Eleanor & Lorena's trip: unloaded gun locked in case, locked in glove compartment, no bullets in car

[struggle4progress]

There was discussion in a recent thread about the gun Eleanor Roosevelt and Lorena Hickok took on their July 33 roadtrip -- in particular, concerning the interesting historical question whether the gun traveled loaded on the seat between them or whether it was locked unloaded in its case locked in the glove compartment. The answer appears to be a matter of historical record:

Empty Without You: The Intimate Letters of Eleanor Roosevelt and Lorena Hickok
By Eleanor Roosevelt, Rodger Streitmatter
pp 28-29
... "ER barked back "We're not infants ... If someone tried to kidnap us, where could they possibly hide us? ..." ... Bill Moran persuaded Eleanor at least to carry a revolver ... Details about that gun, however, would remain Eleanor's and Lorena's secret. For Lorena admitted years later that, throughout the entire trip, the gun remained locked in its case, "which in turn was locked in the glove compartment," unloaded and with no bullets anywhere in the car. If Moran had known ... he would have been furious but probably not surprised ...

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&num=50&q=roosevelt+hickok++Campobello+%22Details+about+that+gun%22&aq=f&oq=&aqi=

http://books.google.com/books?id=univCCsjfdgC&pg=PA28&lpg=PA28&dq=eleanor+roosevelt+guns&source=bl&ots=b7n6lmyELJ&sig=dje9LeBkMSdXu0C1gJqrprlXEPA&hl=en&ei=vyP8SpaCKYa2lAfWo9mOBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=12&ved=0CCgQ6AEwCw#v=onepage&q=&f=false

[slackmaster]

1. DU has a forum for discussing non-fiction books

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=209

[struggle4progress]

2. See posts #34 / #39 in:

Boyfriend kills her, self: cops
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=266273#266612

I posted for the benefit of anyone who prefers not to spread little fictoids

[Tejas]

13. yawn, link to some police-blotter thread.

Once again, those that know nothing of firearms and simply hate the tool but could care less about solving violent tendencies by the users.....have nothing.

[eqfan592]

3. She still exersized her rights.

Her right to carry, loaded or unloaded. That was her choice and her right. And it still doesn't change the fact that you are yet to provide a single idea as to what you personally think should be done to stop violent people from being violent.

Oh, that's right, I forgot. You don't seem to give a good goddamn about violence, you just hate guns. If somebody were chopped to death with a knife, you wouldn't give two shits, would you? Oh, you'd give them the usual platitudes I'm sure, but you surely wouldn't think to pass legislation banning knives! After all, that's something you use every day! What foolish person would ever think to do such a thing?!?

You're the worst kind of troll, and you'll continue to be as such until you start offering up actual ideas as to how to solve the problem of violence. Hell, even if you're idea is to ban all guns, as patently stupid of an idea as that is, it's at least an idea, and it's more than you've offered up so far.

[MajorChode]

6. Pot/Kettle

DU is about discussing ideas. You may not like s4p's point of view, but that doesn't give you the right to accusing someone else of being a troll. You are not the moderator here. If you want to participate in a forum where everyone shares your own narrowminded views, there are plenty of other forums dedicated for just that purpose. I suggest you give one of those a try. I'm sure you'll be a lot happier.

[eqfan592]

10. Wow, way screw the pooch on that one MajorChode.

I have no problem with people discussing new and/or different ideas, nor expressing viewpoints that I disagree with (not to say I won't chastise these people as well, but I usually avoid calling them a troll). What I do have a problem with is somebody who ONLY posts stories about crimes without offering any incite as to how we could stop these. Hell, even sharesunited at least does this much. I disagree with him and think he's a somewhat disturbed person, but he's better than s4p.

s4p has yet, as far as I can tell, to offer up any legislation, or even any ideas at all as to what he/she thinks would put an end to this violence. All he/she has had to offer as of yet are these stories and the occasional sarcastic reply. If you have something new/different to bring to the table, then bring it to the table. But if all you have to offer is the "implication" (I have to say this because he/she has refused to even come out and say this much) that guns are in and of themselves bad, and you flood the forum with story after story of violence, with no actual point being made in the posts other than something violent happened, then you're a troll. And I don't have to be a damned moderator to spot that.

