Not in the least. It was harmful to the civil rights movement. Private ownership of firearms was part of the means by which blacks were kept in subjection even after slavery ended. The Ku Klux Klan made extensive use of them.
The civil rights movement was almost entirely non-violent so far as the protesters were concerned. Martin Luther King adopted Gandhi’s approach of non-violent resistance, civil disobedience, and shrewd use of the media. Firearms played no part in this.
Arms were used by civilians in two ways. First, some black people not affiliated with Martin Luther King felt that they should take up arms in the struggle. They mostly died violent deaths, either through conflicts with the police or among themselves. Malcolm X was killed by someone in his own organization. It was just as dumb an idea as the “militia” loons’ ideas today. Second, a number of white civilians abused their right to bear arms to murder civil rights workers.
Read other answers by Ernest W. Adams on Quora:
- Why was the Civil Rights Act of 1964 necessary?
- Was there any chance of a major socialist-leaning black uprising in the US during the late 50s and 60s?
- Weird Communications: What would a conversation between Donald Trump and Martin Luther King be like?
from Quora http://ift.tt/2ebHJin
No comments:
Post a Comment