They caught two suspects in the Tulsa shootings

[ObamaFTW2012]

[link:http://www.windstream.net/news/read.php?id=19030928&ps=1011&srce=morenews_class&action=1&lang=en]

Looks like two angry white redneck meth heads. We'll see what comes of this.

[Loudly]

1. Guns and ammo in the hands of the public.

A society of convenient murder.

[ObamaFTW2012]

3. If that's really true

How come there are only 12-13K murders-by-firearm per year in a nation of 300,000,000 people with just as many guns? Shouldn't there be many more? How come the majority of those murders are committed by people who are a) legally prohibited from possessing firearms and/or ammunition and b) involved in drug trafficking, against the same sort of people?

It seems to me the few murders-by-firearm America endures are the product of a failed drug policy, not failed gun laws.

[Buzz cook]

54. In part it is.

But the same people that support "gun rights" also support the war on some drugs.

They support the prison industrial complex.

Go to a gun forum and try to make the case that we should treat drugs and crime as social and health problems.

Try making the argument that if we worked to increase social and financial justice, it would reduce crime.

[gejohnston]

55. unfortunately, you are right

they are also the same people that oppose environmental laws their gun owning/hunting forefathers and mothers did. I blame Rush (not the band) along with Wayne and Ted.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

4. inidividuals make up the public. How can you have the one without the other?

[beevul]

33. The evidence continues to pile up...Sharesunited.

"Guns and ammo in the hands of the public." loudly.


"...guns and ammo in the hands of the general public..." sharesunited.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=266391&mesg_id=266468

"Guns in the hands of the public..." sharesunited.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=429419&mesg_id=429448

"...guns in the hands of the public" sharesunited.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9656775&mesg_id=9656987

"...guns in the hands of the public..." sharesunited.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=379235&mesg_id=379351


"convenient killing power in the hands of the public" sharesunited.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6126985&mesg_id=6127253


"guns in the hands of the public" sharesunited.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=330395&mesg_id=330399

"Guns and ammo in the hands of the general public" sharesunited.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=266806&mesg_id=266851

"guns in the hands of the public" sharesunited.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=355994&mesg_id=357367

"guns and ammo in the hands of the public" sharesunited.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=378992&mesg_id=379112

"Guns in the hands of the public." sharesunited.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=419892&mesg_id=419894

"Guns in the hands of the general public" sharesunited.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1027267&mesg_id=1027975

"guns in the hands of the public" sharesunited.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=398802&mesg_id=398850

"Guns in the hands of the general public" sharesunited.

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8337353&mesg_id=8337845

in addition to these:

"Now carrying on dying Americans." loudly


"Such a tragedy. Now carry on dying Americans." sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=415412&mesg_id=415468

"In other words: Carry On Dying Y'all!" sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=301410&mesg_id=301490

"Translation: Carry On Dying Ya'All." sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=275477&mesg_id=275523

"Guns cloud judgment." loudly

"But guns cloud judgment." Sharesunited -tombstoned.

Guns cloud judgment..." Sharesunited -tombstoned.

And compare guns to child porn, repeatedly:

"Refer to the crusade against child pornography."

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=15751

"There is a demand for child porn too, but that is being dealt
with." loudly

"And child pornography should go unchecked because people have young children they can photograph." Sharesunited -tombstoned.

"You may as well come out in favor of child pornography as protected by the first amendment." Sharesunited -tombstoned.


"Public policy against the mere possession of child pornography illustrates what is possible." Sharesunited -tombstoned.

"Over the counter access to morphine and over the internet access to child pornography." Sharesunited -tombstoned.

How did the crusade against child pornography begin? Public policy. Sharesunited -tombstoned.

"By murdering your stubborn hide." loudly.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117223802#post14

"By killing your hide." sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=277573&mesg_id=277577

"By killing that wooly hide of yours." sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x252047#252251

"Now, let's weigh her hide against the 2A dead." sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x267127#267178

"As such, the RKBA endangers all your other rights by killing your insistent and misguided hide." sharesunited - tombstoned

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=281789&mesg_id=282313

"And that means bullets in innocent bodies, including your old hide." sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=415908&mesg_id=415919

"So is not having bullets enter your hide." sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=400631&mesg_id=400663

"You CAN force me to take a bullet in my hide." sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4294235#4295239

"And based solely upon your determination that bullets should GO in their hide?" sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=378807&mesg_id=379353

"Until the nation was dragged kicking and screaming into modernity on the subject." loudly

http://www.democraticunderground.com/117223802#post28

Once again, the federal courts will need to bring the People kicking and screaming into modernity. sharesunited - tombstoned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=352368&mesg_id=352462





Just a reeeeeeally reeeeeally big coincidence...i'm sure.

[pipoman]

41. The only thing missing...

[beevul]

50. I know! I know!!

[Callisto32]

51. Well..

when you say it like THAT, of COURSE it looks damning.

[Hoyt]

2. Yep, "two angry white rednecks" with friggin guns.

[ObamaFTW2012]

5. Like you care who held the guns

You hate anyone and everyone who exercises their right to own a gun, so your comments aren't worth much. If those killed were run down by a car you probably wouldn't say a damned thing.

[Hoyt]

7. I think guns are a plight on society, and those who carry and promote them have a serious problem.

Sorry that you think guns are so essential to enjoying life.

And yes, I believe guns and bigotry are intertwined. I hope you enjoy your guns on this beautiful day.

[ObamaFTW2012]

10. I think those who rail against them so vehemently are mentally ill

I don't recall saying that guns are "essential to life". Thanks for (yet again) attempting to put words in the mouth of someone who doesn't share your twisted view.

I believe that gun controllers (and gun ban absolutists such as yourself) are the real bigots. Who else would openly advocate to strip a black man (along with 80,000,000 others) of his Constitutional rights?

