both sides prefer to keep it around so they can wield it like a fiscal club. We have a 27 trillion dollar debt and this year at least a 4 trillion dollar deficit and we’re buying city buses and stop lights?

    7. My last month cheque was for 1500 dollars… All i did was easy on-line work from comfort at home for 3-4 hours/day that I got from this agency I discovered over the net and they paid me for it 95 usd each hour. Click For Full Details.

    8. Unfortunately Gilespie is tied to the Koch fortune with a chain around his neck…Anarchy is what this rag wants. Regrettably, a vacuum of leadership is fertile grounds for the entrance of a totalitarian Marxist state. The Koch family apparently wants this. Constitution be damn they are saying “let’s riot, burn tear down public/private institutions, redistribute private property”. It appears it’s cool and okay for Libertarians to support this. Those men in the picture carrying long guns were there to intimidate on behalf of a Marxist cause. Many have proclaimed death to Whitey. So while they are guaranteed the right to carry , once they shoot a White /Asian or even a Black man in the name of the cause they become criminals and part of the mob.

  4. What’s so weird about the current political climate in this country is that the very same people flooding the streets and airwaves with strident claims that this country is irredeemably racist are also the quickest to howl in protest when illegal aliens, the overwhelming majority of whom are of minority race, are threatened with deportation. What kind of sadistic monster would want to prevent victims of institutional racism from escaping such an incorrigible system of collective oppression?

    It’s almost as if they don’t actually believe a word that comes out of their own mouths—anymore than they actually believe the claims about rampant sexual assault on college campuses.

    1. At least you picked the right username.

      1. Your rapier wit is incisive and breathtaking.

        1. I see what you did there.

          A rapier is both incisive and breathtaking when used right…

          1. You know who had even more rapier wit? Bill Cosby.

            1. You know who had even more rapier wit? Inigo Montoya.

              1. Pretty sure Bill Cosby is rapier.

                1. How about the three musketeers? Surely Cosby has nothing on gang rapiers.

                  1. Tobias Funke, Analrapist.

                    1. Michael Kenyon

                2. Errol Flynn be the rapiest wit. “In Like Flynn” baby.

            2. BILL COSBY! I’M HOWLING i wish i thought of that

  5. Remember this the next time one of the cultists around here tries to tell you that the current GOP is a better guardian of your freedom. Also remember this when they tell you that nothing short of setting a cross alight while chanting racial slurs and signing an affidavit to the same effect is evidence of racism.

    1. The party of Jim Crow is definitely pro-freedom, yep.

      1. As is the party of the KKK, And George Wallace. And Robert Byrd. The party that least supported the CRA. Those parties are also definitely pro-freedom.

        1. Remember all the ‘freedom’ when the DNC was interning the Japanese.
          The ‘freedom’ they gave the Cherokee with the Trail of Tears was also… memorable.

      2. Do we need to go over basically all history since then? Those talking points are very worn out.

        I wonder why white supremacists clearly prefer Trump?

        1. Possibly for the same reasons murderous marxists always support Democrats?

          Playing this game is fun.

          1. Exactly this.

            Jeff wants to tar everyone on the right because they support the same leaders who are supported by White Supremacists. So Jeff, should we just cut to the chase and count you along side the Marxists? Because I know who scares me, and it isn’t the 5 guys in bum-fuck alabama with a couple AR-15s and a pickup. It is the hundreds of thousands of kids who were just out ACTUALLY BURNING DOWN CITIES last month.

            These kids are literally being cheered on by the leaders of the Democratic party. We aren’t talking the mealy-mouthed “refusal to whole heartedly condemn them” support that you always want to hang around Trump’s neck. No, we are talking AOC, press, and other leaders actively encouraging these little lenins to burn shit down. That is your side.

          2. Marxists prefer democrats, I’m sure, but not for the same reasons that racists prefer trump.

            1. Same reason your mom preferred to fuck retards?

            2. LOL! This is the most classic comeback to the both sides argument. My team might be bad, but yours is worse. So perfect!

            3. Racists, for their problems, aren’t ruining cities. Marxists are and always do.

          3. And there are a fuckload more murderous Marxists than there are white supremacists. All the white supremacists gathered together in the United States in one place couldn’t even fill a small football stadium, meanwhile there are Marxists on practically every university faculty in the country.

        2. “I wonder why white supremacists clearly prefer Trump?”

          You keep saying that with zero proof.

          For instance David Duke endorsed Ilhan Omar. Can you explain to me how “that’s different”?
          https://apnews.com/a97b8b2d48c163c5965c2574ccbbe3d3

          1. Because…reasons.

            And when white supremacists were relevant…who did they support? Overwhelmingly.

      3. No party or politician is pro-freedom.

        And parties aren’t what they were 60 years ago either. There is no party of Jim Crow anymore. Saying they are follows the same logic that allows people to insist that every white American bears guilt for slavery.

        1. Yea, the Dems are insanely anti-white right now and these weirdos are talking about their racism 100 years ago.

        2. Yet they still advocate for segregation…

        3. I tend to agree with your 60 years statement, except when they don’t drop the policies.

          Example: Davis Bacon Act.

          John Cochran stated, “I have received numerous complaints in recent months about southern contractors employing low-paid colored mechanics getting work and bringing the employees from the South.

          Representative Clayton Algood similarly complained, “That contractor has cheap colored labor that he transports, and he puts them in cabins, and it is labor of that sort that is in competition with white labor throughout the country.”

