Racist homeowners refuse to sell to black couple

[Bruno]

Since racism is personal belief, could I protest outside a commie professor's home because I don't like his beliefs?

Why wouldn't you be able to?

 

[Acala]

Hmmm

Fair enough, as long as I get to shoot at the drivers. Of course I'm assuming Alex meant protesting on the sidewalk and not the road. If you allowed drivers to go up on your sidewalk just to run over protesters, what happens when they run over some innocent bystander?

My road becomes less popular and I go out of business? Or maybe my road becomes MORE popular but my sidewalks become less popular and I have to drop that line of business.

 

[wizardwatson]

Because they like the house?

My point is, if I found out that so-and-so's store doesn't want to sell to white people, I wouldn't shop there and I'd probably let as many people know about it as I could.

 

[libertybrewcity]

WTF I thought people here are about free association? I guess it would be okay for someone to protest outside a homosexual's home because he don't like their lifestyle choice. Oh, wait, that goes against cultural marxism, so he is actually a bad person. Plenty here are still trapped inside the marxist way of thinking.

Yea, think what you want, but if you are openly racist you can go to hell. That is not someone I want to be around, and if you don't want to sell your house to a black family, well, I am going to speak out against it.

I said nothing about government control so you can stop your Marxist scare tactic bull crap.

 

[jmdrake]

My road becomes less popular and I go out of business? Or maybe my road becomes MORE popular but my sidewalks become less popular and I have to drop that line of business.

Does the innocent bystander get to sue you for operating a clearly unsafe sidewalk and violating his property rights? (his body)

 

[jmdrake]

My point is, if I found out that so-and-so's store doesn't want to sell to white people, I wouldn't shop there and I'd probably let as many people know about it as I could.

Sure. And once upon a time the overwhelming majority of stores in certain areas wouldn't serve black people or only gave them service in degrading ways. And one way to deal with that certainly is a boycott. (As well as protesting which some people oddly feel is "violating rights" ). But probably the ultimate goal would be that whoever this store owner was either changed his ways or ended up losing so much money that he had to sell. In which case you could by from the store again. Same end goal as the folks who call in the big bad feds. Different methodology. Many of the Woolworth's lunch counters had desegregated due to public pressure alone. Folks didn't then say "Ah man! Woolworth's didn't used to serve us. Let's not eat there now that they will."

 

[Acala]

Nope

Does the innocent bystander get to sue you for operating a clearly unsafe sidewalk and violating his property rights? (his body)

Nope. He signed a contract when I agreed to let him use my sidewalk. He specifically accepted the risk of being run over and agreed not to sue. In a free market the courts would enforce the agreement, unlike the nanny state courts of today.

 

[Elwar]

I do believe that the homeowners were looking out for the best interest of the black couple since the Federal government is giving out housing assistance to blacks...

http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/30-00030-000-line-up-589653.html

 

[WaltM]

that's RETARDED.

I can see if you don't want to rent to certain people, as it would still be your responsibility to maintain, repair later.

But why the HELL would you care who buys it as long as they pay what you want?

Did you promise your dead parents otherwise? Or do you sense that your neighborhood is owed a right to stay a certain percentage a certain skin color?

Either way, sell them the house, let them take the trouble should the neighborhood chose to harass or expel them.

 

[Acala]

Yup

Sure. And once upon a time the overwhelming majority of stores in certain areas wouldn't serve black people or only gave them service in degrading ways. And one way to deal with that certainly is a boycott. (As well as protesting which some people oddly feel is "violating rights" ). But probably the ultimate goal would be that whoever this store owner was either changed his ways or ended up losing so much money that he had to sell. In which case you could by from the store again. Same end goal as the folks who call in the big bad feds. Different methodology. Many of the Woolworth's lunch counters had desegregated due to public pressure alone. Folks didn't then say "Ah man! Woolworth's didn't used to serve us. Let's not eat there now that they will."

The market punishes racism. Consider this:

One of the main functions of the Klan was to intimidate WHITE business owners to not serve blacks. The market inexorably pushes toward rational behavior and punishes ignorance and irrational behavior. The market rewards businesses that cater to customers and punishes businesses that do not. A business that excludes customers for irrational reasons - like skin color - will not be able to compete with businesses that act rationally. Now absent the use of force - by the Klan and by the government - there would probably have been businesses that would have catered to racists by excluding blacks. But over time they would have been eroded and finally have died out after several generations were exposed to the subtle integrative force of the market.

Another example:

In South Africa the apartheid laws were needed by racists to prevent WHITES from hiring blacks or selling them homes. Once again, the racists needed force to counteract the anti-racist pressure of the market.

The free market is relentlessly anti-racist.

 

[WhiteHaven]

Typical anti white racism. Refuse to sell to blacks yer a racist! Fucking bs. I can't stand the government.Its their own damn choice if they don't want to sell to those 2 whiners they couldn't find a suitable home for themselves and their kids so they took it off the market end of story. If they didn't want to sell to blacks they would have never let them make an offer or they would have said no to their offer.

