• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

MickeyW

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
14,012
Reaction score
3,439
Location
Southern Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Attorney General Loretta Lynch overruled FBI Director James B. Comey on Thursday, saying the Obama administration does support denying firearms sales to those on terrorist watch lists and that it can be done without harming investigations.

Mr. Comey last year had told Congress that denying sales could “blow” his agents’ investigations into potential terrorists. But his superiors at the Justice Department issued a statement Thursday saying they want to see Congress approve the “no-fly, no-buy” plan Democrats are pursuing.
DOJ overrules FBI on gun sales debate, says no-fly list can be used for ban - Washington Times
 

MickeyW

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
14,012
Reaction score
3,439
Location
Southern Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Now lots of folks will be fine with this, until they come for you .......because someone's bogus claim that you should be placed on a watch list, w/o your knowledge. ;)

Loretta Lynch is as corrupt as obama is......no integrity whatsoever, except to her liberal agenda.

Just like Holder.

Just like Janet Reno.
 

Chomsky

Social Democrat
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2015
Messages
58,777
Reaction score
45,609
Location
Third Coast
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Attorney General Loretta Lynch overruled FBI Director James B. Comey on Thursday, saying the Obama administration does support denying firearms sales to those on terrorist watch lists and that it can be done without harming investigations.

Mr. Comey last year had told Congress that denying sales could “blow” his agents’ investigations into potential terrorists. But his superiors at the Justice Department issued a statement Thursday saying they want to see Congress approve the “no-fly, no-buy” plan Democrats are pursuing.
DOJ overrules FBI on gun sales debate, says no-fly list can be used for ban - Washington Times

Now lots of folks will be fine with this, until they come for you .......because someone's bogus claim that you should be placed on a watch list, w/o your knowledge. ;)

Loretta Lynch is as corrupt as obama is......no integrity whatsoever, except to her liberal agenda.

Just like Holder.

Just like Janet Reno.
I'm torn on this one Mickey, because the situation is beyond out-of-control, yet I firmly believe only a judge at a proper due process hearing should make decisions of this nature - NOT an administrator!

But my personal feelings aside, I do think the politics may be becoming in line to move in this direction (no new guns for no-flys & terror watch listed).

I have no idea how the Court would rule on this, but I suspect it would overturn.

These issues really need to be put before judges while invoking full due process.
 

ludin

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
57,470
Reaction score
14,585
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I'm torn on this one Mickey, because the situation is beyond out-of-control, yet I firmly believe only a judge at a proper due process hearing should make decisions of this nature - NOT an administrator!

But my personal feelings aside, I do think the politics may be becoming in line to move in this direction (no new guns for no-flys & terror watch listed).

I have no idea how the Court would rule on this, but I suspect it would overturn.

These issues really need to be put before judges while invoking full due process.

the courts would have no choice to rule it unconstitutional.
unless the person can defend themselves to get them off the list.

that is the problem the list itself should be unconstitutional for any US citizen as they have
no way of knowing or proving that they are on the list or have any way to defend themselves.

the list is technically a violation of due process.

however spending peoples rights over unproven accusations without defense is about as despotic as you get.
 

MickeyW

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
14,012
Reaction score
3,439
Location
Southern Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
for the record, banning guns does not prevent shootings.

Jo Cox MP dead after shooting attack - BBC News

You got it!

I'm torn on this one Mickey, because the situation is beyond out-of-control, yet I firmly believe only a judge at a proper due process hearing should make decisions of this nature - NOT an administrator!

But my personal feelings aside, I do think the politics may be becoming in line to move in this direction (no new guns for no-flys & terror watch listed).

I have no idea how the Court would rule on this, but I suspect it would overturn.

These issues really need to be put before judges while invoking full due process.

I agree.

the courts would have no choice to rule it unconstitutional.
unless the person can defend themselves to get them off the list.

that is the problem the list itself should be unconstitutional for any US citizen as they have
no way of knowing or proving that they are on the list or have any way to defend themselves.

the list is technically a violation of due process.

however spending peoples rights over unproven accusations without defense is about as despotic as you get.