There's a lesson here, Chode. Don't come walking in mid-way through something and try and take the moral high ground. You just end up looking like an asshole.

[MajorChode]

11. Your personal attacks continue, and you failed at trying to defend your behavior

Here's what I love about those who call other people assholes or trolls online. Very rarely in person do I ever see anyone blatantly and boorishly engage in that degree of name calling. Certainly there are those who do it, and many of those people are psychotic and I suspect most of the rest are simply projecting. Yet online, strangely the behavior is quite common. Why do you think that is? Well, my theory on the matter is that those who do are almost certainly a lot more brave online that they ever would be in public. Some even call it chickenshit, although I suspect a much deeper personality disorder persists. Whatever it is, it is against the rules of DU, and I don't think it's asking to much for you to follow the rules here. It's not very hard. And no, that's not taking the moral high ground, it's expecting that people should either follow the rules they have already agreed, or go somewhere else. I don't need a "lesson" from someone who can't follow the rules. However, unlike you, I'm not going to pretend to moderate this forum, but neither am I going to tolerate anymore of your childish name calling. So you can either cease and desist, or you're going to get some alerts on your posts. You are free to choose here, and no the subject is not up for debate as far as I'm concerned. That's all I'm going to say on the matter to you.

S4p has no such burden as you suggest to participate in this forum or any other. While I'm sure you'd simply love to steer the discussion to your own terms, until you are running the show here no such requirement exists. Unlike you, he follows the rules. If you feel he isn't then alert on him and see where that gets you. Pissing and moaning ad nausem obviously isn't going to change his behavior, and neither should it. It's simply a reflection of your inability to cope with an opposing viewpoint, or more accurately what you assume is an opposing viewpoint and your inability to engage in discourse that is not on your exclusive terms.

Cheers!

[eqfan592]

15. lol.

First of all, I didn't call you an asshole, I simply said your behavior made you look like one. Bit if a difference. ;)

Secondly, I never said anybody has any requirement to do anything on this forum. But if you are going to behave like a troll, then don't piss and moan about getting called out as one. Though to s4p's credit, he/she has yet to complain about being called anything at all. You, on the other hand, seem to be totally blinded by your self-righteous indignation.

I have also not claimed that he/she has broken any rules, simply that her/his behavior has so far not added at all too the discussion at hand, and has instead lowered the level of discourse. Hence the "troll" label. He/she can decide at any time to stop behaving in this way, or if they find it acceptable to act in such a manner, has no need to ever change at all.

Also, it's kinda stupid to rant about my "personal attacks" when you're personally attacking me. That's OK though, cup cake. It's just a internet forum after all. :P

[MajorChode]

18. See post #11

I told you I wasn't going to debate the subject.

Cheers!

[eqfan592]

22. See post #15

I never called you to debate. ;)

[MajorChode]

25. Right

First you piss and moan that s4p won't debate you on your terms, no you want to claim you don't want to debate. Your last post WAS debate, or at least ad nausem in a failed attempt at debate. So if ad nausem is your game, I will gladly concede defeat. I can't even begin to compete with you on that level.

:rofl: :rofl:

[eqfan592]

26. Actually, I was calling s4p to debate on the issue of firearms.

You started up an entirely new discussion unrelated to that. And I wasn't debating you in my post, but rather pointing out all the straw-men you were tossing up left and right.

Again, nice try though, cupcake. :P

[benEzra]

4. And in your mind, that's the only time she ever used or carried that gun?

Of course, she was actually an evil right-wing freeper because she enjoyed target shooting and had a carry license, because real Dems hatez teh gunz... :sarcasm:

[MajorChode]

7. Historical accounts suggest more or less exactly that

For reference, here is Dave Kopel's famous account of ER's trip to Tennessee:
http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/2nd_Amend/own_bodyguard.htm

This is the one that gun nuts love to reference along with ER's application to carry a pistol. According to Lorena Hickok, the ONLY reason ER agreed to get a gun was at the insistence of Secret Service chief, Bill Moran, who also urged ER to practice with it(which she did and the result of which was recorded in pictures which you posted). There's no reason to doubt Lorena Hickok as she was ER's lifelong friend. She obviously was in a position to know and she had no reason to lie about it. So you can keep perpetuating myths if it makes you feel better about your metal pacifier, but informed people know better. ER would have been perfectly content to take the trip to Tennessee without a gun and she was far more worried about a kid getting a hold of her gun and hurting themselves than she ever was about using it for protection (as most rational people would be).

