June 16, 201610 yr This should be a no brainer. Anyone with a handle on a forum called Hammertime sounds dangerous and a potential threat. No fly, no buy list for sure. So if the government decides Hammertime just searched Jihad on his computer (but you were researching a paper) and they put you on the no fly list/watch list, you're ok with it? They didn't tell you and you can't defend yourself? Yeah let's just do nothing. Seems to be working well. Doing nothing is far better than giving away constitutional rights. Do that and we'll be living in a police-state with no rights except the ones that those in charge decide to allow. No free speech, no 2nd amendment, no religious freedom are just the beginning. Elections, forget it. This is what is at risk when fear motivates us to give away our constitutional rights. Don't be quick to go down that road.
June 16, 201610 yr If they can't fly, how do we ship them back to where they belong? Rubber boat and a plastic paddle.
June 16, 201610 yr Author Anyone with a handle on a forum called Hammertime sounds dangerous and a potential threat. No fly, no buy list for sure. Doing nothing is far better than giving away constitutional rights. Do that and we'll be living in a police-state with no rights except the ones that those in charge decide to allow. No free speech, no 2nd amendment, no religious freedom are just the beginning. Elections, forget it. This is what is at risk when fear motivates us to give away our constitutional rights. Don't be quick to go down that road. Sorry. Not convinced. I'm still for the "no-fly, no-buy." If someone wants to appeal their case and prove they are wrongly on the list, then let them fly and buy. A bunch of those 800,000 have been deemed dangerous for pretty good reasons. I don't want them buying assault weapons. Common sense.
June 16, 201610 yr Sorry. Not convinced. I'm still for the "no-fly, no-buy." If someone wants to appeal their case and prove they are wrongly on the list, then let them fly and buy. A bunch of those 800,000 have been deemed dangerous for pretty good reasons. I don't want them buying assault weapons. Common sense. That's the point, there is no appeal process. A lot of Muslims are not terrorists either but many are, we should ban Muslims too. Then they can appeal they are actually not terrorists.
June 16, 201610 yr Certainly there should be a process to defend yourself being on the list. The process needs to change as well. Seems like people keep missing this part of what you are saying and just want to kick and scream. Any sensible person knows the vetting process can be changed even to a point to where people placed on the list can fight it out in court to defend themselves. People are acting like you drafted up a new rule and want to implement it on Friday. :lol2:
June 16, 201610 yr Anyone with a handle on a forum called Hammertime sounds dangerous and a potential threat. No fly, no buy list for sure. Doing nothing is far better than giving away constitutional rights. Do that and we'll be living in a police-state with no rights except the ones that those in charge decide to allow. No free speech, no 2nd amendment, no religious freedom are just the beginning. Elections, forget it. This is what is at risk when fear motivates us to give away our constitutional rights. Don't be quick to go down that road. So what is your plan then to stop radical Islamists born on American soil who perpetrate attacks of domestic terrorism with guns they shouldn't be allowed to purchase since they can't fly from Orlando to Vegas? I'm all ears.
June 16, 201610 yr What I'm seeing on this thread is we're ok with violating constitutional rights in some cases for some people. :lol2:
June 16, 201610 yr There is a huge legal issue with this. The right to bear arms is a constitutional right that all people have. To deny these people a right because they are on a government watchlist is a violation of their rights. To deny someone the ability to fly is not constitutional right. This is why the ACLU is on the same side as the NRA. Understand the possible Constitutional issue........so lets at least take a small step to prevent those on the no-fly list from purchasing "military style" and other high capacity automatic/semi-automatic weaponry. We're not totally denying their right to "own and bear arms" just adding some common sense criteria.
June 16, 201610 yr With the dealings going on in Government entities like the IRS, where people are being targeted based on their politics, isn't likely that some, possibly many, on these lists do not belong on them? Further infringing their rights is not right. If we could figure a way to make an appeals process to be removed from the list quick and painless, so that down time for those wrongly suspected is minimized, I could get fully on board with this. However, NOTHING involving government bureaucracy is ever quick or painless.
June 16, 201610 yr Understand the possible Constitutional issue........so lets at least take a small step to prevent those on the no-fly list from purchasing "military style" and other high capacity automatic/semi-automatic weaponry. We're not totally denying their right to "own and bear arms" just adding some common sense criteria. Who gets to define what "Military Style" is? Is it military style just because a rifle has a hand-guard, or because it is black and scary, or because it shoots really big bullets?
June 16, 201610 yr Seems like people keep missing this part of what you are saying and just want to kick and scream. Any sensible person knows the vetting process can be changed even to a point to where people placed on the list can fight it out in court to defend themselves. People are acting like you drafted up a new rule and want to implement it on Friday. :lol2: If there are no criminal charges, how will they fight it in court, exactly? I know someone who was on the no fly list. He has never been arrested. Never been suspected of anything close to terrorism. He had a name similar to someone who apparently was suspected of terrorism and was placed on a no fly list. Should he have to spend his own time and money to defend himself, when there's literally no evidence he did anything wrong, just so he can exercise his constitutional right? Should we ban free speech for those on the watch list also? What about the right to vote?
June 16, 201610 yr If you are being investigated by the FBI, should you be allowed to buy guns? If you are being investigated by the FBI, should you be allowed to run for President?
June 16, 201610 yr If you are being investigated by the FBI, should you be allowed to run for President? You got the point.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.