The Mulford Act was a 1967 California bill that prohibited public carrying of loaded firearms. Named after Republican assemblyman Don Mulford, and signed into law by governor of California Ronald Reagan, the bill was crafted with the goal of disarming members of the Black Panther Party who were conducting armed patrols of Oakland neighborhoods, in what would later be termed copwatching. They garnered national attention after Black Panthers members, bearing arms, marched upon the California State Capitol to protest the bill.
Assembly Bill 1591 was introduced by Don Mulford (R) from Oakland on April 5, 1967, and subsequently co-sponsored by John T. Knox (D) from Richmond, Walter J. Karabian (D) from Monterey Park, Frank Murphy Jr. (R) from Santa Cruz, Alan Sieroty (D) from Los Angeles, and William M. Ketchum (R) from Bakersfield. A.B 1591 was made an “urgency statute” under Article IV, §8(d) of the Constitution of California after “an organized band of men armed with loaded firearms [...] entered the Capitol” on May 2, 1967; as such, it required a 2/3 majority in each house. On June 8th, before the third reading in the Assembly (controlled by Democrats, 42:38), the urgency clause was adopted, and the bill was then read and passed.[1] It passed the Senate (controlled by Democrats, 20:19) on July 26 by 29 votes to 7, and was signed by Governor Ronald Reagan on July 28, 1967.
Both Republicans and Democrats in California supported increased gun control, as did the National Rifle Association of America. Governor Ronald Reagan, who was coincidentally present on the capitol lawn when the protesters arrived, later commented that he saw "no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons" and that guns were a "ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will." In a later press conference, Reagan added that the Mulford Act "would work no hardship on the honest citizen."
The bill was signed by Reagan and became California penal code 25850 and 171c.
“The law [Mulford Act] was part of a wave of laws that were passed in the late 1960s regulating guns, especially to target African-Americans,” says Adam Winkler, author of Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms. “Including the Gun Control Act of 1968, which adopted new laws prohibiting certain people from owning guns, providing for beefed up licensing and inspections of gun dealers and restricting the importation of cheap Saturday night specials [pocket pistols] that were popular in some urban communities.”
"By the 1980s when there was no black menace threatening them, Reagan, the NRA, and the Republican Party all switched their stance on gun control. They all became 2nd Amendment hard-liners, desiring for armed citizens to be a line of defense against a tyrannical government. Today armed militias have the full support of the NRA, many politicians, and Fox News. No need to wonder if they’d feel the same if those militias were black? We’ve already seen what happens then."
Thank you for expanding your explanation. Ihe act was right in the 60's. It remains right today. It is conservative/republican hypocrisy that is wrong.
Sure, ban the carrying of guns by blacks, but now just try and take guns away from the violent whites that support Trump. Won't happen. In fact, these days the whole dam country wants to carry guns and legislators are lining up to give them the laws to allow anyone to carry a gun.
If you read the bill it was not defined by race and applied to everyone.
guns were a "ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will. Boy has this changed as more and more people are armed either concealed or open. There was a time when never leave home without it applied to American Express now it is your defense weapon.
Skud, if you lived in CA at the time, or studied the history of that bill, you might know a little more about the bill and its history.
Shaw never said the bill was written to specifically target black people. But the bill was adopted after black people asserted their 2nd Amendment rights.
Us lefties have said for years that people of color do not have the same rights as others and that bill, a response to a legal right exercised by people. But in this case, it was specifically aimed at limiting the exercise of rights by black people.
The point here, perhaps so subtle you missed it, was that in CA, under a Republican Gov, conservatives supported curtailing rights of black people when they exercised them. Do you think conservatives opposed the actions of the "citizen patriot soldiers" in Michigan when they did far worse?
Of course not.
Because conservatives generally only support curtailment of rights when POC exercise them.
Rev, So the bill only applied to minorities. I will say I didn't know that so thanks for clearing that up as I thought it applied to everyone. Does that mean Chicago and NYC banning concealed carry is really only meant for minorities and it is fine for whites to carry.
skud, please re-read what Dave posted. He DID NOT say the bill applied ONLY to minorities. The bill applied to everyone, but minorities were especially targeted. Go back and read what I posted about the law Reagan passed.
Reagan, the NRA, and Conservatives were just FINE with gun control laws when Black people exercised those rights. It was THEN that Reagan and the California legislature passed the Mulford Act.
