PDA

View Full Version : Warning: Anti lynching law proposal



Tahuyaman
02-21-2019, 12:57 PM
Kamala Harris and Cory Booker have introduced a bill to make lynching a crime. Isn't a lynching considered a murder and isn't that already a crime? Are they proposing make it doubly illegal? Strenuously illegal? A double hate crime? Or is there a symbolic reason?

Mister D
02-21-2019, 01:00 PM
"Hate crimes"legislation is entirely symbolic but this adds an extra layer of silliness to it all.

Cletus
02-21-2019, 01:01 PM
It is a useless,feel good, get some publicity measure. As you pointed out, lynching is already a crime. What they want to do is make it a FEDERAL crime instead of a state level crime.

It is just a move to get some free press.

texan
02-21-2019, 01:06 PM
A. Since when is lynching an issue these days? Oh yes NEVER! Cheap ass political ploy from a rich boy and his significant other 2PAC listener LOL!

B. I decided to google some background on Booker. Here it is read them and weep. This guy doesn't relate in any manner to lynchings.

"Booker was born in Washington, D.C. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington,_D.C.), and raised in Harrington Park (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrington_Park,_New_Jersey), New Jersey. He attended Stanford University (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_University), where he received an undergraduate and master's degree in 1991 and 1992, respectively. He studied abroad at the University of Oxford (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Oxford) on a Rhodes Scholarship (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodes_Scholarship) before attending Yale Law School (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yale_Law_School)."

"His parents, Carolyn Rose (née Jordan) and Cary Alfred Booker, were among the first black executives (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senior_management) at IBM (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM)."

Spare me the Bull$hit Booker.

Tahuyaman
02-21-2019, 01:24 PM
Maybe they will demand that people convicted of murder by lynching should be executed twice?

Lummy
02-21-2019, 01:35 PM
It is a useless,feel good, get some publicity measure. As you pointed out, lynching is already a crime. What they want to do is make it a FEDERAL crime instead of a state level crime.
These are very special people, and this thread is just plain racist. Don't think good, moral people can't see through the thin veil. You are all reported, and I hope you spend a month in the hole.

There, I said it.

donttread
02-21-2019, 02:13 PM
Kamala Harris and Cory Booker have introduced a bill to make lynching a crime. Isn't a lynching considered a murder and isn't that already a crime? Are they proposing make it doubly illegal? Strenuously illegal? A double hate crime? Or is there a symbolic reason?

We need to start calling them managers instead of law makers. They feel compelled to make laws, most of which we don't need. As you have alluded to lynching involves , unlawful detention, assault, murder, conspiracy at least. I think we have enough laws to send lynchers to prison!

Tahuyaman
02-21-2019, 02:28 PM
We need to start calling them managers instead of law makers. They feel compelled to make laws, most of which we don't need. As you have alluded to lynching involves , unlawful detention, assault, murder, conspiracy at least. I think we have enough laws to send lynchers to prison!
We need to start electing “law limiters”.

donttread
02-21-2019, 02:35 PM
We need to start electing “law limiters”.

Post of the day!

Tahuyaman
02-21-2019, 02:41 PM
I would support the creation of a new arm of the congress called “ Law Repealers”.

donttread
02-21-2019, 03:39 PM
I would support the creation of a new arm of the congress called “ Law Repealers”.

Only laws we intend to enforce across the board need apply!

Tahuyaman
02-21-2019, 03:58 PM
Only laws we intend to enforce across the board need apply!
What about laws which aren’t important enough to enforce? I’d be willing to bet that nearly half the laws passed by congress over the last two decades are unneeded.

MisterVeritis
02-21-2019, 04:06 PM
What about laws which aren’t important enough to enforce? I’d be willing to bet that nearly half the laws passed by congress over the last two decades are unneeded.
At some point in the past, I recommended that every law have a sunset provision.

A law passed by a bare majority might last for one year.
A law passed by 55-45 might last for two years.A law passed by 60-40 might last for three years.A law passed by greater than 60-40 might last for five years.

No law can last for more than 5 years.

No regulation can remain in effect longer than two years.

