Skip to comments.EEOC's claim that background checks are racist must also apply to guns
Posted on 07/08/2013 8:36:59 AM PDT by 2nd amendment mama
Lawsuits filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission against BMW and Dollar General claim that conducting criminal background checks on applicants and employees is racist, Emily Miller reported 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 administrations 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 EEOCs 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 isnt the first time the administrations 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
You just have to love Emily Miller.
This isnt the first time the administrations position on guns and its position on what it portrays as civil rights have directly conflicted.
I'm sure it won't be the last, either; conversely, I have to wonder how realistic it is to expect consistency from the feral government. It wants what it wants, and it wants it right now, and if it doesn't get it, it's going to have a temper tantrum.
In full seriousness: I believe the feral government has declared its independence from us, the people.
It’s beating a dead horse to say so, but this country has gone stark staring mad. Why in the name of common sense would anyone expect employers to hire people with criminal records to deal with their money? If this impacts any group disparately, then the solution is for that group to get their act together. But no, not in the United States of Affirmative Action. Instead employers are expected to take the risks upon themselves and hire felons to handle their money, and thereby risk their business, and the jobs of the honest employees.
A patently logical argument.
Hmmmm.....I may to have re-think my opposition to background checks.
gun purchases shouldn’t be regulated at all...
Armed neighbors iz good neighbors...
It isn’t just about managing money.
It’s also about managing risk.
Employers have been sued for not providing a safe work environment and hiring a whacko or violent offender should be a red flag.
Absolutely!!! She’s a definite champion.
Yes, that too. Many common sense reasons. But common sense is a despised quality these days.
Based on the fact that almost all DoD and DoE jobs require background checks, ask a Federal Judge to dismiss the case as baseless.
They accused banks of discrimination because they performed credit checks on anyone applying for a loan and minorities were more likely to have bad credit. Forcing banks to give loans to people that were not creditworthy contributed to the housing bubble.
Guess no one bothered suggesting to black males not to commit crimes.
We absolutely must love Emily Miller. FYI, Free Republic's loveable Enterprise raised the same issue on June 22nd:
"I want the liberals to answer this question then. If background checks for purchases of guns and concealed weapons permits are run on blacks, is that also discriminatory?"
I see a problem in that it’s not illegal to work if you are a felon.
It is illegal to purchase a firearm
You are correct...but...
You cannot reason someone out of a position that they did not use reason to get into in the first place. - Alexander Pope
“I see a problem in that its not illegal to work if you are a felon.
It is illegal to purchase a firearm”
Agreed. But then the argument falls back to: ‘It’s illegal for a felon to purchase a firearm’ is discriminatory against blacks.
Blacks commit the majority of crimes and are jailed for it but then don't want the consequences. Tough.
I guess you got me there. True.
Your Post is correct of course.
What they are admitting is that blacks would not be hired anywhere if not for affirmative action and forced actions by Government.
The question is why? Is there a reason?
Why do we need affirmative Action?
I believe we all know the reason and it isn’t because of discrimination.
It is because of a record of showing up late, not knowledgeable, too much sick time, too many grandmothers dying and they don’t show up for work, productivity lapses, sloppy performance, poor showings on skill tests, whining.
Once hired an impossibility to get rid of the loads.
Bring forth a man/woman with job skills good performance, a good attitude, and they are in demand. No matter what their color.
Exactly. All those reasons, added to the threat of being sued if an employer fires a black person for the most legitimate reasons. Who would want that hanging over their head so that they couldn’t rid themselves of a bad employee?
So employers are caught in a bind as a result of this blackmail. Forced to hire minority employees who may not be equal to the task, and unable to get rid of them when that turns out to be the case.
How about "drive a car"? The states have been forced to add biometric information to their drivers licenses and are well on their way to a standardized format complete with RF-ID readout. Sounds like just the thing for voter ID to me...
Ihre papiere bitte...
I’m just the messenger....I certainly don’t have all the answers to your suggestions/questions. That’s why I haven’t responded to each post individually. Just want you all to know I’m not posting and running.....LOL
Why did this get moved to bloggers and personal? Since when is Examiner.com a blog?