The question Dave asked and you did not answer was, Why weren't 2nd Amendment supporters upset at that sort of GUN CONTROL law? And now 2nd Amendment supporters don't even want people to have background checks?
I'll just be over here in the corner waiting for Skid to answer your question, Ms. Shaw. Shouldn't take more than forever for his reply and then it'll be the usual whataboutism or semantical puffery, no doubt.
Ms. Shaw, Gun control in California has always been ridiculous and when you say conservatives and California in the same sentence you are being trite as well. A law is intended to be enforced and not enforcing it is not a problem with the law but the enforcer. I do understand that blaming the state instead of Reagan would not be acceptable but that is the truth. This is the state and culture who believe in protecting the environment while driving their car to the store down the block for a quart of almond milk and litter belongs on the highway not the can. They also believe guns kill people not people kill people.
skudrunner, what you fail to understand is that this law was enacted during the governorship of RONALD REAGAN.
"Reagan signed the bill saying, he saw “no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons” and that guns were a “ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will.” Later he said, “the Mulford Act would work no hardship on the honest citizen.” Can you imagine any Republican saying that today? Among the law's provisions was that an officer could make an arrest without a warrant if they had good reason to believe the person carrying the gun was violating the statute. In actual use, not only Black Panthers but black people carrying guns were targeted and the law was used in a highly selective manner to target blacks and minorities. This is the same city during the same time period where the Hell’s Angels were taking root and establishing a national presence.
By the 1980s when there was no black menace threatening them, Reagan, the NRA, and the Republican Party all switched their stance on gun control. They all became 2nd Amendment hard-liners, desiring for armed citizens to be a line of defense against a tyrannical government."
Today armed WHITE militias have the full support of the NRA, many politicians, and FAUX NOOZ. No need to wonder if they’d feel the same if those militias were black.
The willful ignorance of many cons is alarming indeed. But hey, this is the USA now trending toward the right's dream. Authoritarianism Putinesque style.
16 comments:
But is there more to the truth than a media "sound bite"? There usually is, yes?
Anonymous
The Mulford Act was a 1967 California bill that prohibited public carrying of loaded firearms. Named after Republican assemblyman Don Mulford, and signed into law by governor of California Ronald Reagan, the bill was crafted with the goal of disarming members of the Black Panther Party who were conducting armed patrols of Oakland neighborhoods, in what would later be termed copwatching. They garnered national attention after Black Panthers members, bearing arms, marched upon the California State Capitol to protest the bill.
Assembly Bill 1591 was introduced by Don Mulford (R) from Oakland on April 5, 1967, and subsequently co-sponsored by John T. Knox (D) from Richmond, Walter J. Karabian (D) from Monterey Park, Frank Murphy Jr. (R) from Santa Cruz, Alan Sieroty (D) from Los Angeles, and William M. Ketchum (R) from Bakersfield. A.B 1591 was made an “urgency statute” under Article IV, §8(d) of the Constitution of California after “an organized band of men armed with loaded firearms [...] entered the Capitol” on May 2, 1967; as such, it required a 2/3 majority in each house. On June 8th, before the third reading in the Assembly (controlled by Democrats, 42:38), the urgency clause was adopted, and the bill was then read and passed.[1] It passed the Senate (controlled by Democrats, 20:19) on July 26 by 29 votes to 7, and was signed by Governor Ronald Reagan on July 28, 1967.
Both Republicans and Democrats in California supported increased gun control, as did the National Rifle Association of America. Governor Ronald Reagan, who was coincidentally present on the capitol lawn when the protesters arrived, later commented that he saw "no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons" and that guns were a "ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will." In a later press conference, Reagan added that the Mulford Act "would work no hardship on the honest citizen."
The bill was signed by Reagan and became California penal code 25850 and 171c.
The NRA Supported Gun Control When the Black Panthers Had the Weapons
Back in the 1960s, even the NRA supported gun control to disarm the group.
“The law [Mulford Act] was part of a wave of laws that were passed in the late 1960s regulating guns, especially to target African-Americans,” says Adam Winkler, author of Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms. “Including the Gun Control Act of 1968, which adopted new laws prohibiting certain people from owning guns, providing for beefed up licensing and inspections of gun dealers and restricting the importation of cheap Saturday night specials [pocket pistols] that were popular in some urban communities.”
The Mulford Act: When Ronald Reagan, Republicans, and Democrats Got Together To Take Black People’s Guns.
"By the 1980s when there was no black menace threatening them, Reagan, the NRA, and the Republican Party all switched their stance on gun control. They all became 2nd Amendment hard-liners, desiring for armed citizens to be a line of defense against a tyrannical government. Today armed militias have the full support of the NRA, many politicians, and Fox News. No need to wonder if they’d feel the same if those militias were black? We’ve already seen what happens then."
Thank you for expanding your explanation. Ihe act was right in the 60's. It remains right today. It is conservative/republican hypocrisy that is wrong.
I'm really glad to see these "well-regulated militia" gun-toting right-wingers protecting us. Oh, wait. I think they only care about themselves.
Sure, ban the carrying of guns by blacks, but now just try and take guns away from the violent whites that support Trump. Won't happen. In fact, these days the whole dam country wants to carry guns and legislators are lining up to give them the laws to allow anyone to carry a gun.
If you read the bill it was not defined by race and applied to everyone.
guns were a "ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will. Boy has this changed as more and more people are armed either concealed or open. There was a time when never leave home without it applied to American Express now it is your defense weapon.
Skud, if you lived in CA at the time, or studied the history of that bill, you might know a little more about the bill and its history.
Shaw never said the bill was written to specifically target black people. But the bill was adopted after black people asserted their 2nd Amendment rights.
Us lefties have said for years that people of color do not have the same rights as others and that bill, a response to a legal right exercised by people. But in this case, it was specifically aimed at limiting the exercise of rights by black people.
The point here, perhaps so subtle you missed it, was that in CA, under a Republican Gov, conservatives supported curtailing rights of black people when they exercised them. Do you think conservatives opposed the actions of the "citizen patriot soldiers" in Michigan when they did far worse?
Of course not.
Because conservatives generally only support curtailment of rights when POC exercise them.
Rev, So the bill only applied to minorities. I will say I didn't know that so thanks for clearing that up as I thought it applied to everyone. Does that mean Chicago and NYC banning concealed carry is really only meant for minorities and it is fine for whites to carry.
skud, please re-read what Dave posted. He DID NOT say the bill applied ONLY to minorities. The bill applied to everyone, but minorities were especially targeted. Go back and read what I posted about the law Reagan passed.
Reagan, the NRA, and Conservatives were just FINE with gun control laws when Black people exercised those rights. It was THEN that Reagan and the California legislature passed the Mulford Act.
The question Dave asked and you did not answer was, Why weren't 2nd Amendment supporters upset at that sort of GUN CONTROL law? And now 2nd Amendment supporters don't even want people to have background checks?
What was the difference then and now?
I'll just be over here in the corner waiting for Skid to answer your question, Ms. Shaw. Shouldn't take more than forever for his reply and then it'll be the usual whataboutism or semantical puffery, no doubt.
Ms. Shaw, Gun control in California has always been ridiculous and when you say conservatives and California in the same sentence you are being trite as well. A law is intended to be enforced and not enforcing it is not a problem with the law but the enforcer. I do understand that blaming the state instead of Reagan would not be acceptable but that is the truth. This is the state and culture who believe in protecting the environment while driving their car to the store down the block for a quart of almond milk and litter belongs on the highway not the can. They also believe guns kill people not people kill people.
skudrunner, what you fail to understand is that this law was enacted during the governorship of RONALD REAGAN.
"Reagan signed the bill saying, he saw “no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons” and that guns were a “ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will.” Later he said, “the Mulford Act would work no hardship on the honest citizen.” Can you imagine any Republican saying that today? Among the law's provisions was that an officer could make an arrest without a warrant if they had good reason to believe the person carrying the gun was violating the statute. In actual use, not only Black Panthers but black people carrying guns were targeted and the law was used in a highly selective manner to target blacks and minorities. This is the same city during the same time period where the Hell’s Angels were taking root and establishing a national presence.
By the 1980s when there was no black menace threatening them, Reagan, the NRA, and the Republican Party all switched their stance on gun control. They all became 2nd Amendment hard-liners, desiring for armed citizens to be a line of defense against a tyrannical government."
Today armed WHITE militias have the full support of the NRA, many politicians, and FAUX NOOZ. No need to wonder if they’d feel the same if those militias were black.
The willful ignorance of many cons is alarming indeed. But hey, this is the USA now trending toward the right's dream. Authoritarianism Putinesque style.
Post a Comment