That type of situation has been ruled ok by the judicial system and is similar to fire in a movie theater . I don't necessarily agree but I respect the rule of the Land.

 

The precedent you are setting by your idea is much more far reaching and not as specific.

 

What idea is it that you keep talking about? I'm simply throwing out scenarios.

Fair enough.

 

As to the bolded, does that mean you're also against arresting/detaining someone who screams "bomb" on an airplane? Doesn't that violate their first amendment rights?

 

That isn't considered free speech. Just like saying "I'm going to kill you", or yelling "fire" in a theater.

That isn't considered free speech. Just like saying "I'm going to kill you", or yelling "fire" in a theater.

 

So you're telling me there are restrictions to our 1st amendment rights?

 

That's interesting...

So you're telling me there are restrictions to our 1st amendment rights?

 

That's interesting...

 

There are restrictions on the 2nd amendment rights as well.

 

For example, you can't just go out and buy a fully automatic weapon.

 

You also can't go kill whoever you want with your weapon.

 

Is that interesting also?

*also can't own a firearm if you are a convicted felon.

There are restrictions on the 2nd amendment rights as well.

 

For example, you can't just go out and buy a fully automatic weapon.

 

You also can't go kill whoever you want with your weapon.

 

Is that interesting also?

 

*also can't own a firearm if you are a convicted felon.

 

You're making my point for me....There's restrictions on almost all amendments. None of which take away our constitutional right's protected by those amendments.

You're making my point for me....There's restrictions on almost all amendments. None of which take away our constitutional right's protected by those amendments.

 

Taking away someone's rights to purchase a firearm simply because they're on a list is not the same as restricting the purchase of fully automatic firearms or not allowing CONVICTED felons purchase guns.

 

I don't have an issue with some restrictions. I have an issue with the government having too much discretion as to who can or can't buy guns without evidence or a conviction in the court of law.

If there is due process it honestly is not that big of a deal. 1. You would have to be notified in a certified letter similar to IRS audits that contained all of the govt information that disqualified you from flying and buying. B. The appeals process must be speedy without the need or expense of a lawyer. 3. The process of collecting this information would have to be under constant review. If there are 800,000 on the no fly list and 20,000 shouldn't be on there then we need to see where the problem is. The focus no fly - no buy would bring to some of our HS entities may be good for the safety of our nation.

Would not "due process" require the govt to assume innocent until proven guilty and therefore your name wouldn't be on any list until the govt proved you guilty of a crime?

 

Innocent until proven guilty is NOT the same as guilty until you prove yourself innocent. Burden of proof is on the govt and only after they prove their case can your name be listed on a no fly-no buy list. That is how I see "due process."

I am seeing a ton of people on FB giving the list of all the Senators who voted no to restrict the rights of the "No fly, No buy" again. I don't understand why they are voting on it if they have not cleaned the list up or have plans to. I am all for restricting guns to terrorists but this list and process needs cleaned up before they can vote on it.

 

Wasn't this list called "Islamphobia" by the media just a few years ago because they thought it was discriminatory and people wanted to do away with it?

You're making my point for me....There's restrictions on almost all amendments. None of which take away our constitutional right's protected by those amendments.

 

I'm going to disagree. You actually made a point against yourself. There is a difference between a restriction and an outright denial of a right.

 

Using the no fly list is an out right denial of a right without due process it's that simple.

If there is due process it honestly is not that big of a deal. 1. You would have to be notified in a certified letter similar to IRS audits that contained all of the govt information that disqualified you from flying and buying. B. The appeals process must be speedy without the need or expense of a lawyer. 3. The process of collecting this information would have to be under constant review. If there are 800,000 on the no fly list and 20,000 shouldn't be on there then we need to see where the problem is. The focus no fly - no buy would bring to some of our HS entities may be good for the safety of our nation.

 

What you describe would not be due process. When you are trying to deny a right , the burden of proof is on the government.

 

Taxes are different , you do not have a right not to pay taxes.

The funniest part about this topic is all the people bashing the NRA and ignoring the fact the ACLU agrees with the NRA on this topic.

 

When two large groups who consist of a majority of people on different sides of the political spectrum agree , I think many of you need to take a step and actually realize the ramifications of this action.

Would not "due process" require the govt to assume innocent until proven guilty and therefore your name wouldn't be on any list until the govt proved you guilty of a crime?

 

Innocent until proven guilty is NOT the same as guilty until you prove yourself innocent. Burden of proof is on the govt and only after they prove their case can your name be listed on a no fly-no buy list. That is how I see "due process."

 

Since the vast majority of the list is non-US citizens the requirement for due process for them does not apply. The have no constitutional protections in our country. And if they are legitimately on the list for even suspected issues they should be deported or not have their visas renewed or even have their visa terminated.

Since the vast majority of the list is non-US citizens the requirement for due process for them does not apply. The have no constitutional protections in our country. And if they are legitimately on the list for even suspected issues they should be deported or not have their visas renewed or even have their visa terminated.

 

The "no fly list" is mostly non-Americans which means they can not buy a gun anyway. But the original vote included 2 different lists as well as the no fly list which has over a million Americans on the "list". And you have no idea if you are on it or not.