[Hoyt]

11. Your poor, pitiful gun plight is hardly the same as the real Civil Rights struggle.

[ObamaFTW2012]

13. There you go again

I didn't say anything about the Civil Rights Movement,"real" or otherwise (whatever that means), but since YOU brought it up, let's go there.

Owning and carrying a gun is a civil right under the Second Amendment to the US Constitution. The Supreme Court has affirmed this.

I am a gun owner. People such as yourself believe that I shouldn't be "allowed" to own and carry a firearm, and those people work to restrict and/or remove my right.

Do I need to go on?

[Hoyt]

14. It is not a "civil right" -- look it up. Besides

Lots of things are legal, but not right or good for society.

[ObamaFTW2012]

15. Good thing guns are both right and good for society

[ObamaFTW2012]

16. At your suggestion, I did look it up

Here's what I found:


 
Personal liberties that belong to an individual, owing to his or her status as a citizen or resident of a particular country or community.

The most common legal application of the term civil rights involves the rights guaranteed to U.S. citizens and residents by legislation and by the Constitution. Civil rights protected by the Constitution include Freedom of Speech and freedom from certain types of discrimination.

Not all types of discrimination are unlawful, and most of an individual's personal choices are protected by the freedoms to choose personal associates; to express himself or herself; and to preserve personal privacy. Civil rights legislation comes into play when the practice of personal preferences and prejudices of an individual, a business entity, or a government interferes with the protected rights of others. The various civil rights laws have made it illegal to discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, age, handicap, or national origin. Discrimination that interferes with voting rights and equality of opportunity in education, employment, and housing is unlawful.

The term Privileges and Immunities is related to civil rights. Privileges and immunities encompass all rights of individuals that relate to people, places, and real and Personal Property. Privileges include all of the legal benefits of living in the United States, such as the freedom to sell land, draft a will, or obtain a Divorce. Immunities are the protections afforded by law that prevent the government or other people from hindering another's enjoyment of his or her life, such as the right to be free from illegal searches and seizures and the freedom to practice religion without government persecution. The Privileges and Immunities Clause in Article IV of the U.S. Constitution states, "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States." The clause is designed to prevent each state from discriminating against

the people in other states in favor of its own citizens.

The Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution, delineates specific rights that are reserved for U.S. citizens and residents. No state can remove or abridge rights that are guaranteed by the Constitution.

In 1857, the U.S. Supreme Court held, in dred scott v. sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393, 15 L. Ed. 691, that the Constitution did not apply to African Americans because they were not citizens when the Constitution was written. After the Civil War, therefore, new laws were necessary for the purpose of extending civil liberties to the former slaves.

In 1865, the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution was enacted to make Slavery and other forms of Involuntary Servitude unlawful. In addition, Congress was given the power to enact laws that were necessary to enforce this new amendment.

The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, provides that every individual who is born or naturalized in the United States is a citizen and ensures that a state may not deprive a citizen or resident of his or her civil rights, including Due Process of Law and Equal Protection of the laws. Congress is also empowered to enact laws for the enforcement of these rights.

The Origin of Federal Civil Rights Laws

During the period immediately following the Civil War, civil rights legislation was originally enacted by Congress, based upon its power under the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to pass laws to enforce these rights. The first two of these laws were based upon the civil rights act of 1866 (42 U.S.C.A. § 1982), which had preceded the Fourteenth Amendment.

The first civil rights law guaranteed equal rights under the law for all people who lived within the jurisdiction of the United States. The second guaranteed each citizen an equal right to own, inherit, rent, purchase, and sell real property as well as personal property. The third original civil rights law, the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 (17 Stat. 13), provided citizens with the right to bring a civil action for a violation of protected rights. The fourth law made violation of such rights a criminal offense.

Subsequent Legislation

Although these initial laws purported to guarantee the civil rights of all citizens, including African Americans and other minorities,

they were effectively negated for most African-Americans in the late nineteenth century by the passage of Jim Crow Laws, or Black Codes, in the South. These laws made it illegal for African-Americans to use the same public facilities as whites, restricted their travel, impeded their ability to vote, forbade interracial marriage, and generally relegated them to a legally inferior position.

In the 1896 landmark case plessy v. ferguson, 163 U.S. 537, 16 S. Ct. 1138, 41 L. Ed. 256, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a Jim Crow law that required the Segregation, or separation, of the races on railroad cars. The Court held that the Louisiana law in question was not a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment as long as the facilities that were provided for each race were "separate but equal." This separate-but-equal doctrine was used to support other segregation laws applying to public schools and public facilities.

No significant civil rights legislation was enacted until many decades later, when the Commission on Civil Rights was established by Congress in the Civil Rights Act of 1957 (42 U.S.C.A. § 1975) to monitor and collect facts regarding race relations for consideration by Congress and the president. Congress subsequently passed the Civil Rights Act of 1960 (42 U.S.C.A. § 1971). The statute guarantees that qualified voters have the right to register to vote in any state and that they have the right to sue any person who prevents them from doing so. Voters possess this right to sue regardless of whether the individual who so prevents them is a state official or merely an individual who acting as one.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C.A. §§ 2000a et seq.) is the most comprehensive civil rights legislation in the history of the United States. It contains provisions for parity in the use and enjoyment of public accommodations, facilities, and education, as well as federally assisted programs and employment. Title VII of that act, which prohibits employment discrimination based on an employee's race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, is regarded as the most inclusive source of employment rights. All employers who have at least 15 employees, including state and local governments and labor unions, are subject to its provisions, but it does not apply to the federal government, American Indian tribes, clubs, or religious organizations.

