“As the politics of hatred and fear continue to fuel violence in our communities, it’s urgent we help ensure safety.” – Senator Daniel Squadron (D-Manhattan) in New York State senator seeks law to ban hate crime offenders from owning guns [via nydailynews.com]

Recommended For You

70 Responses to Quote of the Day: We’re From the Government and We’re Here to Help

  1. I’ve yet to see anyone reporting this rise in “hate crimes” correct for any factors.
    Even with “Jewish cemetery vandalism” in PA and NY finally being attributed to erosion and age, nearly all of the JCC threats belonging to two individuals: one a self-hating Jew from Israel and the other a jaded loon upset his lady dumped him, a never ending supply of SJW’s faking attacks on themselves for attention and stupid juveniles who paint swastikas because they’re not supposed to and think it’s edgy.

    Protip MSM: “reported hate crimes” =/= hate crimes.

    If they want a never ending supply of “hate crimes” they just to troll 4chan or get on Xbox Live for a week. Report each time somebody says something that hurts your feelings and you can say “reported hate crimes increase 5,000,000% in three days!”

    • Hate crimes are perpetrated by white people on people of color. Critical Race Theory clearly states that black people, and other minorities by extension, cannot be racists and cannot behave as racists because they lack the essential economic power to be dominant. When people of color, minorities, commit crimes against white people they therefore cannot be hate crimes. Instead of trying to see them as hate crimes it is logically more accurate to see violence against white people as protests against historically inferior status. White people have too many guns, anyway. //sarc//

    • Fox News did. There was a report on how all of the nationally reported stories turned out to be fake or committed by a member of the targeted minority group. Except the ones where black people in Chicago attacked white people “for supporting Trump,” aka, being white. That’s right, multiple hate crimes against white people by black people just in Chicago. Dare I say an epidemic?

      They also said no one tracks false reports of hate crimes; false reports being crimes themselves. Some contributor (opinion person) said that reporting fake hate crimes, or maybe it was faking hate crimes, should be made a felony.

  2. Considering our own government over the last eight years caused much of the divide, seems convenient they now want to ban gun ownership from the people who fell for that rhetoric. Long game anyone?

  3. “New York State senator seeks law to ban hate crime offenders from owning guns”

    Oh, I can just see how that’s gonna go down.

    Any conservative point-of-view will be deemed ‘hate speech’. ‘Hate Speech’ will be whatever a Leftist proclaims it to be.

    And when that happens…

  4. Hate is a natural normal human emotion. It cannot be legislated out of existence.
    When serious haters are disarmed, they will simple create new weapons of of ordinary objects.

    Most hate these days is aggravated by the government.

  5. Any other constitutional amendments we want to burn out off the paper? Why not disallow them speech, maybe quarter troops in their homes, disallow them access to an attorney.

      • Nope, but you never know. I could be a ticking time bomb and it’s only a matter of time before I hatefully cross the street…I may even hatefully spit out my gum as I do it.

        • Did you use your White Priviledge when jaywalking? Did you not self-report? You’re guilty of a double heinous hate crime; no guns for you!

    • It is really hard to convince someone that spray painting [a swastika] on a [synagogue] wall is a felony.

      • If done at night, we can still shoot you* for it in Texas. Who cares if it was just a Class C Misdemeanor?

        The rhetorical you, not binder. I’m assuming binder doesn’t go around spray painting swastikas.

  6. Is it ‘just me’, or does anyone else understand that: –only law abiding citizens, follow the law?– and — that the term ‘criminal’ is associated with a non-law abiding person.

    That having been said, Why do legislative entities (Senator Daniel Squadron (D-Manhattan) in New York State), continuously pass, submit or otherwise write laws, aimed at criminals, who have repeatedly demonstrated disregard for existing, long standing –articles of law? Considering this topic, if the person committed a ‘hate crime’, passing an additional law for the ‘hate crime offender’ (the criminal), to not possess a firearm, or any other weapon, is going to accomplish –exactly what?

    Oh wait, I forgot, this is about guns. So it sounds like the proposal to “ban hate crime offenders from owning guns” has a discriminatory element (against guns) — Please help me with this. I did manage to get my Pre_K diploma, but darn if I can figure out, what I am missing on this?

    • We all know it’s not about criminals and nut jobs. This crap is about CONTROL of the serfs. Who? Law-abiding, legal American citizens.

    • “Why do legislative entities (Senator Daniel Squadron (D-Manhattan) in New York State), continuously pass, submit or otherwise write laws, aimed at criminals, who have repeatedly demonstrated disregard for existing, long standing –articles of law?”

      Because they’ve got to justify their existence to their core voting block, so they can continue to get reelected and be good sniveling career politicians who hope someday to be Governor…or President!