Tahuyaman
02-21-2019, 04:46 PM
At some point in the past, I recommended that every law have a sunset provision.

A law passed by a bare majority might last for one year.
A law passed by 55-45 might last for two years.A law passed by 60-40 might last for three years.A law passed by greater than 60-40 might last for five years.

No law can last for more than 5 years.

No regulation can remain in effect longer than two years.





I could support that.

Agent Zero
02-21-2019, 04:46 PM
A. Since when is lynching an issue these days? Oh yes NEVER! Cheap ass political ploy from a rich boy and his significant other 2PAC listener LOL!

B. I decided to google some background on Booker. Here it is read them and weep. This guy doesn't relate in any manner to lynchings.

"Booker was born in Washington, D.C. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington,_D.C.), and raised in Harrington Park (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrington_Park,_New_Jersey), New Jersey. He attended Stanford University (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_University), where he received an undergraduate and master's degree in 1991 and 1992, respectively. He studied abroad at the University of Oxford (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Oxford) on a Rhodes Scholarship (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodes_Scholarship) before attending Yale Law School (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yale_Law_School)."

"His parents, Carolyn Rose (née Jordan) and Cary Alfred Booker, were among the first black executives (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senior_management) at IBM (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM)."

Spare me the Bull$hit Booker.




Is he black?

Tahuyaman
02-21-2019, 05:28 PM
Is he black?


One of the first black executive at IBM? I'm guessing he would be black.


If you're asking about Cory Booker, yes, he's black. For whatever that's worth.

I'll wait for you to tell me what that has to do with the symbolism of anti lynching laws.

Captdon
02-21-2019, 06:47 PM
Is he black?

He hasn't said.

texan
02-21-2019, 09:32 PM
One of the first black executive at IBM? I'm guessing he would be black.


If you're asking about Cory Booker, yes, he's black. For whatever that's worth.

I'll wait for you to tell me what that has to do with the symbolism of anti lynching laws.
No the two black people had a white baby.

texan
02-21-2019, 09:35 PM
He hasn't said.
No that’s the post of the day. I also heard in other news Barbie pull Kens pants down and it was at that moment she realized Ken was a liberal.

Tahuyaman
02-21-2019, 11:42 PM
No the two black people had a white baby.
There must have been a Scandinavian in the woodpile.

gamewell45
02-22-2019, 12:04 AM
What I'm trying to figure out is why everyone is getting so worked up over this? Who cares, unless you are contemplating committing a lynching. How would passage of this law hurt you?

I'd think there are more important things to agonize over such as getting the border wall built, the economy, high taxes, the state of the union, foreign policy, NK etc. Maybe it's a slow news day here......

Dr. Who
02-22-2019, 12:42 AM
Kamala Harris and Cory Booker have introduced a bill to make lynching a crime. Isn't a lynching considered a murder and isn't that already a crime? Are they proposing make it doubly illegal? Strenuously illegal? A double hate crime? Or is there a symbolic reason?
Agree, lynching is already a crime. If it is part of a racial crime, it would certainly affect the way that the Court would view that act.

donttread
02-22-2019, 10:53 AM
What I'm trying to figure out is why everyone is getting so worked up over this? Who cares, unless you are contemplating committing a lynching. How would passage of this law hurt you?



I'd think there are more important things to agonize over such as getting the border wall built, the economy, high taxes, the state of the union, foreign policy, NK etc. Maybe it's a slow news day here......


The point is that this is not an isolated incident. In most cases, including both lynching and gun control , enforcement of existing law would make new law unnecessary..

gamewell45
02-22-2019, 11:11 AM
The point is that this is not an isolated incident. In most cases, including both lynching and gun control , enforcement of existing law would make new law unnecessary..

I suspect you are right but let me ask you this question: by passing the new law (aside from possibly being unnecessary) how can it hurt society to have it in place?

Cletus
02-22-2019, 11:38 AM
What I'm trying to figure out is why everyone is getting so worked up over this? Who cares, unless you are contemplating committing a lynching. How would passage of this law hurt you?