The Civil Rights Act of 1968 (25 U.S.C.A. § 1301 et seq.) proscribes discrimination in the sale and rental of most U.S. housing. It also prohibits discrimination in financing arrangements and extends to agents, brokers, and owners. Both the 1964 and 1968 Civil Rights Acts establish the right of an injured party to sue and to obtain damages from any individual who illegally infringes with a person's civil rights, conspires to deprive others of their civil rights, or abuses either government authority or public office to accomplish such unlawful acts.

In the area of education, a significant civil rights milestone was achieved in 1954 with the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in brown v. board of education, 347 U.S. 483, 74 S. Ct. 686, 98 L. Ed. 873. In Brown, the justices unanimously rejected the separate-but-equal doctrine that it had upheld in Plessy. They found that segregating black and white children in different public schools violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Segregation, the Court held, effectively discriminates against African-American children by promoting in them a sense of inferiority that limits their opportunities in life. The Court also required that school districts desegregate "with all deliberate speed." Integration, or desegregation, of public schools has been a divisive issue ever since. In particular, arguments arise over the practice of busing students a distance to school, a method that has been used, often by court order, to create a better racial balance.

The issue of segregation continues to cause strife. In 2002, Senate Majority Leader trent lott (R.-Miss.) suggested during comments at the 100th birthday party of retired Senator strom thurmond that he was proud that the state of Mississippi had supported Thurmond in a presidential bid in 1948. Thurmond had run on the so-called "Dixiecrat" platform that advocated segregation. The comments caused a storm of criticism directed at Lott, and he resigned as senate majority leader in December 2002.

In employment, Common Law permits an employer or Labor Union to discriminate for a valid reason in its relations with employees, unless otherwise provided by federal or state statute. The National Labor Relations Act of 1935 (29 U.S.C.A. § 151 et seq.) initially restrained discrimination against employees or job applicants who engage in union activities. Subsequently, the act has been extended through various amendments to prohibit other forms of discrimination, including race and Sex Discrimination. In 1963, Congress enacted the Equal Pay Act (29 U.S.C.A. § 206), which requires that men and women be paid the same wages when they do substantially similar work. The federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is the initial forum for claims of illegal employment discrimination. It also publishes advisory guidelines that explain or define the law. Many states have agencies or Human Rights commissions that are similar to the EEOC.

The 1980s and Beyond

One result of civil rights legislation is Affirmative Action, which is the effort to enforce race and sex classifications when necessary to correct past discriminatory patterns. The ordering of affirmative action requires employers or labor unions to make concerted efforts to hire minorities who traditionally have been discouraged from seeking employment with them. The basis for affirmative action is that if such efforts are not made, unlawful discrimination will be perpetuated.

Affirmative action and other attempts to end discrimination raise new questions. For example, have efforts to help minorities and women begun to infringe on the rights of individuals outside of those groups, such as white men? Some argue that affirmative action results in reverse discrimination, which is prejudice or bias practiced against a particular person or class of people in order to remedy a pattern of past discrimination against another individual or group of individuals.

Much of the attention on the constitutionality of affirmative action programs has focused upon the federal courts of appeals. The most heated controversy has centered on affirmative action programs in higher education. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Hopwood v. Texas,78 F.3d 932 (5th Cir. 1996) held that a program at the University of Texas School of Law granting preferences to minorities in admissions decisions was unconstitutional. This case stirred a national debate, and several commentators noted that the percentage of minorities who were admitted to the school dropped markedly after the decision. The U.S. Supreme Court allowed the decision to stand when it denied certioari.

In 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified some of the confusion experienced by the lower federal courts with respect to affirmative action programs in higher education. In Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S.___, 123 S. Ct. 2325, ___ L. Ed. 2d ___ (2003), the Court upheld a practice by the law school at the University of Michigan that considered race one of the factors the school considered when admitting students. The ruling upheld the decision in board of regents of the university of california v. bakke, 438 U.S. 265, 98 S. Ct. 2733, 57 L. Ed. 2d 750 (1978), a controversial decision that had likewise allowed schools to consider race as a factor in admissions. In a companion case to Grutter, however the Court limited the scope of affirmative action programs of universities when it struck down Michigan's undergraduate admissions policies. Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. ___, 123 S. Ct. 2411, ___ L. Ed. 2d ___ (2003). Unlike the law school's admissions policies at Michigan, the undergraduate admissions department added a certain number of "points" to the application of a racial minority. Because the university added these points automatically without consideration of the individual applicant, the Court held that this policy could not pass constitutional muster.

After President ronald reagan appointed three justices to the U.S. Supreme Court during his two presidential terms between 1981 and 1989, the Court proceeded to render more conservative opinions regarding civil rights. For example, in Patterson v. McLean Credit Union, 491 U.S. 164, 109 S. Ct. 2363, 105 L. Ed. 2d 132 (1989), it addressed the issue of discrimination in the private sector and held that section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 barred only racial discrimination in hiring, and thus not racial harassment while on the job. Minority-rights groups were disappointed by the ruling and saw it as part of a general trend toward making civil rights violations more difficult to prove. However, Justice anthony m. kennedy, who wrote the Court's opinion, stated, "Neither our words nor our decisions should be interpreted as signaling one inch of retreat from Congress's policy to forbid discrimination in the private, as well as the public, sphere."

Less controversial have been developments in the area of civil rights for handicapped people. In 1990, President george h. w. bush signed into law the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (Pub. L. No. 101-336, 104 Stat. 327 [codified in scattered sections of 42, 29, 47 U.S.C.A.] [effective 1992]), which was quickly hailed as the most significant civil rights legislation since the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The ADA prohibits discrimination against disabled persons in employment, public accommodations, transportation, and Telecommunications. Referred to as the bill of rights for physically and mentally disabled citizens—who were estimated to number 43 million at the time of the act's passage—the act supersedes previous state and local laws and extends protection to any person with a physical or mental impairment that "substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual."

