Article from Reason by Jacob Sullum.
Sen. Kamala Harris (D–Calif.), who is seeking the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, says that if elected she will push legislation that would authorize federal courts to issue gun confiscation orders against people who express opinions that may indicate an intent to commit a hate crime. These “domestic terrorism prevention orders” would “temporarily restrict a person’s access to guns if they exhibit clear evidence of dangerousness,” including “violent racist threats or anti-immigrant manifestos.”
Harris’ plan to “disarm violent hate” is pretty vague, so it’s hard to say whether it would be consistent with the First Amendment. If the bill she imagines would merely create a federal “red flag” law focused on a subset of people deemed a threat to others, that would be bad enough, since these laws generally give short shrift to due process. But her description of the problem she is trying to address suggests that constitutionally protected speech might by itself be enough to suspend someone’s Second Amendment rights.
“From El Paso to the Tree of Life Synagogue, and from Poway to Mother Emanuel Church,” her campaign website says, “one thing is clear: Guns are the weapon of choice for domestic terrorists and perpetrators of hate crimes….Whether it’s violent racist threats or anti-immigrant manifestos, signs of impending violence are often evident before tragedy strikes.” While that may be true in retrospect, it does not mean that all racists, nativists, white supremacists, or anti-Semites who express their views online, or even a significant percentage of them, are bent on mass murder.
Harris mentions the 2018 shooting in which Robert Bowers murdered 11 people at a Pittsburgh synagogue. Prior to the attack, Bowers posted a bunch of anti-Semitic comments on Gab. In his bio, he described Jews as “the children of satan,” and his posts and reposts railed against Jews and the Latin Americans whose illegal immigration he believed they were facilitating. “He was clearly obsessed with Jews,” Alex Amend of the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote after the attack. “In the small window into his account currently available, it’s evident he engaged with numerous antisemitic conspiracy theories that have long been in circulation among neo-Nazis and white nationalists.”
Read the entire article at Reason.
wpDiscuz
Did she forget all the ones that scream “ALLAH AKBAR ” when they shot their victims ?
‘Allahu Akbar’ Shouting Hadjiis don’t count! They are only trying to help their Race and their “Religion Of PEACE”!
What that brainless twit is actually saying is that every person that disagrees with the democrat libtards should have their firearms confiscated. The democrat plan is to confiscate all weapons so they can take over the country just as what happened in so many tyrannies around the world.
Kamala is clueless!
1. Is time for all Dems to lose their armed guards. 2. LLhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, need to be arrested for their anti-Jewish threats. If you want gun control all criminals & that includes gangbangers & drug dealers need to be arrested and put in a new tent city like Sheriff Joe had in AZ, that really worked and I know some people that spend time in there and will do most anything to not have to go back. Give up weapons? Just try
She would no doubt demonstrate how to succeed to a higher office, ask Jerry Brown !
She stands zero chance of seeing the inside of the WH.
This figures look along side of her, happens to be Holder, when he got into office he tried to take away our Second Amendment Rights as soon as he got into office. We don’t need dany of his ideas in which he would ever come up with. Let him go back and play Basket Ball with Obama.
how about we play Americans and muslims. anything goes. murder and death are all that they know. it’s time to leave piles of these pukes laying in the gutter.
Another thing that gives me pause about Californica’s “poor, homeless street urchins”.
Have you noticed that almost all of these “poor, homeless” are living in the same kind of tent?
A quick check on-line finds that these are high end, ultra-comfy, all-weather tents, easily worth about $1,500 each.
Where did these “poor, homeless” people come up with that kind of bread? And why do almost all of them have the same kind of tent?
Is this something that perhaps the people of Californica have paid for through the millions and millions of dollars confiscated in the name of “helping the poor”? And what we are seeing is that out of that enforced largess, while the bulk of that money went into “someone’s” pocket, a pittance of that money paid for and distributed to these “poor, homeless” their elaborate and expensive street huts?