          I’ve seen this in practice in my own life. As barriers to entry increased less and less unskilled workers are hired doing menial work, which hinders them from learning on the job. I started working when I was 13 years old doing just odd jobs for a contractor that weren’t necessarily important but made operations a little smoother. They just cut those jobs out now.

          1. They are doing plenty of awful things now (as you point out), so I don’t see the need to bring up historical positions.

            1. Of course you don’t, because the historical positions make your argument look like the steaming pile of shit that it is.

    2. If the left turns pro gun this morning the right will be calling for gun registration and confiscation by lunch. If the right started screaming black lives matter the left would be pointing out that creating hate crimes is unconstitutional. All we have is the “I’m against what they’re for” party running against the “I’m against what they’re for” party.

  6. But they clearly intend viewers to see these men as a threat—and not just because they have put up barricades and hope to shut out the police, but because they’re bearing arms.

    lmao

  7. This bitch be racist.

    If this becomes widespread, and you see blacks open carry everywhere, what the GOP turn against the 2nd Amendment on a dime. Remember Reagan and the Black Panthers.

    1. Yup-yup-yo! Guns… GOOD when carried by white, pro-GOP private-militia-types!

      Guns… BAD and SCARY when carried by uppity black people!

      1. That’s pretty racist Squirrely. Exactly the sentiment I expect from an idiot bigot shiteater such as yourself.

      2. Hihn… RETARDED every day of every week of every month of every year since his hunchback retard mother shat him out of her pus-encrusted blown out pussy.

      3. And the opposite. White people peacefully protesting with guns are violent mobs and guns should be outlawed entirely to the left, black people peacefully protesting with guns are simply using their constitutionally guaranteed (and wisely so) rights to bear arms. There really is less difference between the two sides than anyone thinks, that’s what happens when both sides consider their ideology above the constitution.

    2. I want blacks carrying including the Black Panthers. But you might want to check your history, Reagan was a Democrat at the time and that law was passed with a Democrat majority in CA.

      That said, it does help prove that all “gun control” laws have been inherently about disarming specific groups rather than about safety or crime.

      1. it does help prove that all “gun control” laws have been inherently about disarming specific groups rather than about safety or crime.

        Gun control laws should just prohibit future criminals from owning guns.

        1. I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or what. Either way, BS since you can’t punish someone before they’ve done something wrong.

          1. Minority Report.

        2. We’re not far off from the kickoff date for the Department of Precrime.

          1. I think it will have more to do with only the right people doing crime.

            If there’s structural inequality, isn’t okay for some people to steal and kill? It’s leveling the playing field with the evil WASPs.

  8. And you wonder why black people don’t vote for Republicans. Did we forget patron saint Reagan’s gun control push after seeing Black Panthers carrying?

    Almost as if the party is just, gasp, racist?

    1. Yea, because Democrats have no history of racism. Genius take there, fella.

    2. You mean when Reagan was a Democrat? Along with the CA Assembly that passed that gun control law after seeing the Black Panthers carrying?

      But thanks for admitting that “gun control” laws are about disarming people out of favor with the political elite.

      1. Reagan must have completely reversed his previous opinions on race when he switched parties, much like Donald Trump being sued successfully for racial discrimination several times over when he was a democrat. All the racist democrats do seem to find their way to the GOP, though. Strange.

        1. That may be true, but there’s no evidence that’s why blacks vote Dem. Eisenhower did best with blacks but still lost big running against an ardent segregationist VP.

        2. Sure, the GOP is the only racist thing in this country– segregated drinking fountains in CHAZ? That’s progress!

          1. Never said that, so I’m not sure who you are replying to.

            1. Actually, lying stupid cunt, you did.

          2. They also have a black-only safe space in the CHAZ, with a perimeter guarded by obsequious white millennials.

            How many years and how many people fought for equality, integration, and the realization of MLK’s dream, who now have to be saddened by the amount of self-segregation that is going on, often accompanied by outright racism that pretty much goes unchallenged (e.g., “There’s too many white people here” in the multi-cultural center at UVA).

        3. All the racist democrats do seem to find their way to the GOP, though. Strange.

          It’s amazing how many idiots make this claim. In fact very few Democrats [officials or genpop] changed parties after Jim Crow ended.

        4. Reagan did what his voter base wanted him to do, mostly Democrats.

        5. How many Republicans incited riots in NY like Al Sharpton did?

          Hell, how many civil rights atrocities have the GOP been behind as opposed to the Dems?

          Don’t bitch about bringing up history when history is constantly mentioned.

      2. Reagan was a Republican when he was Governor. He switched parties in 1962 and was a Goldwater supporter. Both parties suck now and both parties sucked in somewhat different ways in the 60s.

        I’m not saying they are the same along all dimensions, but they are in suckiness.

        1. Look at zeb hoping the croc eats him last

          1. Huh? What does that have to do with Reagan’s party affiliation or the suckiness of political parties.
            Please note I am not saying that there is no difference or it should not matter who gets elected.

            1. “I’m not saying they are the same along all dimensions, but they are in suckiness.”

              If you’re trying to say they both suck, i’ll agree.
              If you’re trying to say they both suck equally, you’re making a VAST mistake

              1. I’m not sure I know how to measure suckiness in an absolute sense.

                I will say that in general I’m a lot less worried about Republicans who get elected than Democrats at the moment. Dems are certainly the more immediate threat to things I care about.