The act includes many features that are intended to improve living conditions for those with disabilities. For example, employers, providers of public transportation, and private businesses with public accommodation (such as theaters, restaurants, hotels, and banks) must make "reasonable accommodations" for disabled persons. Often such accommodations must include wheelchair access. Similarly, all commuter and intercity trains are required to have at least one car that is handicapped-accessible, and telephone companies must provide relay operators for hearing-impaired individuals who use special telecommunications devices.

The Civil Rights Act of 1991 (Pub. L. No. 102-166, 105 Stat. 1071 [codified in scattered sections of 42, 29, 2 U.S.C.A.]) marked another important step in civil rights legislation. The act repudiated several U.S. Supreme Court decisions on civil rights; granted women and disabled persons the right to recover money damages under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; and granted congressional employees the protection of Title VII. Among the high court's decisions that were overturned by the 1991 act was Patterson. Section 101 of the act states that employees may sue for damages experienced through racial discrimination in hiring, promotion, dismissal, and all other terms of employment. The changes in Title VII employee-discrimination cases entitle plaintiffs to jury trials and allow them to recover damages in addition to back pay.

Although many minority groups have made rapid advances toward recognition of their civil rights, one group that continues to struggle is the homosexual community. Similar to ethnic and racial minorities, individuals who identify themselves as homosexual, bisexual, or transsexual have long been subject to disparate treatment from the majority. Although Gay and Lesbian Rights groups have made advances toward changing perceptions in society, challenges in the courts have been only marginally successful.

Gay and lesbian rights group claimed a victory in 1996 with the Supreme Court's decision in Romer v. Evans, 517 U.S. 620, 116 S. Ct. 1620, 134 L. Ed. 2d 855 (1996). In that case, a constitutional amendment in the state of Colorado prohibited governmental units from passing any statute, regulation, or ordinance purporting to protect the rights of homosexuals or bisexuals. The U.S. Supreme Court held that the amendment violated the Equal Protection Clause because it explicitly denies a single group protection under the law.

Although Romer represented one of the first major victories for gay and lesbian groups, other decisions have been less favorable. In Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640, 120 S. Ct. 2446, 147 L. Ed. 2d 554 (2000), the Court held that the Boy Scouts could properly exclude gay boys from their organization based upon the principle of freedom of association. Due in large part to their limited success in the courts and legislatures, gay and lesbian advocates have focused much of their attention on changing societal perceptions of homosexual, bisexuals, and other similar minority groups.

Another issue that has arisen in the courts with respect to civil rights is the limitations placed upon Section 1983 actions against governmental officials for violations of constitutional rights. For instance, in Board of County Commissioners of Bryan County, Okla. v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397, 117 S. Ct. 12382, 137 L. Ed. 2d 626 (1997), the U.S. Supreme Court clarified that a plaintiff cannot recover in an action under section 1983 under a theory of repondeat superior. The plaintiff in the case was injured when a police officer forced her to the ground after a chase. The officer had been hired by his great-uncle, a county sheriff, despite the fact that he had had a number of criminal convictions. The plaintiff claimed that the sheriff and the county had shown a reckless indifference toward her constitutional rights through their hiring practices. The U.S. Supreme Court disagreed, holding that a plaintiff in a Section 1983 action must prove that a governmental unit, through deliberate conduct, was a moving force behind the alleged injury.

Prisoners' Rights

Lawsuits brought by prisoners to recover damages for alleged violations of their civil rights have caused problems in American legal systems. Many of these cases have involved alleged violations by prisons or prison officials against inmates. Although many of these claims have no valid legal basis, some do, so courts must determine, among the thousands of cases that are filed each year, which ones have merit. In response to these claims, Congress enacted the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1932 (2003), which requires prisoners to pay filing fees and restricts the amount of money damages that prisoners can recover.

Prisoners have prevailed on a variety of claims, notwithstanding limitations placed upon their court actions. For example, in Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U.S. 574, 118 S. Ct. 1584, 140 L. Ed. 2d 759 (1998), the U.S. Supreme Court reversed an appellate court decision that had imposed a higher Burden of Persuasion on inmate claims. Similarly, prisoners are periodically successful in claims that prison officials have deprived them of constitutional rights, including due process of law.

However, the majority of claims by inmates fail. For instance, in Correctional Services Corp. v. Malesko, 534 U.S. 61, 122 S. Ct. 515, 151 L. Ed. 2d 456 (2001), the U.S. Supreme Court held that a plaintiff held in a halfway house that was operated by a private corporation under a contract with the federal government could not sue the corporation. The plaintiff had sought to bring the case under the rule in Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S. Ct. 1999, 29 L. Ed. 2d 619 (1971) (called a Bivens action), which allows for suits against federal officials who have violated the civil rights of plaintiffs. The Court in Malesko held that Bivens actions do not apply the to acts of government agencies or business entities and ruled against the plaintiff.

Further readings
Abraham, Henry J., and Barbara A. Perry. 2003. Freedom and the Court: Civil Rights and Liberties in the United States. Lawrence: Univ. Press of Kansas.

Hepple, Bob, and Erika M. Szyszczak, eds. 1992. Discrimination: the Limits of Law. New York: Mansell.

Lewis, Harold S. Jr., and Elizabeth J. Norman. 2001. Civil Rights Law and Practice. St. Paul, Minn.: West.

Rutland, George H., ed. 2001. Civil Rights in America. Huntington, N.Y.: Nova Science Publishers.

Shull, Steven H. 1999. American Civil Rights Policy from Truman to Clinton: the Role of Presidential Leadership. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe.