If you want to really be informed about the issue AND ER's actual motives, try reading Hickok's book. I'm sure it's available at your local library. Or you can continue to post things you've managed to find on google and pretend you're an expert on ER. Clearly you aren't, and you're only demonstrating your ignorance.

As I alluded to before, ER would have been perfectly content to make the trip to Tennessee unarmed after receiving death threats and a KKK bounty on her head. As it was she made the trip with the gun locked away and no bullets available. So a 70+ year old woman can do that, yet middle aged men with no rational reason to fear for their lives feel the need to carry a metal pacifier everywhere they go. You may not want to reference ER as a shining beacon for gun worship, assuming you don't want to embarrass gun nuts. Just a thought.

[rl6214]

9. You seem to be reading an awefull lot into what isn't there

"ER would have been perfectly content to take the trip to Tennessee without a gun and she was far more worried about a kid getting a hold of her gun and hurting themselves than she ever was about using it for protection "

Cite please?

"(as most rational people would be)"

This dosen't look like fact, could you be injecting your own bias here?



"This is the one that gun nuts" and "So you can keep perpetuating myths if it makes you feel better about your metal pacifier,"and "middle aged men with no rational reason to fear for their lives feel the need to carry a metal pacifier everywhere they go. You may not want to reference ER as a shining beacon for gun worship, assuming you don't want to embarrass gun nuts."

Come on, you can come up with a better insults than that, can't you?

Grow up, debate the issue.

[MajorChode]

12. No, I'm reading from credible sources on the subject

I've already listed my cite, which if you would familiarize yourself with what this entire thread is based on, you would already know. See post #44 here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=266273#266612

I'm pretty sure most reasonable and rational people would agree that the concern about children getting a hold of a loaded gun outweighs any desire to carry one. YMMV. So yes, I do tend to bias towards the reasonable and rational. YMMV.

To answer your question, yes I can come up with far better insults, but I have no desire to do so towards anyone here even though I may insult others who don't participate on DU. Dave Kopel's account that he passes off as fact is based on pure fiction. That makes him a gun nut in my book. YMMV. Furthermore, my opinion is that there are a lot of middle aged men who feel the need to carry a metal pacifier and ER is a perfect example of why I feel that way. If that opinion offends you, then I guess you'll just have to deal it somehow.

I debate by backing up assertions and opinions with relevant facts and analytical reasoning. I really don't know any other way to debate. YMMV.

[rl6214]

31. If, as you say

"I'm pretty sure most reasonable and rational people would agree that the concern about children getting a hold of a loaded gun outweighs any desire to carry one.", then why are there now 48 of athe 50 states that now have some sort of concealed carry permit available to their citizens? That dosen't sound to me like "most reasonable and rational people" that sounds to me like the majority of the populace WANT and are getting concealed carry. That also means that your " bias towards the reasonable and rational" is not the popular viewpoint that you want it to be.

[spin]

30. No, she carried the firearm on other trips...

We met in California early in July, 1934. Stopping in
Chicago to visit the World's Fair, which was in its sec-
ond year, she flew to Sacramento. When she took off
from Chicago, her destination was supposed to be a se-
cret.

But when I arrived in Sacramento to spend the night
and meet her plane early the following morning, I
found reporters and photographers waiting in the hotel
lobby. SomebodyI suspected the airline press agent-
had broken her secret.

I then proceeded to do the silliest thing I ever did in
my life. As the reporters undoubtedly put it, I tried to
"out-smart" them.

