DOJ overrules FBI on gun sales debate, says no-fly list can be used for ban [W65]

[Beaudreaux]

I conflated two issues... my bad.

No problem. It happens to me as well.

Using the list to deny the purchase of guns is Unconstitutional. I agree.

If the government does not want that individual to buy a gun then they need to prove a case. New laws and procedures are needed. Patchwork bandaids on existing laws in an effort to keep an investigation going will not work.

On that we can agree.

 

[Bodi]

But, you want to take the checks off the government? Do you understand how you massively contradicted yourself?

Like I said, I conflated two issues. I was thinking about the "list" itself as being good. Not allowing them to buy a gun is good too... EXCEPT, the government has proven nothing that would lead that individual (terorist in this case) to be denied certain rights. The government needs to make and prove a case. Not just have a list.

 

[Beaudreaux]

The law.

And, lots of ammunition.

 

[Goshin]

That sounds like a good start.

As for letting them know they're on the list, if they try to fly somewhere, they'll find out. You're just on a list. It doesn't mean you're necessarily being investigated at that time. Besides, they know they're being watched.

The problem is nobody knows how you get on the list.


A bunch of TSA employees are on it. Ted Kennedy was supposedly on it at one time. Already, a lot of people who are not actual terrorists are on the list.


Given a discretionary ability to put people on a secret list for secret reasons with no legal recourse which removes their rights... you can't possibly be for that. The potential for abuse is incredible.

 

[Groogrux]

What's to stop the government from taking your rights after you've surrendered them? Are we supposed to trust the government not to do something stupid?

I think we can trust the government to limit potential terrorists access to guns. You're slippery slope argument is pretty weak since you're comparing apples to oranges.

 

[Beaudreaux]

I think we can trust the government to limit potential terrorists access to guns. You're slippery slope argument is pretty weak since you're comparing apples to oranges.

To do what you trust them to do, you also have to allow them to ignore numerous other Constitutional rights to get there. Do you really want the government deciding who is and who is not protected by the US Constitution?

 

[Deuce]

The fact that those of us who care about rights actually fight for them instead of believing people like you.

What the **** have you ever fought against?

The law.

So what does "surrendering rights" have to do with anything? The law protects us.

 

[Deuce]

I think we can trust the government to limit potential terrorists access to guns. You're slippery slope argument is pretty weak since you're comparing apples to oranges.

I don't agree that we can trust the government with extrajudicial secret lists that have no appeals process.

 

[apdst]

Not really. There are many Republican lawmakers that are also in favor of this madness.

A more accurate description would not be Democrats or Republicans, but rather Progressives that feel the US Constitution is an impediment to their gaining complete control of our lives.

That's what surprises me about the Libbos going for this. Their racialist paranoia must dictate that republicans will use this to revoke voting privileges of black folks.

 

[Deuce]

That's what surprises me about the Libbos going for this. Their racialist paranoia must dictate that republicans will use this to revoke voting privileges of black folks.

His hate is getting so strong his posts are just becoming gibberish. poor fellow.

 

[apdst]

I think we can trust the government to limit potential terrorists access to guns. You're slippery slope argument is pretty weak since you're comparing apples to oranges.

Define, "potential terrorists". What constitutes a, "potential terrorist"?

 

[JackA]

So what other rights do you want to suspect based on this list?

how about, if you're on the list you can be executed without trial and no appeals allowed until you're off the list?

Nothing like a calmly reasoned reply.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

That sounds like a good start.

As for letting them know they're on the list, if they try to fly somewhere, they'll find out. You're just on a list. It doesn't mean you're necessarily being investigated at that time. Besides, they know they're being watched.

By all means if they don't know they're being investigated then lets make sure they find out. I'll bet you're not one for having the government record information from your cell phone or computer though are you?

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

The insanity is to let a possible terrorist suspect legally buy an AR-15. Others' right to live trumps a possible terrorist's right to buy a new gun. They have guns already, you know. Most of them also know they're being watched. Just knowing that they might not be able to buy an assault weapon might stop the attempt. It's worth trying, in order to have an extra level of safety.

How will you fell when you end up on that list and there's no recourse to get off? Don't think it can't happen. It already has to some unsuspecting and innocent people on no-fly lists.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

I mean, I have heard some pretty dumb things by anti-gunners but this argument by pro-gunners takes the cake for straight up stupid.

Angry becuase potential and probable terrorists on terrorist watch lists can't by guns to go and kill innocent people? What in the ****?

:roll:

Valuing civil rights not a big deal in New Zealand?

The Orlando Islamic terrorist gave plenty of opportunity for arrests to be made and nothing happened. Just look at all the people coming out of the closet, so to speak, after the killings occurred with multiple "stories" about his madness and anger.

 

[HenryChinaski]

Gun fetishists crack me up. They probably jack off to Charlton Heston giving Speeches for the NRA on YouTube. And probably can't take a **** or **** without a gun in their hand.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

Putting people on a watch list without due process is good?

What's the criteria for getting on a watch list?

Shouldn't congress be involved in determining and agreeing on that instead of jumping into "lets put them on a watch list and arbitrarily rescind their civil rights."

And the left thinks conservatives are knee jerk.

 

[Goshin]

Moderator's Warning:

Baiting, flaming and trolling will result in infractions. Keep it substantive, post relevant content please. Do not respond to trolling, report it.

 

[Μολὼν λαβέ]

A friend of mine is hard for the Trumpster. He's a gun ho, pro America, Pro guns, pro rights guy... well he was. Now he's all "well if it keeps us safe..."

Have you reminded him about Ben Franklin's thoughts on that subject?

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

 

[Roadvirus]

Stopping the sale of guns to those on FBI Terrorist Watch Lists... is bad?

There was this incident in Florida last week at a night club that you might want to read up on...

The list is flawed. Ted Kennedy was on it at one point.

Speaking of reading up on things

 

[ludin]

The insanity is to let a possible terrorist suspect legally buy an AR-15. Others' right to live trumps a possible terrorist's right to buy a new gun. They have guns already, you know. Most of them also know they're being watched. Just knowing that they might not be able to buy an assault weapon might stop the attempt. It's worth trying, in order to have an extra level of safety.

prove they are a terrorist and charge them with terrorism.
you don't get to suspend people's rights on mere accusations.

if that was the case then no one would be running for president or able to.
many many people would find themselves in jail.

 

[ludin]

Nothing like a calmly reasoned reply.

so you agree with throwing out peoples rights on simple accusations without evidence or
trial?

hmmmm yea I think that is exactly why we have a constitution.

 

[apdst]

His hate is getting so strong his posts are just becoming gibberish. poor fellow.

A perfect example of liberals hurling insults, because their arguments fall apart.

 

[apdst]

What the **** have you ever fought against?



So what does "surrendering rights" have to do with anything? The law protects us.

Obama is making sure those days are over

 

[apdst]

What's the criteria for getting on a watch list?

Shouldn't congress be involved in determining and agreeing on that instead of jumping into "lets put them on a watch list and arbitrarily rescind their civil rights."

And the left thinks conservatives are knee jerk.

That's the problem...no one can tell us what the criteria is.