Sorry, I don't agree with your interpretation at all. Horowitz made perfect sense with this response to the (old) NAACP lawsuit against gun manufacturers. He cited numerous examples with supporting data of what's wrong with the self-proclaimed Black leadership and the inner-city Black community. I didn't see anywhere in there where he even alluded to the fact that Blacks shouldn't be armed because they will kill each other.
The fact is they are killing each other and they ARE armed. Just look at Chicago. An article I read yesterday says that Chicago has more murders now than during the days of Al Capone. The current crowd kills at such a clip that it makes the St Valentine's Day massacre look like a minor shooting. Is it wrong to point that out?
Every thread that I see that references Blacks and the 2A here on FR says that Blacks SHOULD be armed, just like their White brethren and that disarming law-abiding Black citizens can be traced directly back to the end of the Civil War and the Democrat Party. The current climate in cities such as Chicago and Washington D.C., that are ruled by Democrats, that go to great lengths to disarm Blacks is nothing short of criminal.
Friend you think I am targeting(Oh Oh bad word) Horowitz, what you keep avoiding is my initial opening statement that I did not get past the first paragraph! I am talking about the statements of the BLACK leadership and what I interpret THEIR statements to mean. And my comment about a low tolerance to bullshit was directed at all the quotes from said leadership in the first paragraph.