If you can’t dazzle people with brilliance, then baffle them with bull… merde. Pennsylvania Democrat Senator Bob Casey has done exactly this with his re-introduction of the “Disarm Hate Act.” His bill, should it pass, would strip gun rights from those committed of a misdemeanor hate crime. In other words, refuse to bake a cake, lose your gun rights.
Tiara Parker of Philadelphia joined the microphone-chasing Pennsylvania Senator to promote his latest brainstorm. Shamefully, Casey used this woman simply because the Philly resident had visited the Pulse nightclub on the fateful night a radical Islamic terrorist attacked the venue. As if being shot in a terror attack somehow makes someone an expert in public policy. Tragically, Tiara’s cousin died at the hands of the Muslim terrorist that night.
Today she’s promoting Casey’s “Disarm Hate Act” proposal alongside the Keystone State’s senior senator. Strangely, neither blames the Muslim terrorism for the deaths and damaged lives. Instead, they blame the firearm he used and “an individual (with) hate”.
Casey claims hate crimes are way up in America, citing dubious data from the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center. The SPLC loves to spread innuendo and has become so bad that the FBI now refuses to recognize them as a legitimate resource on hate crimes. If the FBI doesn’t trust SPLC, why would a sitting Senator?
Let’s face it: Americans don’t support gun control. Support for gun gun bans is at or near all-time lows. If Americans loved gun control as much as harpy hoplophobes suggest, then Hillary would have won last November. And her Democrat party wouldn’t hold the fewest seats at the state and federal level since 1920. But radical Democrat politicians won’t let eight years’ worth of election drubbings deter them from promoting more failed gun control laws.
The bottom line: Casey’s bill will go nowhere in Congress. However, some strongly anti-gun state legislatures may take up a version of the bill. Watch out for something similar in your home state.
Time to start pushing back on this unconstitutional bullshit. There is no such thing as a “hate crime”. The 14th ammendment prohibits any such thing.
There are plenty of people here whos feelings toward the law is 100% blind support and would have no problem with this. I can hear it now “..well, when the law says you have to bake a cake and you don’t, thats your fault. You should have baked the cake, its THE LAW!”
What a load of crap….I got pulled over for not wearing a seatbelt (OMG the HORROR) in a constitutional carry state today, does anyone else see the irony? The cop didn’t, then again…I’m not sure he knew what irony is. Not ticket, just a stern finger wagging.
Crimes that are committed as intimidatation against a group can and should carry an enhanced punishment. Call them whatever you want. If someone attacked your relative as a message to you, they should not be charged with simple assault. Motivations matter. The effects of your crimes matter. Why do you think assassinations are handled differently than run of the mill murder?
Because an assassination isn’t just a murder. It’s an act of war.
In any case, it’s apples and oranges. The whole problem with “hate crimes” is that there are certain segments of the population that never get charged regardless of motive. As such, they are an example of special laws for special people and fly in the face of equality before the law.
Exactly. How often do blacks get charged with hate crimes against whites?
“How often do blacks get charged with hate crimes against whites” Are you nuts. Read your history. Better yet, try being a black man charged with murder against a white.
So let me get this straight ,Pwrserge, you have no issue with hate crime, you just want to see minorities charged with the same crimes. Trust me, given our history, I can ensure you that the majority of blacks that have been charged with crimes against whites have had enhanced sentencing.
The strongest believers are reformed sinners, and our country has sinned for a very long time. So get over it when the pendulum of politics swings a bit in the other direction.
“So let me get this straight ,Pwrserge, you have no issue with hate crime, you just want to see minorities charged with the same crimes. ”
That’s not what he said at all. That’s called a straw man. When you are done building and destroying it, I know a little pig who needs a house. That’s all your argument is good for – lining a pigpen.
You were one of those people screaming “racism” at Bush 2 for not going along with the hate crime law in Texas over that guy who got murdered by being dragged behind a pick up weren’t you? Ya, those guys got off so easy because there wasn’t hate crime extras right? Oh, wait of the 3 of them 2 got death penalties and the third got life for testifying against the other two.
The things you’re describing are already more serious than you’re suggestingbfeom a criminal standpoint. Some of what you’re indicating sounds like terrorism, terroristic threats, menacing, stalking…but if one attacks another to influence a third, depending with there are also charges for intimidation, extortion, witness tampering and others…
It’s difficult to break just one law at a time, and I’m not convinced hate crimes laws are an effective or advisable means of addressing the gaps where they do exist.
