3. Strain, Christopher Barry. “Civil Rights and ... - Freedom Archives

It is important to emphasize that why people own firearms is, at best, an imperfat
indicator of how they actually use them .s Though the Panthers claimed they were
defending themselves against racist police officers, at times their actions belied the
requisite innocence naessary to the claim of self-defense. They acted not only from need
but also from bravado, braggadocio, and anger.
The best defense, as the old football aphorism goes, is a good offense. It is far
better, according to this line of reasoning, to keep someone from attacking in the first
place than to stop him once he has started; therefore, strike first and strike hard. As
attractive as this option may be, the obvious flaw in its logic is that such "defense" is no
longer defense: it is an offensive precaution. From a legal standpoint, such action is
hardly justifiable; therefore, the pre-emptive actions of the Panthers, and of Ahmed
Evens, arc highly questionable from a defensive standpoint . At best, Evens may be
accused of defensive solicitation--at worst, cold-blooded ambush .
Second, claiming one carries a gun for self-protection does not preclude criminal
intent, malevolence, or the intention of violence . A burglar might honestly claim to carry
a gun for protection, even though he is committing a crime and "defending himself'
against a frightened homeowner wielding a firearm . Accordingly, self-defense in many
cases was an excuse rather than ajustification. In the latter stages of the movement,
concurrent with the burgeoning of Black Power, black militants often sanctified
SAs one British journalist has noted, "A marital quarrel can have a very speedy end
indeed if both parties know that there is a loaded revolver `to protect against burglars' in
the top drawer of the bureau ." Max Hastings, The Fire This Time : America's Year of
Crisis (New York : Taplinger Publishing Co., 1969), 125 .
Z00