If we operate on the guiding principle that no law should be passed unless there is a compelling reason to do so, this law makes no sense. Can you think of a compelling reason to enact this law?

gamewell45
02-22-2019, 11:52 AM
If we operate on the guiding principle that no law should be passed unless there is a compelling reason to do so, this law makes no sense. Can you think of a compelling reason to enact this law?

To make it federal law so it will be uniformly applied as opposed to a state by state law which may vary in each jurisdiction comes to mind.

Cletus
02-22-2019, 12:01 PM
To make it federal law so it will be uniformly applied as opposed to a state by state law which may vary in each jurisdiction comes to mind.

How is that a compelling reason? Is that something that really needs to be done to ensure the safety and security of the American People? Are there any states that do not have laws against lynching? When did the last lynching in the US take place? Was it already illegal where it happened? Does it happen often? Is there an epidemic of lynching going on?

You asked how it would hurt to have such a law. Anytime authority and autonomy are taken from the states, it hurts us all.

gamewell45
02-22-2019, 12:13 PM
How is that a compelling reason? Is that something that really needs to be done to ensure the safety and security of the American People? Are there any states that do not have laws against lynching? When did the last lynching in the US take place? Was it already illegal where it happened? Does it happen often? Is there an epidemic of lynching going on?

I'm not familiar with all 50 states and their laws, if any pertaining to lynching. As to the last lynching; unknown, possibly in the early 1980's, however I personally have read of calls for lynchings over the internet by white supremist, Neo-Nazi's and other racist groups. What is your definition of epidemic?


You asked how it would hurt to have such a law. Anytime authority and autonomy are taken from the states, it hurts us all.
Your viewpoint on this is duly noted.

Cletus
02-22-2019, 12:44 PM
I'm not familiar with all 50 states and their laws, if any pertaining to lynching. As to the last lynching; unknown, possibly in the early 1980's, however I personally have read of calls for lynchings over the internet by white supremist, Neo-Nazi's and other racist groups.

1981. That was 38 years ago. Somehow, I am just not seeing an urgent need for this law.



What is your definition of epidemic?

I defer to Webster. Definition of epidemic: affecting or tending to affect a disproportionately large number of individuals within a population, community, or region at the same time.

MisterVeritis
02-22-2019, 12:55 PM
I suspect you are right but let me ask you this question: by passing the new law (aside from possibly being unnecessary) how can it hurt society to have it in place?
We should only have necessary and needful laws. This is neither.

MisterVeritis
02-22-2019, 12:56 PM
To make it federal law so it will be uniformly applied as opposed to a state by state law which may vary in each jurisdiction comes to mind.
This thinking is hateful. Policing is a local issue.

One of our most important rights is our right to govern ourselves. Why are you so eager to throw that right away?

Mister D
02-22-2019, 04:20 PM
This thinking is hateful. Policing is a local issue.

One of our most important rights is our right to govern ourselves. Why are you so eager to throw that right away?
Because it makes some people feel better. I mean...does having a completely pointless anti-lynching law hurt anyone? We should also have anti-strangling and anti-blunt force trauma laws. It might seem redundant but don't you feel better having them?

The Xl
02-22-2019, 04:24 PM
I must have missed where lynching was legal in the first place

Tahuyaman
02-22-2019, 04:35 PM
I must have missed where lynching was legal in the first place

In Kamala Harris' view lynching is such a problem today that it needs to be a federal crime. Classifying it as a hate crime and a premeditated murder isn't enough.

Too many are being lynched by those who think they can only be charged with murder if caught.

Cotton1
02-22-2019, 04:36 PM
As long as I'm not the one being lynched...:)

gamewell45
02-22-2019, 05:23 PM
We should only have necessary and needful laws. This is neither.

Your viewpoint is duly noted.

gamewell45
02-22-2019, 05:25 PM
This thinking is hateful. Policing is a local issue.

One of our most important rights is our right to govern ourselves. Why are you so eager to throw that right away?
Once again, your viewpoint is duly noted.

MisterVeritis
02-22-2019, 05:29 PM
We should only have necessary and needful laws. This is neither.