 

[Acala]

once upon a time

that's RETARDED.

I can see if you don't want to rent to certain people, as it would still be your responsibility to maintain, repair later.

But why the HELL would you care who buys it as long as they pay what you want?

Did you promise your dead parents otherwise? Or do you sense that your neighborhood is owed a right to stay a certain percentage a certain skin color?

Either way, sell them the house, let them take the trouble should the neighborhood chose to harass or expel them.

Once upon a time in some parts of this country in some neighborhoods it was considered a despicable thing to sell your house to someone not of the predominant neighborhood race.

 

[libertybrewcity]

The market punishes racism. Consider this:

One of the main functions of the Klan was to intimidate WHITE business owners to not serve blacks. The market inexorably pushes toward rational behavior and punishes ignorance and irrational behavior. The market rewards businesses that cater to customers and punishes businesses that do not. A business that excludes customers for irrational reasons - like skin color - will not be able to compete with businesses that act rationally. Now absent the use of force - by the Klan and by the government - there would probably have been businesses that would have catered to racists by excluding blacks. But over time they would have been eroded and finally have died out after several generations were exposed to the subtle integrative force of the market.

Another example:

In South Africa the apartheid laws were needed by racists to prevent WHITES from hiring blacks or selling them homes. Once again, the racists needed force to counteract the anti-racist pressure of the market.

The free market is relentlessly anti-racist.

only if there are enough anti-racist people to work through the free market to change the way racist people can do business.

 

[WaltM]

Why would a black couple want to buy anything from a racist against blacks?

the same reason they want to live in a country where people are racist, and work in a place where racists own it, they have no choice and some things are more important.

some just like to make it a big deal, some thing their pride is a right, some know that "stiffing" by not buying isn't helping themselves.

 

[WaltM]

Once upon a time in some parts of this country in some neighborhoods it was considered a despicable thing to sell your house to someone not of the predominant neighborhood race.

it's still probably true in some places, so what?

the seller can't be held accountable after they're gone, and the buyer will have to deal with the unwelcoming neighbors.

 

[Brooklyn Red Leg]

That said the constitution says nothing about freedom of association. (Read it front to back. It's not there).

Quite untrue. Our rights are Unlimited and Freedom of Association is one of them. Learn, grasshoppa:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

- 9th Amendment to the US Constitution

 

[WaltM]

Typical anti white racism. Refuse to sell to blacks yer a racist! Fucking bs. I can't stand the government.Its their own damn choice if they don't want to sell to those 2 whiners they couldn't find a suitable home for themselves and their kids so they took it off the market end of story. If they didn't want to sell to blacks they would have never let them make an offer or they would have said no to their offer.

and what if they find out later that lower offers are considered?

you can't hide that for much long, you can discriminate on price, and keep changing your mind, just don't get caught so obvious about it.

 

[MelissaWV]

In this market, they can afford to be this picky? *shrugs* It's going to bite them in the ass, to be sure, but I whole-heartedly support their right to transact business with "whites only" if they want to.

As far as protesting, if the protest or anything associated with it is infringing on the homeowners or their neighbors, it's not cool. If I say I'm not selling my house to anyone over the age of 40, and a bunch of old folks (and middle aged, for that matter) show up on my lawn, they're still trespassing. If they're "only" on the sidewalk and yelling and wandering around and making it next to impossible to use the sidewalk and driveways, that's a problem, too. Now, if my neighbor is upset by my not selling my house to a qualified "black couple," then that neighbor can volunteer their property to stage a protest, or even put up a big sign with an arrow pointing at my house that says "RACISTS" or something along those lines. Would they be wrong?

None of this should be enforced by law. That's moronic in so many ways it's hard to keep count.

 

[WaltM]

Well the constitution guarantees freedom to peaceably assemble

It does? Where and how?

, which means constitutionally speaking people have a right to protest these racists.

what are the limits of protesting?

That said the constitution says nothing about freedom of association.

it also says nothing about raping women, molesting children, or privacy.

(Read it front to back. It's not there).

I did, didn't see it, you're right.

It's good to know I'm not the only person who believes a person only has rights that are Stated in the 210 year old piece of paper, and no more.

On the flipside the constitution says nothing about the federal government having any role in what is in fact intrastate commerce. If a state wanted to pass a law to punish people like this, the constitution neither requires nor forbids that. That said.....

So if a State wanted to pass a law forbidding ownership of property, the federal government cannot protect property under its own definitions?

 

[Acala]

No

only if there are enough anti-racist people to work through the free market to change the way racist people can do business.

Not true.

Say you and I operate competing restaurants and you exclude blacks and I don't. My guaranteed customer base consists of all blacks and all whites who oppose racism. Your guaranteed customer base consists only of hard-core racists. We compete for those who don't care one way or the other. Unless hard-core racists outnumber all blacks and all anti-racists, I win. The market will bless my business and slowly rot yours. And every day my business operates, it spreads racial tolerance. This is exactly why the Klan had to prevent racial integration.