      • @ K Maiden, Orge and Alexander: Thank you for setting my mind at ease. Given the ‘elevated education level’ of most, if not all, legislatures, I was beginning to wonder if I missed a week or two of common-sense classes during Pre-K.

        For those who missed my initial query for assistance (above) … Criminals do not follow the law(s) –so why do legislature(s) keep generating gun laws that criminals ‘obviously’ will not follow?

        @ K Maiden, Orge and Alexander, once again –thank you– .

      • When you kill ’em, make sure you kiss ’em. That will show your good intentions. If you also kiss ’em after them r dead, that will show your kind attitude towards the trans-living.

  7. ” We’re From the Government and We’re Here to Help”- The Fed

    “Fvk that sh!t.”- Any American Indian

  8. ” We’re From the Government and We’re Here to Help.”- The Fed

    “Liar liar, pants on fire!”- Anybody with a dozen brain cells to rub together

  9. ” We’re From the Government and We’re Here to Help.”- The Fed

    “Ah, no. Not actually.”- Any Katrina Survivor

    • ” We’re From the Government and We’re Here to Help.”- The Fed

      “No the fuck you’re not”- African Americans

  10. What about hating people for whom hatred is the appropriate ethical reaction? People such as arrogant and condescending politicians with lustful drives to enact ever more intrusive and punitive laws which they always immunize themselves from?

  11. My God. How do these A-Holes get into office? One answer I guess, a brain stem only voter block. SHAMEFUL!

    • Easy. They go to the right schools (in this case, Yale), make the right contacts so they can get a job right out of college as an aide to a U.S. Senator (in this case, Chuck Schumer).

      Then take on an aging, tired Democrat who’d been in office for 30 years, who’d barely survived (with 55% of the vote) a primary challenge two years earlier, and who had demonstrated his lack of interest by running for another office just one year earlier.

      Do this in a heavily Democrat district (87% Dem to 13% GOP in the general election) while strongly backed by a billionaire anti-gunner (in this case, Michael Bloomberg), and your road to a lifetime of imposing your will on your neighbors at taxpayer expense is assured.

  12. Could someone dry shave that metrosexual twits scraggly ass hipster “beard”? Doesn’t make you look macho fella.

    • More of a dweeb neck beard than a hipster beard, which are longer. I share your sentiment though.

  13. NYC is ~ .0004 the area land mass of NY, and NY doesn’t make the top 1/2 of the list of states in the U.S. with regard to land area.

    We don’t give an F how many idiots, illegal aliens, welfare recipients, prison populations, you pack within your border NYC, you still will never equal one more square inch of America or its values. If we ever happen to need anything from you we will come and take it from your unarmed asses, but we sure won’t be chasing after you to get your advice on anything like “guns”.

    Quit being the piss-ant tyrants that the Framers warned us about.

  14. Why not just call for bans on people they disagree with and be done with it. Totalitarian Light is getting old and boring.

  15. A hate crime is punishment not just for what you do, but what they think you were thinking when you did it. So you’re being punished for your thoughts. Great.

    • To be fair, most crimes have an intent element. Which is usually what you were thinking. Sometimes it’s what you should have been thinking.

      We’ve always prosecuted people for what we think they were thinking.

      • Intent to commit the crime, yes. If you accidentally smack someone in the face, you lack the intent to assault them. But this is different- if you intend to smack them, of course you’re guilty of assault. But if you intend to smack them because you don’t like *insert adjective* people, then they punish you again with an enhancement to your sentence. Based only on what they think you were thinking at the time of the crime. Is it worse to hit someone because they were *insert adjective* rather than simply because you didn’t like their shoes? Maybe, but I think it’s enough to punish them simply for hitting them. There’s no need to punish thoughts where there is always, always a real live action to punish them for.

        • My point is simply that we generally do punish people for thoughts. Action + intent. Seldom just action. It is incorrect to argue we shouldn’t punish people for their thoughts. That is the basis of our system. It’s literally elemental. Their thoughts (intent) are an element of the crime.

          Arguing that we shouldn’t punish people because of their motivations is an entirely different story.

  16. Well, given that “hate speech” is now unequivocally a crime — see “Screamin Dean’s” latest — Senator Dan there just argued to disarm every D party pol in his state.

    He might want to check with the bosses on that one.

  17. “As the politics of hatred and fear continue to fuel violence in our communities, it’s urgent we help ensure safety.”

    So does that mean that leftist hellholes like Berkley are going to take action against the violent left wing “protesters” who are beating people in the streets? You’ll pardon me if I don’t hold my breath.

    • A self-reinforcing feedback loop of hatred, chaos, violence, fear, and ever more restrictive control. It’s almost like they planned it this way.

  18. Hi Tom

    Too many driving convictions can get you a show cause notice in Australia of why you should have firearms license.