                No they aren’t equal. But Republicans are damn close to useless as an opposition party. And that’s pretty much what they are, even when they control 2 of 3 federal branches.

                1. I don’t think it’s difficult to make a choice between totalitarian collectivism and not totalitarian collectivism

      3. Check your history Ronald Reagan joined the Republican party in 1962 and was the Republican Governor of CA when he signed the Mulford Act.

        1. Mulford Act supported by NRA

    3. *sigh*. Yes it’s no surprise at least one republican shows hypocrisy about gun rights.

      And it’s no surprise that the entire left shows a complete lack of anger / outrage / furor over people toting guns at protests when it’s “their” cause. Never mind that they believe most of these kinds of guns should be banned.

      It really is tiring hearing partisan fucktards whine about the other side’s hypocrisies all the time. I’m imagining a great game we could all play: “guess what the other side will say when their person gets caught doing the same stuff they just whined about.”

      The history of the democrat party is largely racist and continues to be. Let’s not forget that gun control is a great ploy they’ve used to help ensure blacks couldn’t get guns.

      Apparently the republicans are dumb enough to go that route now.

      1. I am proud that my political party has repudiated its historical support of oppression of Black people. Are you proud of how eagerly your party stepped into the breach?

        1. “my party?” Which one would that be? Obviously not either of the ones I pooped on in my response.

          I’m not even sure it’s possible to tell these two mobs apart when they prop up as their leaders two old white men, both of who are bullies, racists (and no, one is not “more racist” than the other… stop with this childish bullshit), possible rapists, and big spenders of other peoples’ money.

          One views immigrants & blacks as captive voters that they can keep suppressed and killing each other. The other views immigrants & blacks as criminals who might do dirty work for them at a cheap rate.

        2. “ I am proud that my political party has repudiated its historical support of oppression of Black people. ”

          You misspelled, “denied and projected”, ya lying, racist, Party of Slavery sack of shit.

        3. “Repudiation of historical support” is no longer sufficient. It doesn’t matter how trivial or how long ago an offense was, you have to be crucified for it.

          Unless you’re a Democrat, in which case, carry on…we’ll just pretend it never happened.

          “I would vote for Joe Biden if he boiled babies and ate them. He wasn’t my candidate, but taking back the White House is that important,” The Nation columnist Katha Pollitt

          1. Now, be fair.
            Joe Biden and the democrats do not want to boil babies and eat them.
            They just want to tear them limb from limb and throw them in the trash or sell their body parts.

    4. Yes, treating white people protesting peacefully and lawfully on PUBLIC property different from black people erecting barricades, declaring autonomy, and threatening to kill police who try to stop them on PRIVATE property is truly proof positive of racism.

      You know what else? They arrest black people just because they happen to be committing 50% of the violent crime nationally! Can you believe that shit? It’s not like they arrest white people for driving 5 over the speed limit. It’s exactly the same thing!

  9. Kelly Loeffler was born in Illinois; I knew no true Georgia girl would be so ignorant about firearms.

  10. I want to state unequivocally that I had no problem with armed protesters, and I felt a fair amount of hypocrisy coming from the right on this issue.

    Oh, in other news, this doesn’t uhh, look good for the narrative.

    For those who can’t/won’t click on the link. It’s a black man who I think may either work or live in the CHAZ neighborhood and does in a few minutes what the entire Seattle PD and city of Seattle couldn’t/wouldn’t do in two weeks.

    I want to vote for him for mayor. Finally, a man of color in the office.

    1. that’s a racist phrase you know.

    2. That video was great.

    3. There’s a longer version of the video up. Somebody pulls a knife on the dude going 1989 on CommieTown, so he draws on the dude and keeps his cool until the knife disappears.

      Then he goes to fuckin’ shit up while Communists whine about their property.

  11. “…Sean Hannity, reported on Tuesday that there were “at least three men brandishing long guns”…”

    Sean was talking about a BBC porn video he watched.

    1. I saw that interview.
      He reported accurately, then told the armed men that he’s a supporter of 2nd amendment rights and urges them to be careful

  12. Nothing scares Karen more than Blacks carrying guns.

    1. Republicans need to shut the fuck up on this issue, they just got their 2nd amendment argument presented to the country with a ribbon on it. Quit helping the gun control nazis.

      1. Now you get to see their priorities. Hint: it ain’t your freedom to bear arms. It’s hurting the right people.

        1. Fucking racist Republicans trying to disarm peaceful communist revolutionaries barricading miles of public and private property and declaring secession from the United States while they stand idly by and watch violent militiamen stand on the steps of the capitol building legally carrying firearms.

    2. Given the high murder rate among young black males, that’s a rational response, regardless of politics or 2A views.

  13. “The police aren’t allowed here because they’re not here to protect us,” the man with the shotgun said.

    This is what makes them a mob, Scott, they think they have the right to say who goes where.

    1. Bundy ranch was legit though, right? They had every right to cheap grazing on federal land!

      1. No, because federal law enforcement didn’t abandon the area while getting tacit support from the government, with CNN standing in front of the Bundy Ranchers carefully explaining to the nation how it was totally peaceful as corporations dumped hundreds of millions in charitable donations into the John Birch society, while celebrities around the country set up bail funds to spring everyone involved out of jail.

        Plus the Bundy’s never got a montage video of guilty white celebrities promising to “do better”.