Cross-references
Civil Rights Acts; Ku Klux Klan Act; Section 1983; Voting Rights Act of 1965. See also primary documents in "Civil Rights" section of Appendix.

Slavery

From Segregation to Civil Rights

Women's Rights

Native American Rights

West's Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
civil rights n. those rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, the 13th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution, including the right to due process, equal treatment under the law of all people regarding enjoyment of life, liberty, property, and protection. Positive civil rights include the right to vote, the opportunity to enjoy the benefits of a democratic society, such as equal access to public schools, recreation, transportation, public facilities, and housing and equal and fair treatment by law enforcement and the courts. (See: Bill of Rights, civil, Civil Liberties)

Copyright © 1981-2005 by Gerald N. Hill and Kathleen T. Hill. All Right reserved.

[rl6214]

39. Game, set and match

[rl6214]

37. Don't care whether you think it is good for society or not, it IS a CIVIL RIGHT

I read here that many think drugs should be legalized, that may not be right or good for society but I'm sure you think that A-OK.

[oneshooter]

12. So you admit to your hoplophobia?

Now you can seek proper treatment.

[provis99]

20. interesting that you use a totally made up word by a paranoid fascist clown.

[sarisataka]

24. What are the

Criteria to be authorized to create a new word?

I could find no reference to Mr. Cooper having a mental illness so I do not believe he was paranoid. Nor does it appear he was fascist; I suspect republican.

Reading his writings does make me laugh often so he could be considered a clown.

[provis99]

25. 1. If you call black people orangutangs, believe in shooting peaceful profesters,

and advocate for uniformed right-wing militias to overthrow government, like Jeff Cooper, you are a fascist.

2. the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders gets to define mental health terms, not right-wing gun nuts.

3. Jeff Cooper is a registered Democrat in Alabama. and a closeted fascist.

[sarisataka]

30. I believe

in judging people by the standard of their time, not ex post facto by modern ideas

1. Was he racist? by his writings I would say so but to use derogatory terms... I could show you some cartoons from the 30s and 40s that use far worse stereotypes. For something more modern go to TV Land and watch All in the Family to see what was prime-time appropriate fairly recently. Personally I find the allowable language on TV shows today to be grossly inappropriate, but society says it is ok.

2. He was not defining a medical condition but attempting to clarify terms he found offensive e.g gun nut and gun grabber. In that context hoplophobe makes sense. The opposite would be hoplophile I suppose.

3. So I was wrong there. Proof of fascist allegiance?

[Straw Man]

32. Zombie fascist?

3. Jeff Cooper is a registered Democrat in Alabama. and a closeted fascist.

Interesting, considering that he died in 2006.

[pipoman]

36. Wow

Sounds remarkably like the beloved Senator Byrd...did you make any similar posts during the Byrd lovefest on DU?

[provis99]

29. since you think Jeff Cooper is funny, here are some real zingers to make you laugh:

In Vol. 9, No. 8 of Jeff Cooper’s Commentaries published in August 2001, Cooper wrote, “I am told by ‘new soldiers,’ even Marines, that what once was considered normal disciplinary procedure is today held to be legally reprehensible. During my own tour as company commander I never once sent a man before a court. I didn't need to. I had sergeants. How today's captains proceed without sergeants is beyond me. But how to proceed with perverts and girl warriors is also beyond me.”

In Vol. 9, No. 6 of Jeff Cooper’s Commentaries published in June 2001, Cooper wrote, “It is indeed a troublesome thing to observe the historical tomfoolery of many of our modern activists. I recently saw a statement to the effect that six million Negros died in the slave trade between Africa and the New World. Considering that a slave trader only made money out of a live slave, this would seem very poor economics, but beyond that it is doubtful if there were six million Negros available in Africa at any one time to be enslaved.” Of the estimated 20 million Africans sold into slavery, roughly half died during the excursion from their homelands to the African coast. Millions more African slaves died during the Middle Passage voyage between Africa and the New World. Cooper also added, “We have reports from the military to corroborate this. We are told of young men signing up for the military service who have never: slept on the ground, cleaned a fish, climbed a mountain, thrown a punch, ridden a horse, shot a rifle, sailed a boat, changed a wheel, built a fire, [or] read the Bible. I suppose many of these young men know all about sexual perversion, the use of the hypodermic needle, auditory abuse, political correctness, gender equality, and ‘global warming.’ It is hard to say what is to be done.”

In Vol. 9, No. 5 of Jeff Cooper’s Commentaries published in May 2001, Cooper wrote, “There is no more American way of spending a snowy Wyoming morning than listening to [conservative talk show host] Rush Limbaugh while loading ammunition. Our friend Rush sometimes gets a little overblown in his presentations, but certainly his heart is in the right place.” Limbaugh has been frequently criticized for his statements about minorities, women, and gays. Cooper added, “If the Chinese fighter pilot, Wang Wei, is an example of the breed, we take that as a good development. If Chinese fighter pilots are incapable of keeping distance in the air, it is nice to have them on the other side. Should we add the term ‘Chinese fighter pilot’ to what we used to call ‘a Chinese fire drill’? We should not get our hopes up, however. The rest of that crew may be more skillful.” Wang Wei was a Chinese pilot who died in a mid-air collision with a U.S. Navy aircraft in 2001. The accident caused an international dispute between the United States and China.

In Vol. 9, No. 3 of Jeff Cooper’s Commentaries published in March 2001, Cooper wrote, “It would appear that that small, black cloud on the horizon is the specter of a general Moslem war against the West − something which should be put off as long as possible, but is probably going to be with us in due course.” He also added, “Someone has observed that if you find yourself in San Francisco, be careful upon leaving not to look back, lest you be turned into a pillar of salt.” Cooper was referring to the biblical story of God’s destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because of the inhabitant’s sinful behavior (God warned that anyone who looked back at the ruins of the cities would be turned into a pillar of salt). He also wrote, “As I understand it, slavery was abolished in this country in 1865. The issue is closed. Buying those people from their friends in Africa and bringing them over here was a great mistake and we have suffered for it for a long time. Perhaps we should let the matter drop.”