    The only case I know of the man got caught 11 times in two years with the last time being drunk and no license. Not surprising that the police were annoyed by then.

  19. When A punches B because B is Jewish, A has not committed a ‘hate crime’. A has committed assault. If I’m in the jury box, the state doesn’t have to provide me with A’s motivation, just proof beyond reasonable doubt that A did indeed assault B.

    • Au contraire, when they charge a separate “hate crime” or hate crime “enhancement,” then they consider what A was thinking when A hit B. Then A gets a heavier sentence than he would if he just hit B because B was a jerk.

  20. Daniel Squadron’s father was the late Howard Squadron, a great lawyer. Daniel is nothing more than a social parasite trading off his family name.

    • Daniel Squadron is my state senator (when I finally extricate myself from this community, I won’t look back lest I turn to salt). He’s a total dirtbag. His attentions have been focused on issues that have nothing to do with his constituency, to draw publicity to himself so that he may further his careerist ambitions. He was not in office long before he began to run for the prominent position of Public Advocate in NYC. His candidacy was backed by Chuck Schumer, who is seen as a mentor to Squadron, but Squadron lost to Letitia James. At a local street fair a representative from his office was set up at a folding table, and I challenged her to name efforts he had led on behalf of our district, let alone actual achievements. Her vague reply was quite instructive. Needless to say, he has accomplished nothing and has little desire to do so. I bluntly told her my opinion of Squadron, and asked if I was mistaken. She indignantly replied that I was, and directed her attention away from me. I will make an effort to attend Squadron’s next local “community meeting” event taking questions from the public, or confront him or one of his employees this summer at the annual local street fair. I will ask about this legislation and his efforts to deny people constitutional rights based on misdemeanor convictions for which the state has determined were motivated by bias (perhaps not even enmity). There may yet be some true liberals present who will be horrified at least by the precedent of denying major rights to non-felons. My representative to Congress is Nydia Velazquez, who has demanded mandating a tax of hundreds of dollars on each firearm sale, for the explicit purpose of reducing the number of gun purchases. Similar rationale to the National Firearms Act of 1934. My senators are Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, both unprincipled and apparently amoral authoritarian crusaders against human rights and dignity. I live behind an Iron Curtain, surrounded by a decadent and degenerate culture of socialism, sin, vice, racism and fascism in the cloak of anti-racism and anti-fascism, and socially ignorant attitudes that do little but promote human misery. I dream daily of life in what remains of the USA. I grow more disgusted by the culture of the residents of Brooklyn and Manhattan by the day, and I would likely wholeheartedly support fragmentation of the union with border walls and strict immigration policy to isolate the tyranny I see here before it completes it’s cancerous spread outward and kills the freedom of those states that remain true to the traditional liberty-loving character of America. I believe in self-determination and will tolerate foreign cultures that curtail and infringe upon the rights of man such as the culture I live within, but such an opinion is rare and heretical within this orthodoxy. The leftist culture dominant here has no respect for local autonomy, and wishes to place the entire nation in a submissive stranglehold. The present fate of almost all of New York outside of the metropolitan area is a cautionary tale. Most of New York upstate of the City lives in constant outrage over state policy, but being outnumbered they are powerless to affect the laws in their state. Am I hostile to New York City? After living here most of my life, I sure am. This is a barbarous place, and it seeks to spread it’s barbarity and destroy the freedom of those states that remain the freest places on Earth and the best places to live. Humanity is desperately short of regions that respect individual rights, and the residents of my city see it as a moral imperative that they act to interfere in and restrict the lives and natural rights of people thousands of miles away. They are outraged by the continued enforcement of the Bill of Rights in other regions of America, and the repression of those who disagree with the prevailing ideology is real and violent. I’ve never met less tolerant people than New York City “liberals”. Dan Squadron is a monster I’ve seen walking through my neighborhood. Remain vigilant that such terrors don’t arise in yours.

      • Daniel Squadron held an annual “Community Convention” last week, a few days before posting this new gun control proposal to his website and social media, so he may not be seen by his constituency for another year. He has no need to be. Last November he was up for reelection, and was the only choice on the ballot (he won). Committed to vote against Squadron, and with no declared candidates running against him, I wrote-in my vote for Incitatus. When I share my concerns about the proposed legislation and let him know that his staunch opposition to the right to keep and bear arms makes me unwilling to ever support him, I am sure I will not receive a satisfactory response. I continue to regularly urge my representatives to cease denying our rights and support appropriate legislation, though I have no hope of winning hearts and minds. I have not given up the political process, and I have a moral obligation to not give up the political process. We are morally required to fully utilize every other box of liberty to it’s fullest extent to defend our freedoms before, in total desperation to preserve liberty, we consider opening up the final box of last resort.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *