Would Elena Kagan allow it?
I’d bet she would. Despite their pious posturing, these people have no more respect for the first amendment than they do the second.
3 thoughts on “Book Banning”
Comments are closed.
Would Elena Kagan allow it?
I’d bet she would. Despite their pious posturing, these people have no more respect for the first amendment than they do the second.
Comments are closed.
/shrug
Who knows? Kagan is to SCOTUS what Obama was to POTUS.
Yeah, I wrote emails to two of the anti-gun people the NYT had commenting on the ruling, the responses I got were very illuminating, I’ve responded to them to see what more I can get from them and will have something to report soon…
From James Fox, one of the amicus brief authors siding with Chicago, he’s is a professor at Northeastern University…
Me: “You said in your piece “the now-moribund Chicago handgun ban had, according to statistical evidence presented in an amicus brief submitted to the court, resulted in as many as 1,000 fewer homicides since it was enacted in 1983″…
How can you make such a clearly false claim when the City of Chicago has the highest violent crime rates in the country? Geeze, trying to pass that one off as fact totally discredits pretty much anything you have to say.”
J Fox: “Chicago does not have the highest homicide rate in the US, not even in the top 10.
It’s murder rate would have been higher without the ban. Read the amicus brief containing the calculations before you dismiss. Otherwise you have a closed mind unwilling to considerbthe evidence”
Me: “Professor,
Do you have a link to the amicus brief you speak of? I would appreciate reading it.
I was not aware that Chicago’s ambition in life was merely to be “not the highest crime rate”. I am aware that Mayor Daley’s police have regularly sold firearms to gangs in order to increase violent crime rates to justify his draconian rule.
I myself reside in a state (NH) where I can openly and legally walk the streets with a firearm on my belt without any permit/license, and am guaranteed a CCW license within 14 days of application (without having to bribe Democratic Party officials either). I can also legally own machine guns, sawed off shotguns, and silencers without state licensing. There is no state mandate here for any sort of firearms safety training. My state has violent crime rates that are the lowest in the country, property crime rates that are also the lowest, and our rates are even lower than Switzerland, while our firearms ownership rates are one of the highest in the country.
So, given how easy it is for people in my state to access firearms, yet have such low crime rates, why is it that Chicago thinks it can dictate to me how to lower crime and gun related deaths?”
J. Fox: “Yes, your state has a low homicide rate, but it is also primarilly rural, and its population primarilly Caucasian (sic). You don’t have any major cities.”
No, crime RATES shouldn’t be dependent on population density, so having major cities or not shouldn’t matter…. so I asked him thus:
Me: “Thank you very much for the link, I’ll read it over and may have more questions for you. As for your response here, are you saying that crime rates are all about race and that the point of gun control is to keep guns out of the hands of minorities?”
J Fox: “Not at all. Only that it is not valid to compare states in terms of crime rates and gun laws without adjusting for the other factors that influence crime levels (e.g., urbanness, demographic composition, etc)”
So yes, it IS about race and keeping guns away from minorities, but he’s too liberal to admit it, so he calls his racism “demographic composition”.