In Vol. 8, No. 13 of Jeff Cooper’s Commentaries published in December 2000, Cooper published the following excerpt of a song written by his daughter Lindy: “The sun shines bright/On the old Kentucky home/'Tis summer/And all the African−Americans are homosexual.” In Vol. 9, No. 3 of the Commentaries, Cooper stated that his daughter was updating the pre-Civil War song “My Old Kentucky Home,” which opens with the lines, “The sun shines bright on my old Kentucky home/Tis summer/the darkies are gay.” The song’s status as the official song of Kentucky has been called into question for the song’s use of racially disparaging terms for African Americans. “Clearly we had to restructure this because we cannot longer use the term ‘darky,’ and ‘gay’ has been rerouted,” explained Cooper.

In Vol. 8, No. 3 of Jeff Cooper’s Commentaries published in March 2000, Cooper wrote, “It appears that this baseball player [Atlanta Braves reliever John] Rocker has stated publically that he dislikes having to ride public transportation in company with scruffies. On this he has been sent to Coventry, where presumably they regularly wash his mouth out with soap. Does anybody really like to ride with scruffies? Social censorship − miscalled ‘political correctness’ − is reaching new lows all the time.” Cooper was reacting to the following comment that Rocker made when asked during an interview if he would like to play baseball in New York: “I would retire first. It's the most hectic, nerve-racking city. Imagine having to take the [Number] 7 train to the ballpark, looking like you're [riding through] Beirut next to some kid with purple hair next to some queer with AIDS right next to some dude who just got out of jail for the fourth time right next to some 20-year-old mom with four kids. It's depressing. The biggest thing I don't like about New York are the foreigners. I'm not a very big fan of foreigners. You can walk an entire block in Times Square and not hear anybody speaking English. Asians and Koreans and Vietnamese and Indians and Russians and Spanish people and everything up there. How the hell did they get in this country?” Cooper also wrote, “They had a big raffle [election] recently in Zimbabwe (Rhodesia). To everyone's intense surprise, Comrade [Robert] Mugabe was the winner of the grand prize. For all our putative rejection of ‘racism,’ it is sometimes hard to take these popinjays seriously.” Zimbabwe has not been called Rhodesia since before 1980 when white supremacist apartheid supporter Ian Smith ruled the country.

In Vol. 5, No. 12 of Jeff Cooper’s Commentaries published in November 1997, Cooper wrote, “Note that after the emasculation of both VMI [Virginia Military Institute) and the Citadel, there is now a move afoot to establish a ‘Southern Military Institute’ in the hill country of northern Alabama. This academy is projected as male, Christian, private and white, about as ‘politically incorrect’ as one can get. It will be interesting to see whether it actually gets underway. If this is truly a free country, as we keep telling ourselves, there is no reason why it should not.” Cooper’s mention of VMI was likely a reference to the 1996 Supreme Court case United States vs. Virginia that ended the institution’s practice of only admitting male students. He went on to write, “We are now given to understand by a police firearms instructor of wide background and experience that lesbians make lousy shots. Normal girls, on the other hand, tend to do rather well on the range. Is there a point to be learned here?”

In Vol. 5, No. 10 of Jeff Cooper’s Commentaries published in September 1997, Cooper wrote, “In current usage the solecism ‘homophobe’ has begun to intrude. Upon analysis this term signifies an irrational terror of being the same. It is used to designate one who is disgusted by sexual perversion, in which sense it is quite incorrect, because fear or terror, either reasonable or unreasonable, is implied. Perhaps we should all brush up on our Greek.” He went on to share a letter he sent to the editorial board of the Arizona Republic (that the newspaper declined to publish) on the subject of cockfighting: “In your letters column we note a continuing rumble on the part of certain people calling for the prohibition of chicken fighting in Arizona. While we must certainly admit the presence of ruffled feathers on the part of those who are distressed by chicken fighting, we must at the same time protest that it seems uppity for us to deny our Latino residents such pleasure as they may derive from the conduct of one of their public ethnic enjoyments … I have attended various cock fights in both Latin America and the Philippines, and as with vodka, while I have not been enthused, neither have I been repelled. The birds lay into each other with unaffected enthusiasm. The end they suffer in the ring would seem preferable to that which they would otherwise suffer in the barnyard.”

In Vol. 4, No. 9 of Jeff Cooper’s Commentaries published in August 1996, Cooper wrote, “It turns out that a number of governments in the world manifest considerable distress at the idea of large amounts of ammunition in private hands. They insist that any man who stockpiles thousands of rounds must have some sinister and ulterior purpose which should be investigated by the state. Here we have yet another example of the thought control characteristic of the Age of the Common Man. Many on the left seem to hold that one may be punished not for what he does, but for what he thinks−as with what have come to be called ‘hate crimes.’ In this age of thought−control, various sorts of busybodies, in and out of government, feel the need to arrange your thinking for you. In this matter of ammunition, I personally like to keep a large supply on hand, not for any specific purpose, but simply because it makes me feel good … As you know, there are people such as [Democratic] Senator [Patrick] Moynihan who feel that the subtle way to disarm the people is to cut off the supply of ammunition. We hope that such people do not prevail, but it does not hurt to be prepared for unpleasant eventualities−thus we have seatbelts, crash helmets, life jackets, and pistols.”

