- 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
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!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.
for the record, banning guns does not prevent shootings.
Jo Cox MP dead after shooting attack - BBC News
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.
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.
I have no issue with homeland as long as they are operating within the guidelines of the constitution.
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.
Hear hear! I'm getting tired of rules and laws being put in place by unelected bureaucrats.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.
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.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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?