Skip to comments.Dershowitz: "Racist And Bigoted To Say That Guns Are Quintessentially American" (video)
Posted on 01/07/2013 8:54:13 PM PST by i88schwartz
ALAN DERSHOWITZ: I don't think it's the NRA power. I think it's people like us, not the two of us, but Americans who care about guns aren't doing enough to make our case to the public.
Because we think it's their issue. We've given that issue over to them because they have lobbyists they pay money. But in the end, the people determine the outcome. And it's wrong, and it's racist and it's bigoted to say that guns are quintessentially American. They may represent a part of America, but my grandparents who came over from poland and live in Brooklyn, New York, are just as much Americans --people who came over from Ireland, people who came over from Italy -- we're just as much Americans. We live on the coast and we have a right to define the America we want to live in and we have the obligation to win politically, to vote for people to put gun control as a high priority.
They put it as a number one priority. We who favor gun control put it as a 16th or 17th priority. So it's our fault, not the NRA's fault.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
ALAN DERSHOWITZ thinks George Zimmerman is innocent.
“we have a right to define the America we want to live in and we have the obligation to win politically, to vote for people to put gun control as a high priority.”
Does this 0.o anybody but me? That’s called infiltration- & maybe a reach, but to some extent, subversion, too. Professor Dershowitz has the same opportunity (& probably far greater means, too) his parents had to move to a country that is more agreeable to him. It isn’t like there aren’t any suitable alternatives. He grew up here. Why doesn’t he love America that has been good to him?
Mexican nationals invading the US & Muslims invading Europe come to mind because they are obsessed with changing those countries into what *they* want & damn the citizens. They don’t want to assimilate. They want to take over.
(This is the part of ‘spreading democracy’ that I think gets us into trouble. It inherently opens the door to those who think that turnabout is fair play. And that’s hard to argue. It’s different than defense against being attacked or threatened)
That is the only sense he’s made in fifty years.
If you don't like that then eat it, asshat!
Alan, were it not for free men with guns, your whole family would have gone into the ovens, and they would have been put there by a government in the same position you wish to place ours in. What don’t you get?
"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (emphasis supplied).
For Americans of that era, the effectiveness of a well-armed populace as an essential guarantee of freedom was a self-evident lesson of the Revolution. Without the American people being armed, there could not have been a Revolution, or at least not a successful one.
As it was, the lack of a Bill of Rights was a potent criticism by opponents of the proposed Constitution, with a guarantee of the right to keep and bear arms frequently cited as needed. To secure ratification, leading advocates agree to offer a bill of rights in the first Congress under the Constitution.
As proposed and adopted, the bill of rights therefore included a guarantee of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. In that manner, Madison's reasoning and popular opinion of the time was incorporated into the bill of rights.
I can!....He thinks he's exempt!....lol..and the world wonders why the poor Jews get picked on???
(for a small fee...Alan can help us!!.../s..)
I’m not - nor will I be - a 30’s era, Jewish Berliner.
Come for my gun, you’ll get a bullet. It’s really that simple.
Firearms wouldn’t have hurt the Jews in Germany and Poland in the 30s/40s, either. I don’t get Alan’s incredibly short-sighted thinking.
Unfortunately Dipshitowitz is the model for anti-Jewish rhetoric.
I notice with the libs, it’s [what we hate insert here] is racist!!! I mean, they would probably call Dr. Martin Luther King a racist if he were still alive.
Douchebag shoulda stayed in Poland
There it is again: people “who live on the coast(s)” who want to “define” America.
“I think it’s people like us, not the two of us, but Americans who care about guns” are exactly those who spend their money to have and keep them.
Another point that Dershowitz is willfully ignorant on is the original basis for gun control in this country. The gun control movement was specifically started with the intent of keeping free blacks defenseless from attacks by whites. I challenge Dershowitz to site examples of post-Civil War laws which were passed with a more racist intent than gun control laws were. Nothing approaches it - not segregation, not Jim Crow laws, not even anti-miscegenation laws. Simply put, nothing is as disgraceful as the attempt to disarm fellow citizens from defending themselves. A son of Jewish emigrants from Poland should know this better than most.
Alan, with all due respect. Nobody MAKES you own a Gun, unless you live in Switzerland.
Somebody needs to sneak up behind Dershowitz and yell “Hackenholt Foundation!”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.