I was really desperate, though. Our first destination
was to be Colfax, a very small town north of Sacramento,
where we were to spend a week with my dearest friend,
Ella Morse Dickinson, and her husband. The Dickin-
sons couldn't put us up. Their house was too small. But
Ella and I had a friend who owned a sanitarium in the
hills, just outside the town, and she turned her house
over to Mrs. Roosevelt and me for a week. The house
was not on the sanitarium grounds, but it was close
enough so that the commotion caused by the reporters
and photographers and by the crowds that would in-
evitably be attracted by their presence would disturb
the patients. We simply could not have them there.


I appealed to the hotel management for help. And
they thought they could solve my problem. First they
called the state police. I left my keys with the clerk,
and during the night a state trooper drove my small
gray convertible away and hid it. A Secret Service man
accompanied him and removed my D. C. license plates,
substituting California plates. He also had some Nevada
and Oregon license plates, which he hid, along with
mine, under the seat. Every time we crossed a state line
on that trip, a Secret Service man would appear and
change our license plates. Mrs. Roosevelt and I used to
amuse ourselves by conjecturing about what would hap-
pen to us if we were picked up for some traffic violation,
and the police found four sets of license plates and a
gun in our car! She had brought her gun along, not for
protection, but to shoot at targets away up in the moun-
tains. emphasis added
http://www.archive.org/stream/reluctantfirstla012830mbp/reluctantfirstla012830mbp_djvu.txt

This quote comes from

RELUCTANT
FIRST LADY

AN INTIMATE STORY OF

ELEANOR ROOSEVELT'S

EARLY PUBLIC LIFE

By Lorena A. Hickok

[spin]

5. No matter how you cut it, she was one hell of a brave woman...

I don't believe there's much argument that she was familiar with revolvers and that she had a concealed carry permit.

There may be some dispute about the revolver being loaded and where it was carried in the car. I personally believe the weapon was loaded. A woman with her abilities and bravery might decide to carry an unloaded weapon locked away in the glove box only if she was unfamiliar with firearms.

Since she was familiar with revolvers, I would suspect that she had the weapon loaded. She may have told her friend that it was unloaded if her friend was fearful of firearms. The revolver belong to Eleanor. I doubt if her friend ever handled it or personally checked to see if it was indeed loaded.

Of course, it is possible that she feared the consequences of being pulled over by the police and charged with having a loaded firearm in the car. Perhaps she felt she could have talked her way out of a charge if the weapon was unloaded without any bullets in the car.

But the facts remain.

1) Eleanor Roosevelt was extremely liberal and worked to gain equal rights for blacks.

2) She was familiar with firearms and had a concealed carry permit.

3) She put herself in harms way when she defied the KKK to teach non-violent civil disobedience to minorities in an effort to gain freedom for the oppressed.

4) On her trip through KKK territory, she had a firearm in the car.

Perhaps she realized that gun control was racist. One thing is for sure, the KKK did not want blacks to be armed. White sheets make an excellent target in the dark.

[MajorChode]

8. You're assuming things you just don't know

If the definition of "familiar with revolvers" means she fired it on one occasion, then you might have something. There's no historical reason to believe that ER fired the gun at any other time. I think most people would define "familiar with revolvers" to mean more than one, or at least the regular practice with one over a period of months or years. So by any reasonable definition of the term, there's no historical evidence of what you simply assume to be true and build your argument with. Check with this guy for further reference:


And you can suspect the revolver was loaded all you want. Lorena Hickok doesn't agree with you. Since she knew ER the best and she was actually there. So it wasn't a matter of her telling Hickok, because Hickok traveled with her and would have known herself. So if I have to choose between what you suspect and what Hickok knew to be true, I'll go with Lorena Hickok. I'll also go with Hickok's explanation of ER's motives over yours, since she actually knew ER quite well.

[Tejas]

14. So, your assumptions trump other's assumptions

"I think most people would define "familiar with revolvers" to mean more than one, or at least the regular practice with one over a period of months or years. So by any reasonable definition of the term, there's no historical evidence of what you simply assume to be true and build your argument with."


Thank you for setting all of gundom straight with what YOU assume to be true :rofl:

[eqfan592]

16. lol, there is an irony in somebody combating what they see to be a straw man...

...with a straw man of their own, and not doing so in an ironic fashion :P

[MajorChode]

21. Lack of basic comprehension is pretty epidemic in this forum, I see

I hope this helps:
http://www.busyteacherscafe.com/teacher_resources/literacy_pages/comprehension_strategies.htm

[eqfan592]

24. Awww, but MajorChode!

I thought you didn't like the idea of people being overtly insulting on message forums!!