Big time violation. Homeland is a very bad deal and should have never been developed.
 

ludin

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
57,470
Reaction score
14,585
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
You got it!



I agree.



Big time violation. Homeland is a very bad deal and should have never been developed.

I have no issue with homeland as long as they are operating within the guidelines of the constitution.
 

SocialD

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2015
Messages
2,467
Reaction score
716
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I have no issue with homeland as long as they are operating within the guidelines of the constitution.

that's the problem with no fly lists though. it seems so arbitrary. if they are going to suspend/remove someones constitutional right they need to be able to show how you got on that no fly list and as someone else said have a mechanism by which you can appeal it.
There is plenty of examples of people who are on no fly lists because of mistaken identify or clerical error and other random issues we don't know why.
 

Skeptic Bob

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
16,626
Reaction score
19,488
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
The FBI's concern is an interesting one. Think about it. Your an FBI agent and you have a suspected terrorist under surveillance. He doesn't know he is under investigation and you are holding off on an arrest because you are hoping he leads you to more accomplices. The suspect walks into a gun store to buy a gun. He isn't worrying about passing the criminal background check because he has never been arrested for anything. But after running the check the store clerk says he can't complete the sale because the system tells him it is not approved.

The suspect, knowing he has no criminal record, remembers that people on the terrorist watch list are now banned. He surmises this means he is likely under suspicion and goes off the grid.
 

MickeyW

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
14,012
Reaction score
3,439
Location
Southern Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I have no issue with homeland as long as they are operating within the guidelines of the constitution.

But they operate in secret. The No Fly List is a prime example!

And...... they constantly interfere with the FBI, DEA, BATF, NCIS, BP and local agencies, pushing their weight around and mucking things up.
 

MickeyW

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
14,012
Reaction score
3,439
Location
Southern Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The FBI's concern is an interesting one. Think about it. Your an FBI agent and you have a suspected terrorist under surveillance. He doesn't know he is under investigation and you are holding off on an arrest because you are hoping he leads you to more accomplices. The suspect walks into a gun store to buy a gun. He isn't worrying about passing the criminal background check because he has never been arrested for anything. But after running the check the store clerk says he can't complete the sale because the system tells him it is not approved.

The suspect, knowing he has no criminal record, remembers that people on the terrorist watch list are now banned. He surmises this means he is likely under suspicion and goes off the grid.

A good point. The Demo Senators are either myopic or don't care, as long as those mean looking guns are restricted!
 

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
I'm torn on this one Mickey, because the situation is beyond out-of-control, yet I firmly believe only a judge at a proper due process hearing should make decisions of this nature - NOT an administrator!

But my personal feelings aside, I do think the politics may be becoming in line to move in this direction (no new guns for no-flys & terror watch listed).

I have no idea how the Court would rule on this, but I suspect it would overturn.

These issues really need to be put before judges while invoking full due process.
Hear hear! I'm getting tired of rules and laws being put in place by unelected bureaucrats.
 

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
that's the problem with no fly lists though. it seems so arbitrary. if they are going to suspend/remove someones constitutional right they need to be able to show how you got on that no fly list and as someone else said have a mechanism by which you can appeal it.
There is plenty of examples of people who are on no fly lists because of mistaken identify or clerical error and other random issues we don't know why.
This is my biggest issue with the no-fly list. People should have the right to appeal their inclusion in an open court. And, once appealed, and if removed, they should be notified if/when they are ever put back on.
 

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
68,033
Reaction score
34,531
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Now lots of folks will be fine with this, until they come for you .......because someone's bogus claim that you should be placed on a watch list, w/o your knowledge. ;)

Loretta Lynch is as corrupt as obama is......no integrity whatsoever, except to her liberal agenda.

Just like Holder.

Just like Janet Reno.

