US Constitution / Gun Law Talk (Merged Threads)

[indeedproceed]

Anyone seen this bit of "news" as reported by Anne Coulter on Sean Hannity's Fox program:

Ann Coulter is insisting that guns don’t kill people, non-white people kill people.

The conservative columnist on Monday told Fox News host Sean Hannity that the country had a “demographic problem” because “white populations” in the U.S. and Belgium had the same low murder rate.

“As you know, I just got back from England,” Coulter explained. “On the gun crimes, we keep hearing how low they are in Europe and, ‘Oh, they’re so low and they have no guns.’ If you compare white populations, we have the same murder rate as Belgium.”

“So, perhaps, it’s not a gun problem, it is a demographic problem, which liberals are the one are pushing, pushing, pushing, ‘Let’s add more [African-American mass murderer] Colin Fergusons and more whoever the [Muslim] guy was who shot up Fort Hood.’ Why are they coming in to begin with?”

“It’s when you have a home invasion that you need a large-capacity magazine, especially if you are a female who isn’t constantly at the gun range,” she opined.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/15/coulter-not-a-gun-problem-u-s-has-demographic-problem-with-non-whites/

She can really be way way out there at times but Fox allowing her overt racial remark there is astonishing even for them.

Yeah, usually their race-baiting is much more subtle. Anne Coulter must be getting insecure.

[fairweatherfan]

Anyone seen this bit of "news" as reported by Anne Coulter on Sean Hannity's Fox program:

Ann Coulter is insisting that guns don’t kill people, non-white people kill people.

The conservative columnist on Monday told Fox News host Sean Hannity that the country had a “demographic problem” because “white populations” in the U.S. and Belgium had the same low murder rate.

“As you know, I just got back from England,” Coulter explained. “On the gun crimes, we keep hearing how low they are in Europe and, ‘Oh, they’re so low and they have no guns.’ If you compare white populations, we have the same murder rate as Belgium.”

“So, perhaps, it’s not a gun problem, it is a demographic problem, which liberals are the one are pushing, pushing, pushing, ‘Let’s add more [African-American mass murderer] Colin Fergusons and more whoever the [Muslim] guy was who shot up Fort Hood.’ Why are they coming in to begin with?”

“It’s when you have a home invasion that you need a large-capacity magazine, especially if you are a female who isn’t constantly at the gun range,” she opined.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/15/coulter-not-a-gun-problem-u-s-has-demographic-problem-with-non-whites/

She can really be way way out there at times but Fox allowing her overt racial remark there is astonishing even for them.

Yeah, usually their race-baiting is much more subtle. Anne Coulter must be getting insecure.

A lot of pundits are basically just professional trolls, and Coulter's one of the more obvious ones.  I think very little of it is sincere.  Whether that makes it more or less despicable is a judgment call.

[fairweatherfan]

On a somewhat different note, there are Sandy Hook truthers now.  I'm not going to link to anything because screw those guys, but they generally seem to believe either that the attack was completely staged by actors, or that the kids were killed but by a US or Israeli commando squad.

I probably shouldn't, but in some ways I find this more offensive than the original killings themselves.

[Roy H.]

I can't stand Anne Coulter.  There's a serious conversation to be had about demographics as related to crime statistics.  Rather than attempt to have that conversation, Coulter just resorts to blatant racism.

For instance, if the murder rate between non-gang members in Belgium is the same as non-gang members in the U.S., that tells us something.  If most gun violence is coming out of poor urban areas, that tells us something.  Suggesting that "non-white" is the only important factor is just shorthand, lazy, racism.

In Coulter's case, she's probably trying to sell books.  The sad thing is, this will probably up her sales.

[Roy H.]

On a somewhat different note, there are Sandy Hook truthers now.  I'm not going to link to anything because screw those guys, but they generally seem to believe either that the attack was completely staged by actors, or that the kids were killed but by a US or Israeli commando squad.

I probably shouldn't, but in some ways I find this more offensive than the original killings themselves.

Yeah, I read a story about how one of the witnesses who helped out students in the aftermath is being hounded by the truthers, harassing him about why he's involved in the cover-up.

Sickening.

