Bearing Arms:
New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu has vetoed three gun control bills passed by the Democrat-controlled legislature earlier this year, including a “universal background check bill” and legislation that would have instituted a three-day waiting period for all retail firearms purchases and transfers. In his veto statement, Sununu said none of the bills would “prevent evil individuals from doing harm“, and would impact law abiding citizens far more than they would impact criminals.
“These three bills would not solve our national issues nor would they prevent evil individuals from doing harm, but they would further restrict the constitutional rights of law-abiding New Hampshire citizens,” Sununu wrote in his single veto message on all three bills.
“Our focus as a nation must be on addressing the root causes of hate and violence,” Sununu wrote. “Here in New Hampshire, we have taken multiple steps to address our mental health needs and to build a more welcoming and tolerant state.”
Sununu elaborated on those steps, which include a new unit in the state’s Attorney General’s office focused on prosecuting hate crimes, as well as efforts to rebuild the state’s mental health services. The governor also noted that New Hampshire’s violent crime rate is among the lowest in the nation, and the state constitution offers strong protections for the right to keep and bear arms. read more
…he ALMOST makes sense, but then talks about “Hate Crimes” legislation that means we prosecute SOME crimes differently than the SAME crimes against different LOOKING people, which requires we worry about what was in someone’s HEART when they committed a crime, and shreds the whole concept of equality before the law.
Murder is murder. It should not matter WHY you killed, as the penalty SHOULD BE DEATH and it’s hard to get any more severe than that. And is it fair in a 14th Amendment sense if, say, I had a White daughter murdered and it wasn’t pursued as vigorously as the guy across the street who has his Black daughter murdered, or penalized the same, because the murderer MIGHT have said the n-word while murdering? Where’s the justice in THAT, both girls are DEAD.
And establishing intent for hate crimes is a pretty dicey business anyway. Every Black person who has a legal issue with a White person KNOW to say “He called me ni**er”. Famously, Darren Wilson was accused of the same thing. Did he? We will NEVER know, all you have is conflicting testimony by people who have a HUGE incentive to lie. The legal bias in this country currenly presupposes that ALL White people be rayciss, and this puts the burden of proof squarely on the defendant to prove they did NOT say a word that shouldn’t matter ANYWAY.
…so, good on him for blocking these bills. This time. But since he continues the Long March down a different Shining Path that leads to the same Stygnian pit of communism to try to appease his Demofacists anyway, its one step forwards, two steps back as far as Justice overall is concerned.
And evil is persistent. They’ll be BACK. And which of our freedoms, what fundamental part of the concept of Rule of Law will you barter away to them NEXT time?
…and the slide continues…
Supernightshade, I agree with your perspective on hate crimes. The only time it makes sense to look at intent is to determine whether the crime was accidental (losing control of a car that results in a fatal accident) versus intent to commit murder. Hate crime legislation makes no sense, nor does hate as a category. I hate pedophiles. As long as I don’t act on that my going on a crime spree, what difference does it make that I hate them?
One other thing, hate is a god-given emotion and has its usefulness. We should all hate evil, even God hated Esau.
If we are to follow Martin Luther King’s words shouldn’t we be judging by character and not by color?