In Vol. 4, No. 1 of Jeff Cooper’s Commentaries published in January 1996, Cooper wrote, “Reluctant as we may be to compliment a dictator who prefers to be addressed as ‘Comrade,’ we are compelled to do so in the case of Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe. He officially refers to homosexuals as ‘perverts who do not deserve civil rights.’ In his words, ‘Let the Americans keep their sodomy, bestiality, stupid and foolish ways to themselves. Let the gays be−gay−in the United States and Europe, but they shall be sad people here.’ How about that?”

In Vol. 2, No. 8 of Jeff Cooper’s Commentaries published in July 1994, Cooper wrote, “An informal poll conducted in the area of Harare (ex−Salisbury, Rhodesia) indicates that the great majority want Ian Smith back in place of Robert Mugaby. If Mugaby finds out about this, Mr. Smith's head rests very lightly on his shoulders.” Ian Smith was the white supremacist leader of Rhodesia who enforced white minority rule of the nation until 1980. Robert Mugabe became president when the country declared independence from the British and became Zimbabwe. Cooper also described a business deal gone sour involving the sale of Gunsite, his firearms training facility, as “the great lynch party of April Fool 1993.” Turning to the topic of the Vietnam War, Cooper described Vietnamese as “slant−eyed little fiends.” He then added that, “If Nicole Simpson had studied at Gunsite she would now be a wealthy widow.” Simpson was murdered in 1994 and her ex-husband former NFL star O.J. Simpson was eventually acquitted after being charged in connection with her death. Cooper then recommended that his readers purchase “Racism, Guilt and Self−Deceit" by M. Gedahlia Braun, stating “His work, which is very carefully researched and irreproachably objective, is not politically correct, which may be its strongest recommendation.” In the book’s forward, Braun writes, “It was obvious to [black Africans] that whites were ‘cleverer’ and they made no bones about it. It is whites who feel guilty about this and blame themselves for black failure. Shrewd blacks use this ‘guilt’ to blackmail, browbeat and bamboozle whites. This sham anger is a principal weapon of psychological warfare. It is used by women against men, blacks against whites, homosexuals against straights and islam [sic] against the West—though always with the help of the (alleged) wrong-doers … Blacks are deficient in abstract thinking and this leads to moral blindness … Blacks’ difficulty in thinking of the future explains, e.g., their high rate of criminality and HIV.”

[sarisataka]

31. You have been busy

To hit a couple of points:

Vol. 9, No. 8 of Jeff Cooper’s Commentaries published in August 2001, Cooper wrote, “I am told by ‘new soldiers,’ even Marines, that what once was considered normal disciplinary procedure is today held to be legally reprehensible. During my own tour as company commander I never once sent a man before a court. I didn't need to. I had sergeants. How today's captains proceed without sergeants is beyond me. But how to proceed with perverts and girl warriors is also beyond me.”

If you are prior military, the first part makes perfect sense.
As for perverts, the rank and file has come to terms with serving along side homosexuals more than several years ago. It has taken longer for the older leadership to accept it.
Women in combat is a very complex issue and not for the reasons most think. That would be a whole other thread.

In Vol. 9, No. 5 of Jeff Cooper’s Commentaries published in May 2001, Cooper wrote, “There is no more American way of spending a snowy Wyoming morning than listening to Rush Limbaugh while loading ammunition. Our friend Rush sometimes gets a little overblown in his presentations, but certainly his heart is in the right place.” Limbaugh has been frequently criticized for his statements about minorities, women, and gays. Cooper added, “If the Chinese fighter pilot, Wang Wei, is an example of the breed, we take that as a good development. If Chinese fighter pilots are incapable of keeping distance in the air, it is nice to have them on the other side. Should we add the term ‘Chinese fighter pilot’ to what we used to call ‘a Chinese fire drill’? We should not get our hopes up, however. The rest of that crew may be more skillful.” Wang Wei was a Chinese pilot who died in a mid-air collision with a U.S. Navy aircraft in 2001. The accident caused an international dispute between the United States and China.

I listen to Rush as well sometimes but for totally different reasons. I find him to be a buffoon.

Pilot Wei collided with a US P3 while dangerously harrassing the US aircraft flying in international airspace. His collision and the subsequent impoundment of the aircraft by the Chinese could have been considered an act of war.

In Vol. 4, No. 9 of Jeff Cooper’s Commentaries published in August 1996, Cooper wrote, “It turns out that a number of governments in the world manifest considerable distress at the idea of large amounts of ammunition in private hands. They insist that any man who stockpiles thousands of rounds must have some sinister and ulterior purpose which should be investigated by the state. Here we have yet another example of the thought control characteristic of the Age of the Common Man. Many on the left seem to hold that one may be punished not for what he does, but for what he thinks−as with what have come to be called ‘hate crimes.’ In this age of thought−control, various sorts of busybodies, in and out of government, feel the need to arrange your thinking for you. In this matter of ammunition, I personally like to keep a large supply on hand, not for any specific purpose, but simply because it makes me feel good … As you know, there are people such as Senator Moynihan who feel that the subtle way to disarm the people is to cut off the supply of ammunition. We hope that such people do not prevail, but it does not hurt to be prepared for unpleasant eventualities−thus we have seatbelts, crash helmets, life jackets, and pistols.”

I strangely find myself in full agreement with Mr. Cooper on this. Why should there be an arbitrary limit on anything you wish to collect? Because you could, potentially, misuse the item in question?
I see no call to arms against the government. There is an implication that in the unlikely event of the government turning against the people, citizens should be prepared to resist. Bothe sides agree on the 2A allowing that. T. Jefferson and others advocated as such in their writings.


As for most of the rest... the 1A covers speech which is distasteful or even hateful.

[oneshooter]

27. WOW. It seems to be a common term in the medical community.

http://www.allaboutcounseling.com/library/hoplophobia/

So your problem is?