      2. That all you can do is flap arms and engage in whataboutism says much about your intellectual rigor.

        1. We are discussing the different coverage that armed black protestors receive vs. white armed protestors receive. And Azathoth decided to perfectly illustrate this double standard himself. How would you have us discuss this without violating this what-about rule?

          1. I don’t remember the Bundys receiving favorable media coverage from anyone, and the feds slaughtered their cattle, arrested them, and sent them to prison for over a decade. Still want to talk about this double standard, or are you ready to slink off into your mommy’s basement again cytotoxic?

          2. I dont think worse coverage of the Michigan protest would be possible

          3. That and the Bundy’s actually had a legitimate grievance, has a member of their group murdered, and weren’t a bunch of psychopathic Communists and racists looking to do things like kidnap reporters and drag deaf women into tents to rape them.

            Oops.

      3. “Bundy ranch was legit though, right?”

        No. They are the same.

        Do you agree, or are you going to explain how they are different?

      4. I think both protest are legit with or without guns until they do damage to private property or deny others the right to legal passage.
        BTW look up Black Guns Matter website. More blacks should carry as long as they are law abiding like when the armed protestors walked into the capital.

      5. Yeah, that time the feds killed a man’s cattle on his private property to protect federal supremacy over state land that was never properly ceded, invalidating preexisting easement and grazing rights that preceded the state’s entry into the union, then proceeded to arrest dozens of protestors and send a handful of them to jail for over a decade was exactly the same as armed vigilantes patrolling a Wendy’s restaurant with guns and threatening to kill any cops that showed up.

      1. Every move you make…

        1. D’oh… that was Sting wasn’t it. SMH

          1. canary in a coalmine.

            1. You’ve got me walking on the moon.

      2. who exactly voted for these guys and the rules they enforce?

        1. I didn’t vote for any of the people trying to enforce rules on me every day.

          Please note this is not a defense of people blocking or occupying private property.

          1. Then what is it?

            1. Equivocation and sophistry because Zeb is a lying piece of ignorant shit.

      3. Though I did like the comment, when the graffiti, “Fuck the Police”, was spray painted on Stevie Ray Vaughan’s statue in Austin, “You idiots. Andy Summers was the guitarist for The Police, not Stevie Ray.”

        1. Now that I think about it, I think John, here, came up with it. Well done if so.

    2. I think you just defined the police as a “mob”.

      I don’t entirely disagree.

    3. Such unruly children!

      The police are not an ‘armed mob’ because we PAY them to tell people where they can go. They’re an armed unit.

      They’re not ‘armed protesters’ because they’re illegally hindering access to property that does not belong to them.

      There have been many instances of armed protesters who are black having no problem whatsoever with police. The Lockdown protests. The Virginia 2A protests. And many others that get pointed out each time someone trots out the ‘double standard’ canard.

    4. Yeah, seems pretty obvious. If they are using force or the threat of force to keep private property owners or their agents off of their own property or if they are preventing other citizens from use of sidewalks, streets, etc. then they are a mob and are committing a crime, regardless of whether or not they are armed.

      If they just happen to be three dudes standing on a corner, armed because they are concerned about the lawlessness in area then they are not committing a crime. Maybe someone else is in the area, but those three aren’t in that case. Need more facts and less conjecture.

  14. “This Republican Senator Calls Three Black Men Peacefully Carrying Long Guns ‘Mob Rule”

    Golly, wait till Shackford finds out what all the Democratic senators call men of any color peacefully carrying guns.

  15. I don’t want to see anyone carrying long rifles in public but if we allow it we allow it for all. There is far too much of a double standard where guns are concerned. The includes the Republicans and the NRA (or should I say National White Peoples Rifle Association).

    1. The reality is that when people with guns protested the government closing down churches and businesses the staff at Reason and Amash bashed those protesters for displaying guns. Now, they’re taking the opposite position. The game is just to obvious here.

    2. Your bigotry is showing. The NRA has always welcomed black members, and has long counted among its officers and board members African American nominated and elected by the MEMBERSHIP.
      The NRA has brought legal battles on behalf of the rights of black individuals to own and use guns (including the right to own a gun in public housing).
      Just lovely when pre-judging scolds chime in on an organization they never belonged to.

      1. Really what did the NRA say when Philando Castillo was shot for having a permitted gun? What did the NRA say when Breanna Taylor was shot even when her boyfriend had a permitted gun? Ban bump stocks and the NRA is in an uproar, shoot a black man and nothing. The NRA supports responsible gun ownership, what about taking guns from irresponsible police. What the NRA position on disarming police?

        1. Take a breath, there warrior. The NRA said “”It’s a terrible tragedy that could have been avoided”. The problem with Castillo was that even though he has a permitted gun, he was a chronic pot head and was not federally eligible to possess a gun. The NRA was in a catch 22, and could not get all outraged. They rarely if ever get hair on fire outspoken about individual incidents, no matter the source. They work on legislation and civil rights as well as safety training and education.

          The NRA will never support the concept of using aberrational misuse of firearms as the basis for some conclusion on gun rights OR police conduct. And there has been a push to welcome minority members https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/04/30/the-nras-struggle-to-prove-black-guns-matter-215084

          1. “The problem with Castillo was that even though he has a permitted gun, he was a chronic pot head and was not federally eligible to possess a gun.”

