FBI launches hate crime investigation after a swastika was carved into the back of a

Walt said:
So you think the Constitution gives you the right to carves swastikas into the backs of children?

I think the Constitution gives the government the right, and the responsibility, to arrest you for carving swastikas into the backs of children. I guess we just disagree.
Click to expand...

Very telling that he gets more upset about the FBI involvement than the kid having the swastika carved in his back
 
SmarterthanYou said:
unconstitutional. the federal government is not given any power to police in the states. any 'law' giving them power is null and void.
Click to expand...

Your opinion doesn't count or determine the law.

You asked why the Feds were involved, apparently unaware that hate crimes is federal law.

Civil rights is absolutely and unequivocally a federal issue.
 
Walt said:
Both have jurisdiction, so you are wrong.
Click to expand...

false. the feds have no jurisdiction.

The congress of the United States possesses no power to regulate, or interfere with the domestic concerns, or police of any state: it belongs not to them to establish any rules respecting the rights of property; nor will the constitution permit any prohibition of arms to the people; or of peaceable assemblies by them, for any purposes whatsoever, and in any number, whenever they may see occasion. —ST. GEORGE TUCKER'S BLACKSTONE
 
Cypress said:
Your opinion doesn't count or determine the law.

You asked why the Feds were involved, apparently unaware that hate crimes is federal law.

Civil rights is absolutely and unequivocally a federal issue.
Click to expand...

again, you are wrong. did you ever read the constitution? claiming that the feds can simply write a law to get around the constitution is boneheaded. it's the same thing as classifying marijuana as a controlled substance to get around the constitutional limits imposed upon them. remember prohibition?
 
"Not only was this student targeted for his identifiable faith, but he was particularly vulnerable due to his disability," Brisin said. "This incident illustrates points of intersectionality in how hate can show itself across marginalized communities.
 
Walt said:
Well, every judge who has studied the issue disagrees with you, so you are probably wrong.
Click to expand...
does being a judge make one smarter than everyone else concerning the constitution?

Walt said:
...Died over 160 years ago, before many of the amendments important to this even existed.
Click to expand...

fine, what Amendment gave the feds power to police in the states in any context other than interstate commerce????
 
SmarterthanYou said:
that baby doesn't get the choice. And that woman did choose when she accepted the possibility of pregnancy by consenting to sex.
Click to expand...

The embryo belongs to the woman, nobody else. It is part of her body , nobody else's. Her decision cannot possibly be matched by anybody else. Same with your vasectomy.
 
moon said:
The embryo belongs to the woman, nobody else. It is part of her body , nobody else's. Her decision cannot possibly be matched by anybody else. Same with your vasectomy.
Click to expand...

Its a shame that "my body my choice" did not work with the death jabs.
 
moon said:
The embryo belongs to the woman, nobody else. It is part of her body , nobody else's. Her decision cannot possibly be matched by anybody else. Same with your vasectomy.
Click to expand...

she did not become pregnant on her own, so the embryo does not belong to just her. and as I said, the CHOICE was made when she consented with the knowledge that pregnancy can result.

Being a woman is a huge responsibility, not to be taken lightly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top