[indeedproceed]

On a somewhat different note, there are Sandy Hook truthers now.  I'm not going to link to anything because screw those guys, but they generally seem to believe either that the attack was completely staged by actors, or that the kids were killed but by a US or Israeli commando squad.

I probably shouldn't, but in some ways I find this more offensive than the original killings themselves.

My sister in law put one for those videos up on facebook with a, "Does anyone know if any of this is true? If so, WOW!"

I defriended her.

[Roy H.]

On a somewhat different note, there are Sandy Hook truthers now.  I'm not going to link to anything because screw those guys, but they generally seem to believe either that the attack was completely staged by actors, or that the kids were killed but by a US or Israeli commando squad.

I probably shouldn't, but in some ways I find this more offensive than the original killings themselves.

My sister in law put one for those videos up on facebook with a, "Does anyone know if any of this is true? If so, WOW!"

I defriended her.

People are just ridiculously stupid.

It's why I get on Ron Paul's case for going on Alex Jones' show.  When you legitimize craziness, you're part of the problem.

[LB3533]

On a somewhat different note, there are Sandy Hook truthers now.  I'm not going to link to anything because screw those guys, but they generally seem to believe either that the attack was completely staged by actors, or that the kids were killed but by a US or Israeli commando squad.

I probably shouldn't, but in some ways I find this more offensive than the original killings themselves.

My sister in law put one for those videos up on facebook with a, "Does anyone know if any of this is true? If so, WOW!"

I defriended her.

People are just ridiculously stupid.

It's why I get on Ron Paul's case for going on Alex Jones' show.  When you legitimize craziness, you're part of the problem.

There are different kinds of crazy...the loud and out in the open kind of crazy is infinitely less harmful than the quiet, concealed crazy.

[Rondo2287]

Good read

[fairweatherfan]

Good read

I don't disagree with the gist of what he's saying, but I disagree strongly with the implication that he (and not the court system) gets to decide what is and is not an infringement of Constitutional rights.  If the courts find a new law or regulation unconstitutional, then this guy doesn't have to do anything to stop them.  If they find them constitutional, then saying "Nope, I still think they're unconstitutional, not enforcing them" is a pretty major breach of his duties as law enforcement.

Too many people seem to want to appoint themselves as arbiters of Constitutionality these days.

[Donoghus]

Good read

Idiot.

So someone whose job is to "uphold the law" is now gonna to pick & choose what laws to uphold depending on whether or not he agrees with the law?

Yeah, a real gem of a public official. 

[Rondo2287]

Good read

Idiot.

So someone whose job is to "uphold the law" is now gonna to pick & choose what laws to uphold depending on whether or not he agrees with the law?

Yeah, a real gem of a public official. 

Honest question, if a law is passed that contradicts the rights granted to us in the constituion is it legal?

[Donoghus]

Good read

Idiot.

So someone whose job is to "uphold the law" is now gonna to pick & choose what laws to uphold depending on whether or not he agrees with the law?

Yeah, a real gem of a public official. 

Honest question, if a law is passed that contradicts the rights granted to us in the constituion is it legal?

What's the contradiction?  What has been ruled unconstitional here besides what this sheriff is claiming to be unconstituional in his own eyes?

[Rondo2287]

Good read

Idiot.

So someone whose job is to "uphold the law" is now gonna to pick & choose what laws to uphold depending on whether or not he agrees with the law?

Yeah, a real gem of a public official. 

Honest question, if a law is passed that contradicts the rights granted to us in the constituion is it legal?

What's the contradiction?  What has been ruled unconstitional here besides what this sheriff is claiming to be unconstituional in his own eyes?

Nothing yet, they havent passed any laws yet, I was just curious

[indeedproceed]

Good read

Idiot.

So someone whose job is to "uphold the law" is now gonna to pick & choose what laws to uphold depending on whether or not he agrees with the law?

Yeah, a real gem of a public official. 

Honest question, if a law is passed that contradicts the rights granted to us in the constituion is it legal?

What's the contradiction?  What has been ruled unconstitional here besides what this sheriff is claiming to be unconstituional in his own eyes?

Nothing yet, they havent passed any laws yet, I was just curious

If a law is upheld by the Supreme Court, it is constitutionally valid, right? So, if a law is passed that some people think is unconstitutional, and they challenge it in the Supreme Court, and the SC upholds the law, isn't it be default constitutional?