            Oh, this is horseshit. The big problem with the NRA is that they concede WAY too much on guns. Their response should have been “there is no reason why a man like Castillo should have lost his life and been barred from owning a gun simply because he smoked week”.

            1. Castile would be fine and alive if the dummy wasn’t moving his hand towards his gun in his pocket. Probably to get something like his wallet or ID out because genius had it in the same pocket as his gun.

              My guess is Castile was buzzed enough that he didn’t think he was doing anything wrong, and he definitely didn’t respond quick enough to Officer Yanez going from Officer Friendly to “Holy shit! That’s a gun. Get your hands up!” Watch the video.

        2. “Ban bump stocks and the NRA is in an uproar, shoot a black man and nothing.”

          To be fair, they didn’t give a shit about banning bump stocks, which does not speak well for the NRA’s gun advocacy

          1. They actually PROPOSED the bump stock ban, along with increased mental health screening. But hey, they didn’t chimp out and burn down a gas station when a cop shot a black guy. Or when he shot the 45 white guys to the 1 black guy. So that proves, uh, something, I guess. Kinda.

        3. Were they the same things Democrats said when Duncan Lemb was murdered in his bed?

  16. It’s nice to see the real racists reveal themselves so openly here.
    Just look at the comments and who prioritizes race…
    Hint: projection is a big issue with them

    1. If you’re going to call out hypocrisy and claim to be “independent” then you call it out on both sides. As it is, Shackford is the hypocrite here.

      I’d love to be wrong. Did he write an article denouncing those who called people protesting in MI with guns “terrorists”?

      1. Spoiler: He Didn’t

  17. It’s describing it as “a Wendy’s” accurate? My understanding is that it’s better described as “former Wendy’s” or “location where a Wendy’s once stood”. Moreover, did we get any input from the owner of the Wendy’s or neighbors in the community about the issue? Open carry in Atlanta may be legal, that’s no guarantee that what these people are doing is in any way legal. Strangers showing up on private property or on public property like streets and alleyways in a generally private neighborhood is a different proposition than people showing up on the steps of the statehouse.

    But silly me, this is Reason, of course they wouldn’t consider local property owners at all, let alone prioritize their input first.

  18. Is because they are carrying guns or is it because they say they will determine where police are allowed to go in an open public space?

    1. Listen nigger-hater, this is EXACTLY THE SAME.

  19. Important points.
    1: That Wendys was BURNED TO THE GROUND
    2: The issue at question was a fairly clear case of justified use of force. Whether the final shot was reasonable is a matter of debate, but it is certainly not murder of an innocent.
    3: This is the middle of large scale civil unrest that involves active, destructive rioting.

    There is a strong difference between carrying weapons for convenience or protection and knowingly going into an area of open conflict with drawn weapons.

    1. But I guess it was okay when armed protesters entered Michigan’s capitol building during the lockdown demonstrations there. I certainly didn’t hear any Republican protests, only more encouragement about fighting for their rights. You can’t allow guns for some and not for others.

      1. Did the protesters in MI dictate who would and would not enter the capitol building or even lay claim to such?

        I see three armed people in this article, two throwing up symbols associated with violent militant organizations. Were 66% of the protestors in MI throwing up similar militant organization signs? Say my math is off by an order of magnitude, were 6% of the MI protestors throwing up signs?

        The MI protestors were protesting an official state policy at its point of origin and while subject to its decree, were these gunman protesting a policy at its source or simply occupying non-descript territory.

        I’ve got no problem with people defending their own neighborhoods as they see fit but, from this story, that’s a hefty inference, let alone the superficially false equivalence you make between these three… gunmen… and the hundreds of armed protestors who showed up at the statehouse.

      2. It’s almost like setting up an armed perimeter on someone else’s private property and threatening to kill cops is not the same thing as peacefully protesting on public property while legally carrying firearms or something.

        1. Well, in his defense, Shackford is a retard.

    2. it’s the areas of conflict where the guns are handiest…that place where personal protection or protection of friends and loved ones is a heightened need. the thing i tell folks to note is that they were not “brandished”, they were carried and not needed…LIKE THE MANY MILLIONS OF CONCEALED CARRY THAT GOES DOWN DAILY.

      brandish has a definition…like the word “hero” or “survivor” or “literally”, it is RARELY used correctly. here’s the websters definition…
      an act or instance of waving something menacingly or exhibiting something ostentatiously or aggressively : an act or instance of brandishing

  20. They were wearing the wrong uniform.

  21. I know some might call me a filthy libertarian but the police force that shows up a week later after the Wendy’s is burned down when no one called them seems somehow more… oppressive and/or politically motivated than the police force that shows up only when private property owners call them about a drunk and/or the place is being burned down.

  22. adding that cops were not going to be “allowed” in this space….Asked what he’d do if police rolled up and ordered him to drop his weapon, the man insisted he had the legal right under the Second Amendment of the Constitution to bear arms: “And at no point will I allow my right to be disturbed.” Good for him!

    It’s revealing Shackford applauds the implied use of violence against police.

    But they clearly intend viewers to see these men as a threat—and not just because they have put up barricades and hope to shut out the police, but because they’re bearing arms.

    Mind reading has a long and validated history. Let’s go with that and toss this “Reason” and “logic” stuff out.

  23. Kelly Loeffler has no political history other than enough time appointed to the Senate to dodge an insider trading accusation. She got her spot by bailing out the current Gov. and thinks the best way to keep it is by running creepy re-election commercials singing songs out of the Trump hymnal.

