Day after San Bernadino Shootings, Senate Votes to let Suspected Terrorists, Mentally Ill Buy Guns

i'm pro gun but this is stupid. it's ridiculous that the NRA has more influence than an entire nation. the government has more fear of a single lobby than of the people. the whole system is broken and eventually the government will fear the people more if things don't change.

 

Or doesn't work.

I think you can make a strong philosophical argument that the no-fly list impinges on one's liberties without due process, but I don't think it has a strong legal argument. Those travelers are not prevented from traveling, only from using regulated air service. The unabridged right to fly in a plane is not spelled out in the Constitution like the right to own a firearm is.

On the bill, I'm not too sad about it. I doubt denying guns to people on some administrative list like the no-fly list was going to win in the courts anyway. Why pass unConstitutional bills?

 

There's no constitutional right to fly on a plane, there is a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. There is a constitutional right to vote, there isn't a constitutional right to drive or to buy chicken nuggets. Some things the government can restrict without infringing on the rights of its citizens, some things they can't.

I really shouldn't have to point stuff like this out.

 

I don't know if this is accurate or not, but if it is, then they are saying Farook and his wife were in contact with one of a million (?) people on the FBI's list?

This issue does probably reflect how ginormous (and therefore useless, as San Bernardino shows) the FBI's watch list is.

 

Something intelligence agencies have always struggled with is the sheer volume of intelligence reports they have to sort through. Terrorism is just one part of a HUGE job they are tasked with. They do a damn good job all things considered.

 

Have you heard of a concept called 'implied rights'?

 

Are people on the terrorist watch list aware that they are on the list?

Let's just say the bill is passed and they go buy a gun and they get rejected, do they find out that they are on the list?

 

Nope they don't know they are on the list and often people are mistakenly on the list because their name is similar to someone else's. There's cases of people finding out they are mistakenly on the list when they attempt to travel....you know, another reason why it would be a really stupid thing to strip people of their constitutional rights due to being on a random list.

It's ridiculous that people even try to argue for this bill. Since that group seemingly cares nothing about constitutional rights, why not just round up everyone on that list and imprison them without a trial? Throw them in internment camps till they can determine if they should be on the list or not?

 

Not sure what the point of that was. Of course it's not a legal opinion. It's just a citizen's opinion. The implication of the thread is whether I'm going to hold Republican Senators feet to the fire (in voting, donations, public sentiment) for voting down this bill. My answer is no -- at least on the bill about the no-fly list -- because the bill strikes my as undue burden on the civil liberties of the people on that list. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. I was explaining to the OP who was outraged by the Senate Republicans' behavior why I don't feel the same, even though I want to abolish the second amendment and take away everybody's guns.

 

I'm pro-gun control but don't see how this bill addresses the issues we are facing.

We do need to have psyche evaluations for someone to own a gun. But we can not deny gun ownership unless they have a criminal background. What we can do is restrict the types of guns by requiring automatic weapons and those capable of killing more than 2-3 people quickly require a special license - one that includes not being on any watchlist. There's nothing in the constitution that says you can have any kind of gun you want.

 

Automatic weapons are already pretty restricted and expensive. It's the semi-automatic ARs and AKs that can still do a ton of damage. If everyone had non-AR bolt action rifles then these mass killings would be much more difficult to pull off.

I don't think I've even seen an actual automatic used in a crime for a long time now.

 

As long as they can keep brain washing right wing fundamentalist via misinformed vitriol via major news networks that planned parenthood is selling dead babies and black lives matter is going to knock up there daughter these mass shootings are all within their agenda of hate against woman and ethnicity.

Stop voting for these GOP *****

 

I mean to include semi-automatic as well.

 

Except this is actually a sensible regulation for gun owners. At utmost importance is the safety of our civilians. It is no different than requiring an age limit to own guns or an age limit to own weapons. Why is there an age limit to purchase firearms? Public safety. This legislation has the same benefit. Does it cause a inconvenience if your name is mistakenly on a list? Sure it does, just like it might be inconvenient for a guy trying to buy a gun who lost his ID.

 

It isn't sensible, you are taking away someone's constitutional rights without even accusing them of a crime....I mean that should bother you.

 

the idea of an executive being able to deny someone an explicit constitutional right by simply putting them on a list gives leftists a hard on (what power!), but it's an obvious violation of due process

one can imagine Obama running wild with such power

 

Yes, he will become the next Hitler in the one year he has left in office and not relinquish his presidency.

 

If you took away every single private citizen's firearms in the U.S. you would have effectively violated zero explicit constitutional rights as none of those citizens are part of a well regulated militia.