Let’s not forget sentencing either: in Ohio a ‘simple assault’ may net an offender anything from mild probation to 6 months in jail and a $1000 fine, for a first offense. Other included charges could well increase this penalty to several years depending in circumstances, and subsequent charges for the same offense begin to stack penalties pretty deep. Within the penalty phase much can often be presented that otherwise wouldn’t be considered ‘evidence and can dramatically increase actual penalties handed down.
Laws are like guns in a way, only far, far more complicated. People who know nothing about guns oughtent make gun policy, and we who are ignorant of the law in all its fullness and nuances ought to be careful in calling for new laws. Most things are illegal enough already.
As for gun rights, when you are done with probation, incarceration or parole your gun rights should be restored automatically. Serious violent crimes can have periods of supervised and unsupervised parole following release.
Amen! Rights restoration should be re-funded at the federal level as well. These Damnocrats would take away our 2nd Amendment rights for three parking tickets. If the government can take away a right then its NOT considered a right – ya hear that NRA leader Wayne LaPierre with your 6 million dollar retirement?
Tragic? As a Philly resident, I only wish this fat slob had been added to the Pulse list as well. It’s always the biggest racists on the planet falsely accusing everyone else of racism, while ignoring their own racist agenda.
This is why policy based on utilitarian “principle” must be destroyed, people can box one another in with lines in the sand. It’s why our politics is a shrill clown show. Yeah, you can keep and bear arms, but no grass, no unpaid parking tickets, not if you have kids, and you have to eat a bug first. No infringe-o.
Pray tell what hate crime was the Pulse night club terrorist murderer convicted of before his murder spree spree that would have made him a prohibited person Ms. Parker? Oh wait the answer is none, but do continue to dance on your cousin’s grave waving the bloody shirt.
Exactly the question I was going to ask…
Innuendo? Isn’t that an Italian enema?
SPLC? Simpering Propagandists Lascivious Creepers, I see Morris Dees is back to his old tricks and has taken a break from sneaking around and peeking in on his teenage female relatives taking showers after a dip in his pool. I wonder where his chinless cohort and fellow ambulance-chasing weasel, Jeff Potok, is, no doubt scurrying about on his knees in a Men’s Room at an I-85 Rest Area
Simply Pushy Levantine C*nts
SPLC is a joke. Dr. Carol Swain called them out very well 5 years ago.
“His bill, should it pass, would strip gun rights from those committed of a misdemeanor hate crime. In other words, refuse to bake a cake, lose your gun rights.”
All part of their long game.
Using the Leftist concept of ‘nudge’, slowly, ever so slowly, expand the crimes that result in a person adjudicated a ‘prohibited person’.
As for the guns, eventually they ban more and more firearms until the only ones not banned will be bolt action single-shot firearms.
Since they will allow those, SCOTUS will find that constitutional…
Cee-Lo Green will do anything for attention.
I was going to ask what the hell that thing is next to him, but then I noticed Casey is absolutely towering over the people in the background too. How tall is he?
Shorter than me and I am 6’2″. Also one of the dumbest men I have met. Has that doe eyed vacuous look of someone struggling to put a coherent thought together. He rode in on the coat tails of his father and is an excellent example of why we need term limits.
So Joe Biden?
NO RISE IN HATE CRIME RATE SINCE 2004
(First) Space Aliens really do exist!
I wonder if people loose all Constitutional rights for not baking a cake?
Can a bakery no longer have that “No shoes, No Shirt, No service” sign?
I’m pretty sure that lady’s entire head is made of plastic.
There is no such thing as a hate crime. A state that can decide what hate is will decide what love is… Oh wait a sec.
This vacuous moron is wasting his time and taxpayers money trying to initiate a Bill that doesn’t have the chance of a snowball in hell of passing. Well…maybe specific to places like Kommiefornia and New Yuk it could pass. We all know that there’s a few places that don’t care what the law and Constitution says, but in most places, not a chance!
Indeed, such a statist, ill-concieved, and unconstitutional law has no chance of passage or endorsement by the SCOTUS in the Untied States of America…which tells us nothing at all about the adoption of this tripe by those places no longer under the dominion of the court or the constitution. Thus this may well spawn look alike laws in places such as NY, CA, perhaps Massachusetts…but not in America!
As the drum continues to beat, one has to wonder where it ends. Without tin-foil hattery, without a brash young man’s firebrand worldview, as a middle aged, contemplative man, invested in the establishment and the American Dream, with a lot to lose (houses and cars and investment accounts and retirement plans and children and elderly parents to worry over) I dont want a manor upheaval, I don’t want a civil war, I don’t like civil unrest, but there are tripwires which must not be crossed, and responses that cannot remain un-implemented when such tripwires are crossed.