  24. Reason calls mob rule “three black men peacefully carrying guns”.

  25. “Fox does not actually accuse any of these men of breaking any laws. But they clearly intend viewers to see these men as a threat—and not just because they have put up barricades and hope to shut out the police, but because they’re bearing arms.”

    And they’re Black.

    1. And they don’t have badges.
      And they’re even less beholden to protecting the peace and serving the public than the regular police.
      And they’re even less capable of bringing justice to their jurisdiction than the system they’re supposedly replacing.

      It’s awesome that Reason has chosen the hill with the burned out Wendy’s with three armed black guys at the top as the hill to die on.

  26. “Don’t make any sudden moves, or you will get shot.”

    The warning was matter-of-fact, almost indifferent, and issued by an armed young Black man perhaps not yet out of his teens. The warning was given to me and Steve Visser, a former Atlanta Journal-Constitution reporter who accompanied me to the Wendy’s where Rayshard Brooks was killed by a cop this month.

    A widely viewed video shows several gun-toting fellows strolling down the street as an admirer films them, gushing, “Man, I wish I could hold me a pistol. That’s the @#&$!”Almost on cue, gunshots — lots of them — break out. People scatter, although some not as urgently as you might think. A 24-year-old woman is hit in the leg.

    A few armed guys are seen in this screenshot of a video widely viewed online, marching down the street by the Wendy’s on University Avenue in southwest Atlanta, seconds before bullets started flying the night of June 19, 2020. Someone else, not them, started the gunfight.

    Someone says the shooter was white. There have been rumors white supremacists have been itching to target the area. In fact, it’s like some want it to be the KKK. It fits the narrative.“It’s a Black guy,” the injured woman responds as she calmly attends to her own wound.Minutes later cops arrive and one is shoved away — forcefully — by a man in a Black Lives Matter shirt. Soon, two white cops are shouted back into their cars by a menacing crowd. The cops realize discretion is the better part of valor. They skedaddle.

    So, every bit as racist, knee-jerk reactionary, dangerous, unprofessional, and unaccountable and maybe more but the issue is that motherfucking Republican racists insist they don’t have 2A rights too!

    Reason Magazine, all the shit that’s fit to print.

    1. That waz a few days ago – over the weekend I believe.
      Don’t think it’s the same part of town either

      1. It’s the Brooks ‘Memorial’ Wendy’s in Atlanta.

        Even if it’s not aren’t multiple groups of armed men vowing to run off police still newsworthy/relevant in a discussion of mob rule.

        1. They refer to it in the article, it’s seen in the video, and one references the other as being the place.

          I don’t know dick about the Atlanta Journal Courier except that it’s auspiciously in Atlanta. That much alone leads me to believe they know more and are more accurate than Reason.

  27. Good to see that you’re still a lying sack of shit Shackleford. Loeffler is explicitly told by the Fox host that the men carrying guns are doing so to keep the police out prior to her response. Which is very much mob rule. She is not told that the reason they are carrying guns is because they don’t believe the police will protect them.

  28. It also occurs to me that these armed men happen to be (supposedly) defending a(n arguably public) memorial (erected) on private property. Demonstrating, once again, how foolishly naive the callse to “Just privatize the statues!” is.

  29. Armed protesting is an American tradition. It belongs to everyone. It is not a “mob.”

  30. In what universe would a peaceful protester need to carry guns at the ready to use? Kinda defeats the idea of “peaceful”

    1. The Black Panthers in Oakland carried rifles. When they outlawed “loaded carry,” they carried unloaded rifles. Firearms are a very important political symbol.

      1. And I’m fine with firearms and even, to a degree, actual violence as political symbols but occupying a small suburb is overtly a message against the people of that area. Analogously, occupying the statehouse is a message against the people of that area.

  31. We once were sane about the right to keep and bear arms:

    “I firmly believe it is the right of American citizens to
    own and bear arms as guaranteed by the Constitution.
    I feel that Congress should not· attempt to consider antigun
    legislation when there is a likelihood that emotion
    may be substituted for objectivity.”
    ~ Congresswoman Catherine May, 4th District, Washington 1964

    1. “I feel that Congress should not attempt to consider antigun legislation passing any new legislation whatsoever when there is a likelihood that emotion may be substituted for objectivity.”

      FTFY

      1. While I heartily agree with your improved statement, I would not change someone’s quote.

    2. “I firmly believe it is the right of American citizens to
      own and bear arms as guaranteed by the Constitution.
      I feel that Congress should not· attempt to consider antigun
      legislation when there is a likelihood that emotion
      may be substituted for objectivity.”
      ~ Congresswoman Catherine May, 4th District, Washington 1964

      “Acknowledging or ignoring that American citizens’ RTKBA has already been infringed on emotional grounds and further acknowledging that it would be wrong to continue to do so, I propose my empty bloviating be regarded as the meaningless hot air it represents.” ~ Former Congresscritter Catherine May, after the NFA was passed but before the Brady Bill was passed.

  32. Funny, I don’t remember fox being apoplectic about the armed protestors at the Michigan statehouse. If only there were some difference between the two that would explain it….

    1. Is it the number of people who have been shot?
      I’m going to say it’s the number of people who have been shot.

      I can’t recall a single second amendment rally that involved ambulances because people were shot. I also can’t recall any that involved threatening police.

