Posted on 09/08/2019 2:23:18 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
A University of California-Los Angeles professor is calling not only for gun control but also “qualifications” to freedom of speech in order to combat mass shootings fueled by racism, a phenomenon he says has only come to light since President Donald Trump’s election.
UCLA professor Douglas Kellner states that until just two years ago, “all of the previous shootings were rather divorced from sociopolitical factors,” claiming that while mass shootings occurred in the past, they were the results of “individual crises of young men,” having to do with things such as family life or school trouble, in an interview published by the university.
Kellner asserts that the phenomenon of mass shootings motivated by racist ideas is largely isolated to instances occurring since Trump's election.
“The toxicity of gun culture has created a new factor that we have never seen before, that was a major factor in the last few shootings, and that was the election of Donald Trump, and in particular, Trump’s rhetoric [on immigrants],” Kellner said, adding “there haven’t been particular racist school shootings before, or acts of domestic terrorism.”
The professor goes on to state matter-of-factly that the El Paso shooting “was completely different from any of the other acts of domestic terrorism [or] school shootings, because it was targeting Latinos and immigrants.”
(Excerpt) Read more at campusreform.org ...
I am guessing you are going by wording of the 2nd Amendment which does not discriminate as to age. Age laws are post Constitutional and I am one who does not things in the Constitution are “absolute” although I am aware of the slippery slope and believe we must guard against that.
Sure you do not believe a 5 yr old or a 10 year old should be permitted to walk around with a loaded weapon? Instruction attempts aside, young people simply do not have the capability or experience to use sound judgement and when it comes to weapons that could prove deadly.
Common sense is all I am asking for.
“....calling not only for gun control but also “qualifications” to freedom of speech...”
I can agree with the qualification to freedom of speech as everyone except politicians and the media are already under being responsible for their diction by law. But there should be a goose/gander clause in the agreement that says those two aforementioned should be held to the same responsibility as those of the citizens of the country. This means that every time they get caught in a lie they can be tried in federal court for violating the first amendment they now qualify for. It will shut up the politicians and close news media sources.
As for guns, the only way to “control” them any more than is already in existence, is to remove them completely. And then the adherence to the 2nd amendment becomes a problem as that is the constitutional privilege of the states as stated in the amendment.
The states cannot over rule the constitution any more than the feds. There was an attack on this when Justice John Paul Stevens’ op-ed in the New York Times called for a repeal of the Second Amendment, which guarantees “a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” That was March of last year. But they can’t amend it and not destroy the intent of the rule. And they haven’t got the pelotas to repeal it.
rwood
I’m sure he’s also hiding behind his tenure. A complete hypocrite.
A perfect example of the 40 +++ years of INDOCTRINATION instead of EDUCATION that has occurred in the American system.
Raised in a bubble-—
Never had to actually sweat & work for anything-—
Participation trophies abound-——
Could buy the sweat of others & avoid getting a callous or dirty hands——
Will be among the very first targets & goners when the shooting actually starts.
Probably also still thinks that milk comes from SAFEWAY -—ONLY !!!
I despise every single cell in this person’s body.
They think they are totally superior due to their ‘education’ & they are truly totally useless in the overall scheme of things.
Kids under 18 have limited rights because their parents have control of them, everyone else retain their full 2nd amendment rights for as long as they are alive.
So The 2nd Amendment is not absolute.
So The 2nd Amendment is not absolute.
Just watched the Kahn Academy 16 minute video on the second amendment. It’s worth watching.
Don’t care what you think, prof. F with my 2nd or 1st amendment rights and I’ll show you something very absolute.
The Trump Factor.. Sounds sexy.. Thanks Prof.
Institutions of hugher learning are a sham and this idiot prof provides proof willingly.
Better you go to a technical college or an unbiased institution if you can find one.
Not sure he’s worse than this guy...
http://www.truthandaction.org/college-professor-white-people-kill/
This WHITE guy, says that white folks should kill themselves to atone for slavery. Show us the way, Champ!!!
I had and shot bb guns since I was 8 years old and firearms since 12 years old...some young kids still hunt and fish for food..
https://allthatsinteresting.com/civil-war-children#20
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
In fact, note that the congressional record shows that Rep. John Bingham, a constitutional lawmaker, had officially clarified that the states have never expressly given Congress the specific power to make peacetime penal laws, not even for murder.
"Our Constitution never conferred upon the Congress of the United States the power - sacred as life is, first as it is before all other rights which pertain to man on this side of the grave - to protect it in time of peace by the terrors of the penal code within organized states; and Congress has never attempted to do it. There never was a law upon the United States statute-book to punish the murderer for taking away in time of peace the life of the noblest, and the most unoffending, as well, of your citizens, within the limits of any State of the Union, The protection of the citizen in that respect was left to the respective States, and there the power is to-day [emphases added].” —Rep. John Bingham, Congressional Globe. (See bottom half of third column.)
It is disturbing that federal penal gun control laws seem to have started appearing in the books during the FDR Administration, FDR and the Congress at that time infamous for making laws which they had no express constitutional authority to make.
Franklin Roosevelt: The Father of Gun Control
On the other hand, I agree with professor that 1st Amendment-protected rights are not absolute. After all, the Founding States had obligated only the feds, not the states, to respect the rights that they expressly protected in the Bill of Rights (BoR).
It wasn't until the states ratified the questionable 14th Amendment that the state likewise obligated themselves to respect right expressly protected in BoR.
Remember in November 2020!
MAGA! Now KAG! (Keep America Great!)
In a strictly controlled situation, sure but I was talking about in public.
Yes, as written, it applies specifically to Congress. It’s nevertheless an absolute prohibition against Congress, whether or not the 14th Amendment extended the prohibition to the several States.
OH YEAH! He's totally qualified to make determinations and limitations on Constitutional Amendments............ Gender studies? Complete bullshit!
For those convicted of certain crimes...certain *types* of crimes...it should be permanent.For people with certain ailments/conditions (severe cases Parkinson's Disease,for example) it could be temporary...the condition being continuously monitored for improvement.
And for those with certain psychiatric disorders there is already a mechanism in place in all 57 states to commit a person to a psych facility...where,of course,no firearms would be allowed.On that point it's the Left who, during the 70s/80s/90s,decided to shut down 90% of the nation's psych facilities with the result that schizophrenics and psychopaths are walking the streets committing various crimes...including mass murder.
Basically,the President is *absolutely* correct to state that we don't have a gun problem...we have far too many people with serious psychiatric disorders walking the streets.
Hubert H Humphrey
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.