Your viewpoint is duly noted.
In the Declaration of Independence the first two charges against King George were:

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance,


If we went to war with the most powerful superpower in the world for those reasons don't you think the Federal government should pass laws, wholesome and necessary of immediate and pressing importance?

We don't need trivial laws.

MisterVeritis
02-22-2019, 05:30 PM
One of our most important rights is our right to govern ourselves. Why are you so eager to throw that right away?

Once again, your viewpoint is duly noted.
Your refusal to answer is duly noted.

gamewell45
02-22-2019, 05:32 PM
One of our most important rights is our right to govern ourselves. Why are you so eager to throw that right away?

Your refusal to answer is duly noted.

Likewise thank you for your additional input.

MisterVeritis
02-22-2019, 05:33 PM
Likewise thank you for your additional input.
You are essentially worthless.

Agent Zero
02-22-2019, 05:38 PM
You are essentially worthless.
And you've overstayed your welcome here by insulting a mod.

MisterVeritis
02-22-2019, 05:47 PM
And you've overstayed your welcome here by insulting a mod.
Thus spake the Affirmative Action State Department hire...

Common
02-22-2019, 05:57 PM
Theyre liberals running for Potus they are all going to get more and more stupid to get attention

Pocahwarren has already said she wants reparations for slavery, she might even try to say shes black this time around

gamewell45
02-22-2019, 05:57 PM
You are essentially worthless.

MisterVeritis; please behave. No need to insult people because they do not agree with your viewpoint, especially when they do not insult you. Keep that in mind.

Cletus
02-22-2019, 06:01 PM
MisterVeritis; please behave. No need to insult people because they do not agree with your viewpoint, especially when they do not insult you. Keep that in mind.

You really weren't participating in the discussion. You were just repeating the same nonsense over and over and over again. You weren't even expressing a viewpoint. Your responses could easily have been interpreted as insults.

I think pretty much everyone knows repeating "Your response is noted" over and over again is really just a roundabout way of saying "Fuck off". You know that was the message you were trying to convey.

Cletus
02-22-2019, 06:02 PM
And you've overstayed your welcome here by insulting a mod.
Would you be happier if he insulted you? At least that way you would know you were noticed.

Common
02-22-2019, 06:04 PM
Stick to the Thread Topic and Not each other

gamewell45
02-22-2019, 06:06 PM
You really weren't participating in the discussion. You were just repeating the same nonsense over and over and over again. You weren't even expressing a viewpoint. Your responses could easily have been interpreted as insults.

I think pretty much everyone knows repeating "Your response is noted" over and over again is really just a roundabout way of saying "$#@! off". You know that was the message you were trying to convey.

That may be your opinion, but that's not mine. When I tell people that "their opinion is duly noted" that is an indication that I have nothing more to add to the discussion between myself and them. Now some people may not find that acceptable since they may want to continue the discussion but that's the way it is.

Cletus
02-22-2019, 06:18 PM
That may be your opinion, but that's not mine. When I tell people that "their opinion is duly noted" that is an indication that I have nothing more to add to the discussion between myself and them. Now some people may not find that acceptable since they may want to continue the discussion but that's the way it is.
Uh huh.

MisterVeritis
02-22-2019, 06:23 PM
MisterVeritis; please behave. No need to insult people because they do not agree with your viewpoint, especially when they do not insult you. Keep that in mind.
You are worthless because you refuse to engage. Keep that in mind.

Common
02-22-2019, 08:27 PM
You are worthless because you refuse to engage. Keep that in mind.

TB bad faith posting and insults

gamewell45
02-22-2019, 10:25 PM
Theyre liberals running for Potus they are all going to get more and more stupid to get attention

Pocahwarren has already said she wants reparations for slavery, she might even try to say shes black this time around

I think that Sen. Warren needs a good dose of reality; the chances of that ever occurring are practically nil since all of the former slaves are long gone and the vast bulk of the American people would not support that. I further think it's nothing but election rhetoric on her part much like what most politicians from both sides of the fence spout in hopes of getting elected. I'd much rather she stick to the current issues before us for her talking points.