You do realize that insulting comments aren't as effective when you're wrong, right? :P

[MajorChode]

27. Let's get something straight

There's a difference between making a condescending remark and a personal attack. If you don't know the difference, then you should probably better familiarize yourself with the rules around here. I'm surprised you've managed to get by with your behavior in the few months that you've been around here, but I doubt you'll last indefinitely that way.

For further reading, you may go here and figure out which rules you are in violation:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules_detailed.html

Whether you realize it or not, I'm doing you a favor, assuming your DU membership means something to you. I'm not going to continue this discussion. If you have something substantive to offer, then offer it, otherwise I'll invite you to go piss up a rope. If I don't respond to your subsequent posts, it probably means I didn't read them, or I'm refusing to play your childish games, or I have you on ignore.

Cheers!

[MajorChode]

20. Comprehension is not your strong suit, I see

It ain't my assumption. It was spin's assumption. So let's not reverse the responsibility for proving his failed assertion, OK? See post #5 if you need to catch up. I was challenging that assumption because there was no reasonable basis for it.

I'm not assuming anything other than a reasonable definition for "familiar". You may better educate yourself here:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/familiar

For further reading...
http://www.busyteacherscafe.com/teacher_resources/literacy_pages/comprehension_strategies.htm

Cheers!

[Tejas]

29. Quit blaming others for the sentence structure you use.

Also, please keep in mind that every time you pull the holier-than-thou card.....the hole gets deeper (put away the shovel).

[friendly_iconoclast]

17. Nicely parsed, Major! Too bad you went on to fail...

If the definition of "familiar with revolvers" means she fired it on one occasion, then you might have something. There's no historical reason to believe that ER fired the gun at any other time.

Quite true-as far as it goes. I'm even willing to concede that Eleanor's pistol on her trip South may have been newly bought.

The trouble is, that's not the definition of "familiar with revolvers" we've been using. As you can see from the photos
in benEzra's post #4, ER had been shooting revolvers at least as far back as the 1920's.

I think most people would define "familiar with revolvers" to mean more than one, or at least the regular practice with one over a period of months or years. So by any reasonable definition of the term, there's no historical evidence of what you simply assume to be true and build your argument with.

Unless you've got evidence that the photos of a somewhat younger ER firing offhand and looking over her targets
are some sort of NRA fabrication, what you say is untrue.

[SteveM]

I noticed that up-to-date automobile in BG -- hot stuff in the '50s! (nt)

[spin]

19. That's fine. You have your view of what happened, I have mine...

My experience has taught me that people who are familiar with firearms do not travel around with an unloaded weapon when they feel it might be necessary for self defense. I am talking about basic familiarity. To gain that level, all that is necessary is to fire several boxes of ammo through the weapon.

There is this picture:


While it's far better to practice on a regular basis, most gun owners don't. It's an unfortunate fact that many people who own firearms for home defense never shoot them or at the best run one box of ammo through them. That's why used handguns are often a great deal.

ER was a very intelligent woman. She would have realized that point an unloaded weapon at someone is an excellent way to get shot. As I pointed out, her companion may not have been familiar with firearms or may have been afraid of them. ER may have just told her it was unloaded, knowing her companion would never touch the weapon. If it was unloaded, she may have had ammo in her purse. Who knows?

One reason I suspect that ER had a loaded revolver with her was that she was an accomplished bow hunter.

