General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNRA Ordered GOP To Allow Gun Sales To People On Terror Watch List. They Did.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/12/04/nra-ordered-gop-to-allow-gun-sales-to-people-on-terror-watch-list-they-did/In the wake of the San Bernardino shooting, Democrats in the Senate decided to offer a bill that would prevent people who are listed from purchasing a gun. Senator Harry Reid, the Minority Leader, announced the plan in a tweet:
A few hours later, the NRA led by executive vice president Wayne LaPierre issued an alert to its members and followers to oppose the bill. It was an unambiguous message, ordering opposition to any and all gun control proposals.
Senate Republicans, who receive millions in NRA donations, did just as they were ordered to when the bill came up on the floor.
Senate Democrats forced a vote Thursday on language which would give the U.S. Attorney General to deny the transfer of firearms or the issuance of firearms and explosives licenses to suspected terrorists if it is reasonably believed those individuals may use firearms or explosives in connection with an act of terrorism. The amendments were offered as part of the Republican budget bill intended to repeal portions of Obamacare and defund Planned Parenthood. The amendments failed to advance because it did not get the 60 votes needed.
meaculpa2011
(918 posts)on its No-Fly List without a warrant, without due process and without giving the accused the right to confront his accuser.
Should being placed on this "List" also strip the accused of all Constitutional protections?
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)saturnsring
(1,832 posts)meaculpa2011
(918 posts)appointed to the Supreme Court?
Did you tell the other justices or are you just keeping this little nugget of knowledge to yourself?
saturnsring
(1,832 posts)the constitution -- oops did say guns I meant childkillers. fixed
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)to get your money back on that online constitutional law class you took.
saturnsring
(1,832 posts)GGJohn
(9,951 posts)and a bit disconnected from reality.
saturnsring
(1,832 posts)GGJohn
(9,951 posts)but you knew that.
GGJohn
(9,951 posts)saturnsring
(1,832 posts)sorry to the responsible gun owners but anyone at anytime can become "depressed" disgruntled or whatever and take out their childkillers and go get some.
GGJohn
(9,951 posts)You will never get a firearm ban and confiscation in this country, that's not opinion, that's fact, whether or not you want to believe it.
saturnsring
(1,832 posts)she was 7 but at least the 2a wont be harmed
GGJohn
(9,951 posts)saturnsring
(1,832 posts)anyone at anytime can become depressed, paranoid, disgruntled or whatever label you prefer pull out a gun and kill a 7year old. these childkillers are too dangerous to put in the hands of humans.
GGJohn
(9,951 posts)I deal in facts not emotions.
You will NEVER get a ban or confiscation of firearms in this country, that's a cold hard fact whether or not you choose to believe it.
saturnsring
(1,832 posts)can become unstable and kill someone with it they are too dangerous.
I am reminded of things that also would never happen like blacks being free, women getting the right to vote, getting an alcohol ban in the constitution, an African American becoming president. remember the war that was supposed to end all wars?
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)GGJohn
(9,951 posts)saturnsring
(1,832 posts)remember their mommy didn't love them enough or daddy slapped them around and next thing you know you get adam lanza , Dylan roof mr dear.the list goes on and on and on and on... ad infinitum
sanatanadharma
(3,707 posts)An as yet unmanifested future state can not be called a fact. Your authority is negated.
However, you and only you can answer this one personal question.
What is the magic reserve number of bullet riddled kid bodies that might create an emotional response in you?
It seems that some (perhaps not you) defenders of the American status-quo of blood and brain splattered carnage have not yet been able to recognize a heart unless it is on a target.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)is not an "emotional card." It is an undeniable fact.
GGJohn
(9,951 posts)that's an undeniable fact.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)GGJohn
(9,951 posts)saturnsring
(1,832 posts)ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)But thanks for showing your slip one more time.
GGJohn
(9,951 posts)So because I forgot to add the ic, I slipped?
Of course you being the perfect person, you've never made a writing error, right?
But thanks for your concern.
EX500rider
(10,849 posts)....you know, the rights of the people...
If you are thinking of the Militia Clause, I suggest you see: The Militia Clauses Article I Section 8, Clauses 15 and 16 of the US Constitution
saturnsring
(1,832 posts)a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box
therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to
contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty
balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and
provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only,
he may appear without a knapsack.
saturnsring
(1,832 posts)wife or ex-employer or whomever pissed him off
blm
(113,063 posts)somebody has to profit big from all the self-fulfilling prophecy bullshit going on.
GOP and Daesh - same apocalyptic agenda.
Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)on a list? A list you can't even see or appeal being on?
Speech? Privacy?
Because if you set the precident that one right can be removed arbitrarily with no due process, then it's a short step to other rights being removed the same way.
If someone is too dangerous to have a firearm than do it right- establish a process that has due process and allows the right to be removed with an open process that allows a person to represent themselves and appeal. It's how it is done with those deemed mentally unstable, they must be adjudicated such and there is a legal process they can participate in and appeal if they feel their rights were wrongfully taken away.
Don't set the dangerous precident that a right can be removed just because someone, somewhere in DC puts you on a list you can't see or appeal. Think about how that would play out with a Trump administration having that kind of power....
Initech
(100,079 posts)linuxman
(2,337 posts)Iggo
(47,555 posts)Every one of them.
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)I can't even say what I really want to say or I'll get banned.
Waldorf
(654 posts)time. I'm sure his name was removed quickly but probably a difficult time for John/Jane Doe who are mistakenly put on it to get their names removed.
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)A different Ted Kennedy was (and probably still is).
Senator Kennedy got hit with the name match, which is the only lookup entry point. Senator Kennedy produced ID indicating he was not the person on the list, he got his boarding pass, and continued on his way.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Kidding we already knew a long time ago.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)GGJohn
(9,951 posts)Dr. Strange
(25,921 posts)Around 875,000 names are believed to be on the list, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said. Many are included "based on information that is often stale, poorly reviewed, or of questionable reliability," it added in a report published Friday. Moreover people are being put onto the watch list based on secret evidence and secret standards, with no meaningful process to challenge mistakes, the ACLU warned.
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/3/15/aclu-us-terror-watchlistrisksstigmatizinginnocentamericancitizen.html