Just like Trump ;)
 

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
68,033
Reaction score
34,531
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
The FBI's concern is an interesting one. Think about it. Your an FBI agent and you have a suspected terrorist under surveillance. He doesn't know he is under investigation and you are holding off on an arrest because you are hoping he leads you to more accomplices. The suspect walks into a gun store to buy a gun. He isn't worrying about passing the criminal background check because he has never been arrested for anything. But after running the check the store clerk says he can't complete the sale because the system tells him it is not approved.

The suspect, knowing he has no criminal record, remembers that people on the terrorist watch list are now banned. He surmises this means he is likely under suspicion and goes off the grid.

Making the list public provides terrorists with a planning aid. It's like walking up to the group and dividing them into two subgroups; then explaining that if they try to attack us with these fellows, we'll stop them, but not to worry, if they try to attack us with those fellows, we won't.
 

Gaius46

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 15, 2012
Messages
15,463
Reaction score
8,697
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
There is a kind of silver lining here.

While the government argument that a no-fly list is Constitutional because flying is not right might be arguable I think it's pretty clearly a due process violation to deny a fundamental right based on a no fly list, at least the way they are currently implemented. I can see this winding up in court pretty quickly and the whole no-fly list finally getting closely scrutinized.
 

Skeptic Bob

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
16,626
Reaction score
19,488
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
And are we talking about the no fly list or the terrorist watch list? The no fly list probably has around 100,000 individuals on it by now whereas the terrorist watch list has about 2 million.
 

calm

Banned
Joined
Jul 2, 2013
Messages
631
Reaction score
123
Location
Toronto, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
Why would they allow somebody on the No Fly list to drive a car?

Isn't a terrorist more likely to plunge his car into a crowded bus stop or the like?

The reason that they don't want to tie the No-Fly list into gun sales is that it may open the No-Fly list to legal appeals and generally make it in the public domain.

The No-Fly list is about shutting down the travel of "Professional Organizers" (protesters) as the economy continues to crumble, and to allow the Rich Folks to travel without being accosted and shamed at airports, like what was happening on Wall Street when the Occupy Movement was shaming the workers. As it is now, the Rich Folks have their own separate line-ups and inspection areas.

They are even using TSA employees on highways because they are going to prevent protest travel events all around the country.

To further prove my point ...

It is freight trains (not airplanes) which are the largest threat and they are not being monitored in the same fashion as airports.

90-ton rail tankers filled with deadly chemicals and other hazardous materials roll slowly through our major cities every day over unprotected and unguarded rails, with no warning to those communities, and we are worried about some airplane. An assault on a chlorine tanker could create a toxic cloud extending up to 15 miles. It is estimated that up to 100,000 people could be killed or injured in less than a half-hour by such an attack. The federal government has "essentially done nothing" to reduce this threat.

About one-fifth of the nation's 15,000 chemical facilities are close to population centers.

A study by the Army surgeon general, conducted soon after 9/11, found that up to 2.4 million people could be killed or wounded by a terrorist attack on a single chemical plant.

Calm
 
Last edited:

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Why would they allow somebody on the No Fly list to drive a car?

Isn't a terrorist more likely to plunge his car into a crowded bus stop or the like?

Maybe the "no fly" list should also be a "no drive" list. McVeigh & his cohorts drove a bomb to OKC.
 

calm

Banned
Joined
Jul 2, 2013
Messages
631
Reaction score
123
Location
Toronto, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
There is no doubt in my mind that the No-Fly list contains more names of professional protesters and leaders than any amount of possible terrorists.

The Ruling Class don't want this fact known.

Calm
 

eohrnberger

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
48,359
Reaction score
31,340
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
This is my biggest issue with the no-fly list. People should have the right to appeal their inclusion in an open court. And, once appealed, and if removed, they should be notified if/when they are ever put back on.

Yeah, this would be the 'due process' concerns that have been expressed. Once that I would agree with.

When someone's added to the no fly list, they need to be informed, and there needs to be an appeal process in place to get off it. Further, the exact criteria which gets someone on the list as well as off of the list needs to be made public, and adhered to.
 
Top Bottom