Mrs. Roosevelt was an accomplished archer, and one of the first modern women to participate in the sport of bowhunting. Her exploits as a 20th-century Diana are well documented in the writings of her male bowhunting contemporaries Fred Bear, Howard Hill and Saxton Pope. A close personal friendship with J.E. Davis, editor of Ye Sylvan Archer, which was a popular bowhunting magazine of the time, led to an invitation to author several articles for that publication. Mrs. Roosevelt's tales of her hunting excursions were well received, though they did not serve to further the cause of women's liberation: in keeping with the chauvinistic standards of the time, Roosevelt's stories were published under the masculine pseudonym "Chuck Painton" to avoid offending the magazine's overwhelmingly male readership. One of Mrs. Roosevelt's prized trophies, the taking of which was immortalized in her poignant 1937 account Outwitting the Rompala Buck (Ye Sylvan Archer, v2), for many years graced the mantle above the fireplace in her husband Franklin's presidential library. It is now held as one of the organizing artifacts of the Community Forum Collection of the Smithsonian Institution. emphasis added
http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/eleanor-roosevelt/life-after-the-white-house.html

In my opinion, I find it unlikely that a woman who hunted for sport would carry an unloaded revolver for self defense. Many people that I know own bows for hunting as well as rifles and handguns. All involve the same basis discipline, in other words all are varieties of shooting.

During my research on ER and bow hunting I ran across this fascinating quote by ER that also shows some insight into her personality.

““The Marines I have seen around the world have the cleanest bodies, the filthiest minds, the highest morale, and the lowest morals of any group of animals I have ever seen. Thank God for the United States Marine Corps!”.
http://skinnymoose.com/racktracker/category/archery/page/2/

Despite our disagreement over a firearm in the car, I think we both agree that ER was one of the most admirable women of the last century.

[MajorChode]

23. Because she was a bow hunter, that means she kept her gun loaded?

That defies all logic. I don't know too many people who use a bow and arrow for self defense, at least in the last 150 years or so. And even those who did back then, I don't think carried them around "loaded" very often.

The point is, ER DIDN'T feel she needed a gun for self defense. That's part of what makes her such an amazing and admirable woman, and on that point, yes I do agree. To assert or even suggest that she traveled around the country with a loaded pistol beside her tarnishes and distorts that image.

Lorena Hickok traveled right next to ER, and she definitively stated the gun was locked away, unloaded. Until someone comes up with historical evidence that proves otherwise or comes up with some sort of reasonable explanation as to why Hickok would lie or could possibly be mistaken, I'm just not buying anything to the contrary.

[spin]

28. ER did travel with a firearm and ammo at times...

I appealed to the hotel management for help. And
they thought they could solve my problem. First they
called the state police. I left my keys with the clerk,
and during the night a state trooper drove my small
gray convertible away and hid it. A Secret Service man
accompanied him and removed my D. C. license plates,
substituting California plates. He also had some Nevada
and Oregon license plates, which he hid, along with
mine, under the seat. Every time we crossed a state line
on that trip, a Secret Service man would appear and
change our license plates. Mrs. Roosevelt and I used to
amuse ourselves by conjecturing about what would hap-
pen to us if we were picked up for some traffic violation,
and the police found four sets of license plates and a
gun in our car! She had brought her gun along, not for
protection, but to shoot at targets away up in the moun-
tains.

From your favorite source of info:

RELUCTANT
FIRST LADY

AN INTIMATE STORY OF

ELEANOR ROOSEVELT'S

EARLY PUBLIC LIFE

By Lorena A. Hickok

http://www.archive.org/stream/reluctantfirstla012830mbp/reluctantfirstla012830mbp_djvu.txt

To you the fact that she might have had a loaded firearm in her car on a trip for self defense "tarnishes and distorts" your image of her.

To me the fact that she was progressive liberal who fought for civil right and enjoyed handgun shooting and hunting and makes her even more admirable.

You may not know it or want to admit it, but firearms were very important for blacks in the civil rights movement.

Many activists and other proponents of non-violence protected themselves with guns. Fannie Lou Hamer, the eloquently blunt Mississippi militant who outraged Lyndon B. Johnson at the 1964 Democratic Convention, confessed that she kept several loaded guns under her bed.<4> Others such as Robert F. Williams also practiced self-defense. Williams transformed his local NAACP branch into an armed self-defense unit, for which transgression he was denounced by the NAACP and hounded by the federal government (he found asylum in Cuba).<5>