[provis99]

28. a self-help and life-coach blog is convincing evidence to you?

ok, bub.

[pipoman]

38. Just because you don't like it doesn't make it so..

I'm sure a fair amount of paranoid schizophrenics don't like that there is a name for their ailment either..

[provis99]

43. tell you what! I'll make up a word, too!

Foolimania! It must be a real word, because I said so!

Refudiate that!

Also try looking up hoplophobia in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. oh wait, it isn't there, because it is not a real thing! Jeff Cooper just made that shit up!

[pipoman]

44. It is a word made up by someone like every other

word in every language...you know what it means, you don't like it, and it pisses you off...that's it.

[provis99]

45. Foolimania!

you have foolimania! Now just because you don't get your way, doesn't mean you have to have an internet hissy fit.

[sarisataka]

56. foolimania

I like it.

Could you please give a definition; with your permission I would like to use it in the future.

[provis99]

46. since you like made up words, put strategery and refudiate in a sentence.

you can even put in foolimania!

[pipoman]

47. Look at yourself..

you are just full of anger about this...jus' type'in y'r fingers off.. Words become words when people use them. The word is in usage, people know what it means or can find out quickly.

Hoplophobia
About 62,600 results (0.19 seconds)

http://www.google.com/search?q=hoplophobia

Your search - foolimania - did not match any documents.

http://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en&tab=ww#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=foolimania

Let me know when you get like oh, what the hell..100 search results

[provis99]

58. I hope I didn't make you wet your panties in fear!!

I'm angry? projectionism is a real word; and you are guilty of it.

[pipoman]

61. Anyone reading this exchange can see who is angry and who is not..

I'll just leave it to the good judgement of other DUers.

[provis99]

60. refudiate: 189000 results

so is refudiate a word you accept is real? It got twice as many results! It must be twice as real to you!

[pipoman]

62. It is a word..

a new word which launched by news, critics, and people like you. When you wrote the word you had a definition of the word in your mind,,you maybe defined it as an infamous mispronunciation of the word 'repudiate'. Most people who read the word will immediately know what it means..it is no different than any new slang word. A slang word being either a made up word or a different usage of an existing word which isn't included in the dictionary definition. Nobody needs Mariam-Webster to tell us the meaning of slang words. I haven't said that hoplophobia is a medical term, you wish to define the word as meaningless, but you know full well what it means or we wouldn't be having this conversation.

[rl6214]

49. Refudiate? Did you make that one up too?

Or do you think you are sarah palin?

[provis99]

57. its a made up word, so you should like it eleventy times as much.

[rl6214]

40. How about Wiki, bub?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoplophobia

[provis99]

42. good lord. Now wikipedia is your source for medical terms???

You didn't even read the entry, did you? Especially the part where it say Jeff Cooper completely made it up, and it was probably a satiric joke on his part! Yet you think it's a real medical diagnosis?

[rl6214]

48. I think nothing of the sort, just posting a link

"Yet you think it's a real medical diagnosis? "

Do you always make things up? Besides that, most of the anti-gun zealots will readily link to Wiki to prove their points.

"Especially the part where it say Jeff Cooper completely made it up"

Aren't all words made up by someone? How many words are added to the main stream dictionary every year? I guess you don't recongnize those either?

[provis99]

59. you're really embarrassing yourself.

keep digging that hole. I want to see how far you go before you recognize your own foolishness.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

26. Obviously...

...the control freaks that need to take charge and micromanage everyone are fine. The 80,000,000 gun owners and the 10,000,000 or so that carry, they're the abnormal ones.

[rl6214]

35. So you've melted down your guns, right?

Maybe turned them in at the last police buy-back?

Of course you are part of the 1% that thinks guns should be for you but not for the unwashed masses, amirite there?

"And yes, I believe guns and bigotry are intertwined."

And you say you are a gun owner and we all know your opinions about certain types of people such as gun owners, people from the south, people from the country, anyone that opposes your opinion or views on guns...who else am I missing?

[rl6214]

34. Yeah, of course you skipped right over the part that said METHHEADS

[bluedigger]

6. That's not what I see.

The younger one had a revenge motive, no idea about the older one. Just racists.

[gateley]

8. I'm happy to hear it. I didn't know there was more than one. nt

[petronius]

9. Excellent news! I'm glad it was so quick... (nt)

[shadowrider]

17. So?

Two angry black kids (children some here would say) beat a 50 year old white guy with a hammer in Sanford, Fl. recently. (He isn't expected to live).

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-02/news/os-two-arrested-seminole-beating-20120402_1_victim-arrest-affidavits-crimeline

A recent picture of one of them (he's on the left, with a friend):


Now, why didn't this story get any traction yet the one in Tulsa did?

Neither one of these incidents are good in any way, shape or form and I despise the perps.

[Callisto32]

52. I love that the "banger" look almost always seems to consist of faux-hakama.

A style of skirt/pants that was originally conceived to make it difficult to run....

[provis99]

18. the suspects are Cherokee Indians.

but, your jump the gun racial slur is noted.

on edit: the youngest is Cherokee Indian, based on his now deleted Facebook page and mugshot. the older one appears be white from his picture.

[ObamaFTW2012]

19. I guess I was wrong

A Native American you say? That's the only group more screwed over by the US government than black people. I wonder why he did it.

[sarisataka]

22. So then it is ok

Since they come from a screwed over group?

Or are they angry native American redneck meth heads?

[slackmaster]

21. I'm glad they were caught. Why is this posted in Gun Control & RKBA?

[ileus]

23. didn't they realize guns kill people?

[AtheistCrusader]

53. If these people are behind it, I'm glad they are the hell off the street.

What an awful crime.