what will he say if someone gets shot?

The lawmakers in the state made that bed, now everybody that goes into Ohio have to lie in it.

He's following the law.

Donald Trump 'got rid of me and this is his fault'


http://elections.ap.org/content/trump-rally-violence-offers-kasich-fresh-chance-contrast

Or - I hope he says -

"What did Trump expect from a baby and absentee governor?"
Same Link as Above

not unlike after Reconstruction, when states and communities made Black gun ownership unlawful.

That said, I would be happy if Kasich took the call a step farther ... and permanently "suspended" open-carry.

To me - he was the greatest threat to a Democratic Party President taking office in 2017.

Have you ever seen the exit polls from his Governor's race? Or who gave him who newspaper endorsements?

http://www.cnn.com/election/2014/results/state/OH/governor/


I'm not saying I *love* the guy - but he is trying to follow the rule of law. I almost feel like they (the Trump campaign) are trying to make him clean up THEIR mess.

He was pretty clearly disgusted with the vile crap that came out of Trump's mouth, has refused to endorse, and won't be present.

Do I want gun violence there? NO! Nope! Hell to the no!

I don't want innocent people to be hurt.

But he didn't let the genie out of the bottle. Trump did. It's his problem. He needs to go explain himself to the local PD.

and wrote on this board that I feared his candidacy. As I wrote, Kasich knows how to tell white folks "Yes" without pissing off Black folks ... and he knows how to tell Black folks "Yes" without pissing off white folks. And he knows how to tell both groups "No" without being cast as the devil.

That is a rare political quality.

So what does this guy do in a situation like this?

I hope ... no, pray ... no suspends open-carry, as it will be unevenly enforced ... And that will be the match tossed into the tender-box.

But I think - based upon Trumps many calls to violence ALREADY answered . . . things need to be even. *sigh*

guns to defend their communities.

force the US to consider rational gun legislation.

After all, that is how it worked in California, even though the Black Panthers were actually not trying to get gun legislation passed, but rather carrying weapons specifically to defend their communities against racist aggression.

Since white Americans wet their pants at the mere thought of black men with guns, it is just possible that black men will be the ones to rescue us from the insanity of the NRA program of all guns everywhere at all times. If a rational approach to gun regulation ever comes about in the US, I suspect we will have black men to thank for it.

(And if that ever happens, those who favor reasonable gun control should have the decency to give credit where credit is due.)

Seem like the NRA only stands up for whites guys gun rights.

Now I understand why.

"I don't care if it's constitutional or not."

1) Until the passage of the XIV Amendment, the Constitution was never intended to apply to Black folks ... this call is a mere extension of the past;

2) "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

And, ignoring the above:

3) Public Safety is a well recognized grounds for restricting/regulating the Constitution. (See: Yelling fire in a theater/1st Amendment)

There has to be a specific threat, not just a general possibility that public safety might be compromised. When the armed black citizens and the armed white citizens actually confront each other, there may be cause to impose special restrictions.

merely a likelihood of danger to the public, if the/a restriction/limitation is not applied. (See: TSA and the IV Amendment)

First, you volunteer to have your person and your baggage searched, according to the fine print on your airline ticket. Second, it's a an administrative search, not a legal or criminal search, making it difficult to prosecute you if they find dope or drug money. That's how they sidestep the 4th Amendment.

If all we required was a reasonable likelihood of danger to the public, we would never allow anyone to carry firearms to public gatherings. There is a higher threshold than that. If the two groups start talking smack to each other, that might do it.

the third is already occurring.

yet we STILL aren't viewed as humans and citizens.

"Preposterous" was used twice. But it seems pretty obvious to me that my black compatriots are stateless persons under police rule.