***snip***

Not wanting to fall victims any longer to groups like the Klan the African-American community felt that a response of action was crucial in curbing this terrorism because of the lack of support and protection by State and Federal authorities. A group of African American men in Jonesboro, Louisiana led by Earnest "Chilly Willy" Thomas and Frederick Douglas Kirkpatrick founded the group in November of 1964 to protect civil rights workers, their communities and their families, against the violence of the Ku Klux Klan. Most of the Deacons were war veterans with combat experience from the Korean War and World War II. The Jonesboro chapter later organized a Deacons chapter in Bogalusa, Louisiana led by Charles Sims, A.Z. Young and Robert Hicks. The Jonesboro chapter initiated a regional organizing campaign and eventually formed 21 chapters in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. The militant Deacons' confrontation with the Klan in Bogalusa was instrumental in forcing the federal government to invervene on behalf of the black community and enforce the 1964 Civil Rights Act and neutralize the Klan.

***snip***

The Deacons were very instrumental in many campaigns led by the Civil Rights Movement. A good example of this is The June 1966 March Against Fear, which went from Memphis, Tennessee to Jackson, Mississippi. The March Against Fear signified a shift in character and power in the southern civil rights movement and was an event that the Deacons participated in.

Scholar Akinyele O. Umoja speaks about the group’s effort more specifically. According to Umoja it was the urging of Stokely Carmichael that the Deacons were to be used as security for the march. Many times protection from the federal or state government was either inadequate of not given, even while knowing that groups like the Klan would commit violent acts against civil rights workers. An example of this was the Freedom Ride where many non-violent activists became the targets of assault for angry White mobs. After some debate and discussion many of the civil rights leaders comprised their strict non-violent beliefs and allowed the Deacons to be used. One such person was Dr. King. Umoja states, “Finally, though expressing reservations, King conceded to Carmichael’s proposals to maintain unity in the march and the movement. The involvement and association of the Deacons with the march signified a shift in the civil rights movement, which had been popularly projected as a ‘nonviolent movement.”’<13>

***snip***

An example of this type of force needed that made substantial change in the Deep South took place in early 1965. Black students picketing the local high school were confronted by hostile police and fire trucks with hoses. A car of four Deacons emerged and in view of the police calmly loaded their shotguns. The police ordered the fire truck to withdraw. This was the first time in the twentieth century, as Lance Hill observes, “an armed black organization had successfully used weapons go defend a lawful protest against an attack by law enforcement.”<4> Another example as Hill writes is, “In Jonesboro, the Deacons made history when they compelled Louisiana governor John McKeithen to intervene in the city’s civil rights crisis and require a compromise with city leaders—the first capitulation to the civil rights movement by a Deep South governor.” <18>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deacons_for_Defense_and_Justice

Feel free to hold your views and your image of ER. I have my views and to me my image is enhanced by the fact that she wasn't a gun hating or anti-hunting liberal.

[DU GrovelBot]

32. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[SteveM]

33. So, she got a CCW and used a revolver? I knew that (nt)

[spin]

34. I doubt many people know that...

good for you.

I learned that info from reading DU. I learn a lot here.

[SteveM]

35. Yep, you can do a lot worse, even on other forums in DU.

You might be interested to know that Zora Neale Hurston, the legendary folklorist from Florida, packed her own gun -- too many jealous rivalries in the "jook joints" of Polk County. Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings not only hunted, but at times had a .44, which she carried on her boat trip along the St. Johns River (which was the basis for the book "Cross Creek"). One night while camping along the river, a bear began rummaging around the site, and Rawlings reached for the revolver. Her companion on the trip said: "Don't. You might get unlucky and hit him, then will be in trouble."

[spin]

36. I believe a lot more southern women...

carry firearms in their cars than would be expected.

I know in this rural area of Florida, I was amazed by the number of women who hunt deer and hog and are very familiar with firearms. The majority of my daughter's friends have hand guns in their car. My daughter is the only one with a concealed carry permit, but when her friends talked to her about it they showed interest and asked questions about getting one. I expect they will eventually get a carry permit.

If more women carried firearms we might see a decrease in crimes against women. Nothing deters a rapist faster then having a woman who is familiar with firearms point a handgun at his privates.

All the women I taught to shoot handguns always seemed to enjoy hitting the silhouette targets in the area that would be below the belt. I would chastise them and say, "aim for center body mass". They would just smile back in a slightly evil manner.

God made man and woman and Sam Colt made them equal.