May 6, 201016 yr Many have stated that the end justifies the means in regards to disregarding rights of people suspected of being terrorists. Its cool to tap their phones. Its cool to track financial transactions. Should we also deny those on the official terrorist suspect list the right to buy guns?
May 6, 201016 yr Many have stated that the end justifies the means in regards to disregarding rights of people suspected of being terrorists. Its cool to tap their phones. Its cool to track financial transactions. Should we also deny those on the official terrorist suspect list the right to buy guns? IMO anyone considered a "suspect" shouldn't be denied anything other than leaving town before questioning is complete. If a terrorist suspect wants to buy a gun there's no law that's going to stop him.
May 6, 201016 yr Author IMO anyone considered a "suspect" shouldn't be denied anything other than leaving town before questioning is complete. If a terrorist suspect wants to buy a gun there's no law that's going to stop him. What if the suspected terrorist hasn't done enough to be "questioned?" What if they're just suspicious enough to be put on a watch list? Are you saying these folks should not be monitored? Should we not see who they are calling?
May 6, 201016 yr If he is an official "suspect" (not just a "person of interest") then shouldn't he be under arrest? If he is not charged with a crime and is a US Citizen then how do you contrain a consitutional right? Getting your phone tapped is not violating a consitutional right. Having your financial transactions analyzed for suspicious behavior does not violate a consitutional right. I am not sure how the "no fly" list works but that does not directly violate a constitutional right. If the government has enough on you to put on their "watch list" then they probably have enough on you to prosecute you for crimes. But they dont because they want to monitor them and their contacts and map out the bigger picture.
May 6, 201016 yr What if the suspected terrorist hasn't done enough to be "questioned?" What if they're just suspicious enough to be put on a watch list? Are you saying these folks should not be monitored? Should we not see who they are calling? That's a tough one for me Clyde. I'm not a supporter of the Patriot Act, I see it as a government intrusion that gives government more power than they need. 9/11 made it a little easier to ignore when being created.
May 6, 201016 yr http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/05/AR2010050505211.html Title: Terrorists who want to buy guns have friends on Capitol Hill Nothing inflamatory here. If they are actual "terrorists" then hold Mr. Holder accountable for not prosecuting them. If the "watch list" is going to be used to restrict specific consitutional rights of Americans (I can not about non-Americans) then lets codify it in the laws and constitution since that is exactly want they want. Lets be clear about it and say - 'we have this "star chamber" like group that puts you on this list and you are no longer entitled to rights under the consitution'.
May 6, 201016 yr Many have stated that the end justifies the means in regards to disregarding rights of people suspected of being terrorists. Its cool to tap their phones. Its cool to track financial transactions. Should we also deny those on the official terrorist suspect list the right to buy guns? Believe me when I tell you, unless you somehow slip through, if you are on the terror list, you are NOT getting a gun.......
May 6, 201016 yr Author Believe me when I tell you, unless you somehow slip through, if you are on the terror list, you are NOT getting a gun....... The law says otherwise.
May 6, 201016 yr The law says otherwise. It sure does. Let one of those cats go in and do a background check and see when they get their gun................
May 6, 201016 yr A terrorist, on a watch list, wanted list, or no list, could care less about our laws and if they want a gun, they'll get one. I'd rather they be allowed to register them. At least there'd be a start of a paper trail.
May 6, 201016 yr Clyde, if they're a terrorist do you really think they care if they can legally buy a gun or not? Do you really think they won't be able to get one if they want one?
May 6, 201016 yr They would not be able to buy, Background checks are ran through DC. They would tie it up in red tape and make the person come back at a later date. Shoot I went to buy a gun once and put down an address where I moved that did not match my drivers license. I had to spend 4 hours getting a fax from a bank and show all kinds of proof of address stuff it was a mess.
May 6, 201016 yr They would not be able to buy, Background checks are ran through DC. They would tie it up in red tape and make the person come back at a later date. Shoot I went to buy a gun once and put down an address where I moved that did not match my drivers license. I had to spend 4 hours getting a fax from a bank and show all kinds of proof of address stuff it was a mess. Next time just go to Court Days in Mt. Sterling. Anything you want, cash transaction, no paperwork. Background check is not required at a gun show. As someone said - "the waiting period is how long it takes you to get your money out of your wallet." Terrorists, watch-list people, etc. and other can do the same thing. But they probably would not feel comfortable be around some many good people armed to the teeth in public. Edited May 6, 201016 yr by Bluegrasscard Added saying
May 6, 201016 yr Author Clyde, if they're a terrorist do you really think they care if they can legally buy a gun or not? Do you really think they won't be able to get one if they want one? If they're a true terrorist, no. However, I'm going to go out on a limb and say our list of suspected terrorists includes many that are not.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.