The 2a is both such a tripwire, and the protection of the means required for effective response to such tripwires being crossed, it is the one thing which cannot be surrendered. It’s not really negotiable in the sense that the left and the antis mean when they speak of negotiation.
The social and cultural pains and changes we experience are one thing, and some of them are more worthy than others, while some are more tolerable than others…but if they come for the guns, there is no choice left but to fight. While we may be reluctant to engage, once it is done it must be carried through until no such existential threat to liberty or the means of ensuring liberty remains.
While there are clearly people on both sides who are too hasty and glib when it comes to the specter of civil war, and we aren’t exactly on the threshold of such widespread violence and upheaval, one observing all this, the violent rhetoric, the violent acts, and the aplomb with which many seem to embrace the prospect of more of the same makes one wonder if there is a way out that doesn’t include one side annihilating the other.
Is it just me, or does Ms. Parker look like a black, female Danny Devito?
The resemblance is uncanny.
That picture — it looks like a ventriloquist and his dummy.
“Her” dummy, not his.
Hate Crime = Thought Crime
Kween Tiara’s infidel cousin was slaughtered at the hands of an ordinary, run of the mill Islanimal. Casey should be taught the meaning of the phrase “shall not be infringed”, before being indicted, prosecuted and imprisoned for the intentional subversion of the US Constitution
Sorry guys, I didn’t vote for this bozo. I tried to get the other bozo in.
Great. I’m sure our SJW governor and his pansy attorney general will find some leftist west-side legislator to introduce this in Washington. Thankfully, our legislature (so far) has proven remarkably resistant to the progressive disease. But if they use a voter initiative, we’re sunk. The Puget Sound progbots outnumber the rest of the state all by themselves.
They do the usual dance:
– introduce it in the legislature
– watch it fail
– use that failure as a motivator for the initiative campaign
– use the Puget Sound majority to push it through
Never understood why people sincerly believe that some one intent on murder would balk at illegally obtaining a gun first.
“….to promote his latest sh1tstorm.” FIFY
Anyone who refuses to bake Tiara Parker a cake is doing her a favor.
Technically the 1st. Amendment allows religious based discrimination.
“or prohibit the free exercise thereof”
Any Law that interferes with a person’s religious beliefs or practices is unconstitutional.
Whether the Courts will ever understand that is unknown.
GUANO…the correct non-shite term.
Tripe like this is why being a Democrat should be a capital offense punishable by execution. There is no other political part in the history of the US that has used any excuse to denigrate the rights of the people from day one of this nation. Everything from slavery government corruption is purview of the democrats. Been that way since the start of this nation and it’ll be here when this nation finally falls apart into warring states.
So, who decides what constitutes a hate crime?
According to the Democrat Party, I am a racist because I am not loyal to their party…and it doesn’t matter to them that I am part Apache and Cherokee.
Actually by democrat party thinking that makes you a traitor.
“Hate crime” is when you abuse somebody by force — kill them, hurt them, take their stuff — because you don’t like them.
Like for example, taking their right to protect themselves, because you don’t like their opinion on gay marriage (which, BTW, they kept to themselves until somebody asked.)
So, Our Dear Overlords want to ban their own favorite hobby?
As opposed to when you abuse somebody by force — kill them, hurt them, take their stuff — because you just want their stuff.
Meanwhile, someone is still just as killed or hurt. Hate is a motivation just the same as greed. Hate Crime = Thought Crime.
Idiotic bill but how about leaving culture wars out of the gun control debate? There’s absolutely no reason to insert any “cake baking” references into this article. Or Muslims. Or SPLC. Or hate crime laws. Or I could be naive and missing the author’s brilliant insights into a anti-gun, muslim homesexual SPLC-funded statist conspiracy to deprive us of rights.
This site has taken a much harder right turn with addition of Infowars fanboys like John Boch. Remember the truth about Guns, Robert?
In what state would refusing to bake a cake be a hate crime? In every jurisdiction I know of, it would be a civil cause of action, at most.
You are correct sir! At the very most, a person would be entitled to damages as part of a civil suit. Nobody goes to jail, nobody pays a fine to the authorities.
I am capable of holding two seemingly opposing thoughts in my head at the same time: You shouldn’t lose your gun rights for refusing to bake a cake for a gay wedding, and if you want to do business with the public, you should be prepared to bake a cake for a gay wedding. We’re all just folk.