      Both of those have happened in this situation.

      1. The men in this story didn’t shoot anyone. Unless you’re arguing that all blacks have a sort of collective guilt that negates their second amendment rights.

        1. Don’t make up accusations. This set of riots has a death toll well into the double digits. I will give collective guilt on a group that choose to continue to participate in riots that have killed people.

          Secondly, in this particular story, they were standing on the ground of a crime scene. The Wendy’s restaurant was burned to the ground. Multiple people have reported being threatened. One woman was shot (apparently by accident) earlier this week.

          Quit denying reality to fit it into your preconceived ideas of good and evil.

          1. Again, no argument that these guys committed any crime whatsoever

            1. When you are on a crime scene, with a group that are committing crimes (criminal threats), and at least one person has been shot already, guilty by association is actually reasonable.

      2. I don’t have anywhere near that clout as these ppl but I’m even getting flack from Google games for spreading Infowars links on their stupid games world chat lines. Click For Full Details.

  33. No one in Georgia ever cast a vote to elect Kelly Loeffler to the US Senate. She’s going to finish, at best, third in her first election in November. Buckhead Barbie’s legacy will amount to being a wrong answer on a multiple-choice GA History test question asking “who was the first woman US Senator from Georgia” ?

    Correct answer:
    Progressive lynching-enthusiast Rebecca Latimer Felton

  34. Thank you again for reasonable reporting on the hypocrisy of the Right. “Can’t have those black folks exercising their 2A rights, can we?”

    1. DefilerDan: actual racist

  35. Maybe Shackford can give us the preferred understanding of this armed “mob” and why it is treated so differently by the media?

    https://www.inquirer.com/news/south-philly-protest-marconi-plaza-christopher-columbus-20200623.html

  36. They can carry guns on public property. Once they enter the Wendy’s parking lot, they are trespassing; and if they are trespassing with guns, that’s even worse.

  37. Two things:

    1) Seizing public property is a lawless act, and bearing arms in concert thereof is presumptively unlawful.

    2) Dangling federal funds to defeat 10th Amendment assignment of authority is now and has been the rule for a long, long time. It is, at bottom, bribery. States willingly give up power to get the money. Don’t want the feds calling the tune? Then pay the piper YOURSELF.

  38. There’s nothing wrong with armed black men who are legally in possession of their firearms to be where ever they want to be. However, there are reports from the same area of armed people attacking people and using racist slurs against them. If these men are the same men who attacked the white couple, then they are not peacefully standing around with their firearms. If it was OTHER people doing the attacking and not the men pictured, perhaps one might be excused for conflating the two groups if it was not made clear that they are different people.

    From WSB radio:

    Police say a man and woman were attacked by a group of men who were gathered in front of the burned Wendy’s restaurant where Rayshard Brooks was shot, according to WSB-TV.

    Ty Spiceland, 35, and a woman who did not wish to be identified were confronted by the group – some of whom were armed with handguns – on Atlanta’s University Avenue around 1:30 p.m. on Saturday. Spiceland says that members of the group punched him in the face three times when he rolled down his window and proceeded to throw rocks at his car.

    Spiceland later told WSB reporter Matt Johnson that the group told him white people were not allowed on the road.

    “Overall I absolutely agree with their side,” he said. “All I wanted to do is just roll down the window and try and reason with the guy and say, ‘Hey, we’re not going to Wendy’s, we’re just passing through, we’ll be gone in one second.’ And he just didn’t want to hear that or anything about that, he straight-up said, ‘No white people are allowed on this road.'”

    Another person in the car says he tried to explain they were trying to get on the interstate before he says he was punched. It’s unclear if there’s any video of this incident. Police are investigating. pic.twitter.com/hb9uBRsqs7
    — Matt Johnson (@MattWSB) June 21, 2020

    The woman also said the group kept them from going through because they were white.

    “They said, ‘You can’t go this way,'” she recalled in a separate video, adding, “You’re not African American. Only African Americans are allowed on this road. You’re white, you’re a cracker, whatever word they used. You’re not allowed on this road. Turn around.”

    1. That’s what I don’t get. These articles are clearly ignoring the fact that “protesters” are actively threatening people. I mean, trust in media is low, but are they really wondering why no one trusts them anymore?

      1. I mean, trust in media is low, but are they really wondering why no one trusts them anymore?

        You wanna hear a sad thought? Do you think China’s propaganda outlets care what their trust or approval rating among the Chinese people are?

  39. You know what an advantage of badges is? When someone is terrorizing someone under the color of law, it’s easy to identify them because their wearing a badge. It’s part and parcel to the ‘well-regulated militia’ clause of the 2A. The McCoys can’t form their own militia and go occupy or seige the Hatfields land because, in their estimation, the Hatfields are getting uppity.

    1. There is a movement afoot to spraypaint an endorsement of legalized-murder anarchism onto the Libertarian platform. Did you know that? Actual libertarians here ought to participate in the survey before we get blamed for the machinations of a small fistful of useful idiots behind closed doors. The sabotage includes another “no borders” plank plus wordy inanities imitating communist and Kleptocracy verbiage.

  40. I, for one, am glad conservatives and libertarians are no longer conflated by thoughtful people.

  41. Sockpuppets commenting on Fox videos spare no effort to inject references to “drug zombies,” “addicts” and “junkies” under hand-wringing coverage of what is largely a reaction to asset-forfeiture prohibitionism and economic disaster. It’s no secret anymore that looter prohibitionism caused the Depressions of 1929-33, 1987-92 and 2008-11, and cop violence is bought and paid for by asset forfeiture extortion. Yet fanatics would the GOP lose than let up on its war on rights and the economy. Their shrillness might be a symptom of worry the election is lost.

  42. With 331 million US residents doing stuff 365 days a year, you only have to write an editorial and wait a day or two to find your Poster Child case to defend any possible position. This one took minutes…

  43. This piece’s headline is pretty hypocritical coming from a publication that (rightly) takes other media outlets to task for sloppiness/dishonesty. Whatever other quibbles one might have with Loeffler’s comment, she was not specifically referring to the three rifle-carrying individuals as being an example of “mob rule”. Watching the interview her response was to a description of the situation as a whole, including moves to defund (or even disband) PDs.

  44. This isn’t about the right to bear arms; it’s about some cretin woman whining about black people carrying weapons while trolling them as exemplary of “mob rule”.

    I suggest she use a dictionary to find-out what mob rule is. The Kochtopus is exemplary of mob rule in that it seeks to intimidate politicians with money to be given or wrenched away in order to fulfill the wants, desires and appetites of special interests no matter what will happen to the public interest.

    When those hairy bozos sought to intimidate the Governor of Michigan a few weeks ago so they could go to Denny’s, that is exemplary of mob rule.

    Then she tries to nail calls to “defund” the police onto Democrats or Liberals or whatever. Defunding doesn’t mean stripping all funding from police departments; it means removing funding from areas where police departments don’t belong. And getting Wehrmacht-like weaponry out of police department armories.

    More gasbag bloviation from Fox Pretend News, propaganda machine for the brainless.

    1. Your comments about Fox News reminded me of this article from a couple of years ago:

      When a liberal calls Fox fake news and claims it is biased or when a conservative trashes CNN, or MSNBC with similar claims always remember these are merely opinions. To determine who is or isn’t biased one must look at the facts which are as follows: A Harvard study of the media coverage by network/cable channel during of the first 100 days of Trump’s Presidency found: CNN = 93% negative coverage and 7% positive coverage and NBC = 93% negative and 7% positive. On the other hand Fox News = 52% negative coverage and 48% positive coverage. Remember that study is from HARVARD, not exactly a bastion of conservative groupthink now is it? Another study by the Pew Research Center found similar results. Now of the 3 which had more “balanced” coverage? What is more balanced 93 to 7, or 52 to 48? I can’t believe liberals still falsely claim Fox is so biased when liberal studies, performed by liberal researchers at liberal universities show without a doubt Fox is MUCH less biased than CNN or NBC.

      1. You started off talking about facts then switched up to talking about characterizing coverage of Trump. Maybe it’s a fact that a Trump is 90%+ bad. We have to establish what the facts are before we determine who is more biased relative to facts (it’s FOX News).

      2. it’s about some cretin woman whining about black people carrying weapons while trolling them as exemplary of “mob rule”

        Apparently you didn’t bother to watch the interview either. Either that or you’re just as dishonest as the author.

  45. I make a big amount online work . How ??? Just u can done also with this site and u can do it Easily 2 step one is open link next is Click on Tech so u can done Easily now u can do it also here Go to this link

  46. Getting paid every month easily more than $15k just by doing simple job online. Last month i have exactly received $16839 from this online job just by giving this 2 hrs a day online. Now everybody on this earth can get this job and start earning more cash online just by follow instructions here……..for more info visit any tab this site Thanks a lot Click Here For More Detail.

  47. Getting paid every month easily more than $15k just by doing simple job online. Last month i have exactly received $16839 from this online job just by giving this 2 hrs a day online. Now everybody on this earth can get this job and start earning more cash online just by follow instructions here……..for more info visit any tab this site Thanks a lot Click Here For More Detail.

  48. Getting paid every month easily more than $15k just by doing simple job online. Last month i have exactly received $16839 from this online job just by giving this 2 hrs a day online. Now everybody on this earth can get this job and start earning more cash online just by follow instructions here……..for more info visit any tab this site Thanks a lotClick Here For More Detail.

  49. Reason.com and the article’s author should be ashamed of this headline and article. The Senator wasn’t calling “three black men peacefully carrying long guns” mob rule. She almost certainly couldn’t even see the graphic being presented as she spoke, as she was responding to the host remotely over a video hookup.

    It’s clear from the context of the questions and answers that she was speaking about “mob rule” in terms of her opposition to defunding the police, not anything to do with people peacefully carrying long guns.

    I’d expect this kind of twisting-the-words-and-context hit piece from the NY Times or the Washington Post, but Reason.com should be above that kind of nonsense. It’s unhelpful to the truth and doesn’t accomplish anything useful.

  50. Thanks for sharing this information with us. thank you so much

    Indian Festival

  51. My Boy pal makes $seventy five/hour at the internet. She has been without a assignment for six months however remaining month her pay have become $16453 genuinely working at the internet for some hours.Click Here For More Detail.

  52. I am making a good pay from home 1900 Buckets/week, that is brilliant, beneath a year agone i used to be unemployed amid a monstrous economy. I pass on God consistently i used to be invested these bearings, and at present, I should pay it forward and impart it to everyone.a href=”https://xurl.es/qr5c6″>Click Here For More Detail.

Please to post comments