Cebu_4_2
8th July 2013, 02:28 PM
EEOC's claim that background checks are racist must also apply to guns
http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/01/30701-004-4884AF17.jpg
If criminal background checks are discriminatory, and requiring photo IDs is discriminatory, why isn't EEOC Chair Jacqueline A. Berrien weighing in on mandating both to buy guns?
Credits:
Employment Opportunity Commission
Lawsuits filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (http://www.examiner.com/topic/equal-employment-opportunity-commission) against BMW and Dollar General claim that conducting criminal background checks on applicants and employees is racist (http://www.examiner.com/topic/racist), Emily Miller reported (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jul/2/now-its-racist-to-pass-on-hiring-ex-cons/) last Tuesday in The Washington Times.
“Businesses are fighting the charge that not wanting ex-cons on the payroll is illegal discrimination,” Miller writes. “The agency claims that the companies disproportionately screened out black Americans when they fired or did not hire those with criminal records.”
The administration’s assertions raise a paradoxical logical conflict, as it is also pushing for “universal background checks” to purchase guns. An appropriate syllogism, assuming one buys into the EEOC (http://www.examiner.com/topic/eeoc)’s contention, might be that criminal background checks result in unlawful discrimination against minorities, universal background checks are being demanded for all gun purchases, and therefore universal background checks will unlawfully discriminate against the ability of minorities to exercise their right to keep and bear arms.
This isn’t the first time the administration’s position on guns and its position on what it portrays as “civil rights” have directly conflicted. Its opposition to requiring government-issued photo identification to vote on the grounds that it disenfranchises minorities from exercising their rights, if true, must also apply to requiring a photo ID to purchase a gun (http://www.examiner.com/article/holder-position-on-voter-id-exposes-racial-discrimination-against-gun-ownership).
If criminal background checks and requiring photo IDs really do produce unlawfully discriminatory rights-denying results, the inescapable conclusion is agents of the government are willfully, with premeditation, engaged in a criminal conspiracy to disenfranchise minorities from their right to keep and bear arms. On two different fronts.
The administration can’t have it both ways.
Or maybe they can, and they’re counting on a supportive judicial, political and media axis to let them get away with both wealth-redistributing extortion and citizen disarmament.
“Heads we win, tails you lose.”
http://media-2.web.britannica.com/eb-media/01/30701-004-4884AF17.jpg
If criminal background checks are discriminatory, and requiring photo IDs is discriminatory, why isn't EEOC Chair Jacqueline A. Berrien weighing in on mandating both to buy guns?
Credits:
Employment Opportunity Commission
Lawsuits filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (http://www.examiner.com/topic/equal-employment-opportunity-commission) against BMW and Dollar General claim that conducting criminal background checks on applicants and employees is racist (http://www.examiner.com/topic/racist), Emily Miller reported (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jul/2/now-its-racist-to-pass-on-hiring-ex-cons/) last Tuesday in The Washington Times.
“Businesses are fighting the charge that not wanting ex-cons on the payroll is illegal discrimination,” Miller writes. “The agency claims that the companies disproportionately screened out black Americans when they fired or did not hire those with criminal records.”
The administration’s assertions raise a paradoxical logical conflict, as it is also pushing for “universal background checks” to purchase guns. An appropriate syllogism, assuming one buys into the EEOC (http://www.examiner.com/topic/eeoc)’s contention, might be that criminal background checks result in unlawful discrimination against minorities, universal background checks are being demanded for all gun purchases, and therefore universal background checks will unlawfully discriminate against the ability of minorities to exercise their right to keep and bear arms.
This isn’t the first time the administration’s position on guns and its position on what it portrays as “civil rights” have directly conflicted. Its opposition to requiring government-issued photo identification to vote on the grounds that it disenfranchises minorities from exercising their rights, if true, must also apply to requiring a photo ID to purchase a gun (http://www.examiner.com/article/holder-position-on-voter-id-exposes-racial-discrimination-against-gun-ownership).
If criminal background checks and requiring photo IDs really do produce unlawfully discriminatory rights-denying results, the inescapable conclusion is agents of the government are willfully, with premeditation, engaged in a criminal conspiracy to disenfranchise minorities from their right to keep and bear arms. On two different fronts.
The administration can’t have it both ways.
Or maybe they can, and they’re counting on a supportive judicial, political and media axis to let them get away with both wealth-redistributing extortion and citizen disarmament.
“Heads we win, tails you lose.”