People on the secret "no-fly" terror watchlist buying firearms?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by HazelGod, May 15, 2010.

  1. HazelGod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,531
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow
    This is the question that Huffington Post current has blaring from their main site in bold red scare-the-pants-off-you font.


    Of course, their headline has the usual bogeymen (NRA, Sarah Palin) attached to this horrifying notion, even though the linked article doesn't mention Palin at all. :rolleyes: Another link points to a survey indicating the rank-and-file members of the NRA disagree with the leadership and favor the idea of restrictions.

    Basically, the issue is presented in the worst trappings of partisanship imaginable...it's on par with a Fox News piece, just slanted the other way.


    That said, the issue itself interests me because it's a matter of Constitutional law...so I offer it up here for discussion by the members so inclined (and not in the penalty box :tongue: ):

    Should people on the federal government's terror suspect watchlist (aka the "no-fly" list) be denied the right to purchase firearms?

    To me, the issue is a no-brainer...of course they shouldn't be denied. It would be a clear violation of the 2nd, 5th and 14th Amendments to the US Constitution...respectively the right to keep and bear arms, the right of due process, and the right of equal protection under the law.

    This watchlist is completely cloaked in secrecy. The public has no visibility into the people currently listed, nor what critera are established that place someone on it. However, those on the list have not been indicted nor otherwise charged with any crime. There is no available means of legal recourse for a person to challenge their inclusion on this list.

    For anyone to actually advocate empowering the government to restrict individual freedoms based on some secret list bespeaks either a staggering degree of ignorance or a lack of respect for the ideals upon which this nation was founded.
     
    #1 HazelGod, May 15, 2010
    Last edited: May 15, 2010
  2. B_spiker067

    B_spiker067 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    2,189
    Likes Received:
    0
    Did some poster get on the no-fly/watch list? Tsk, tsk, tsk.

    People who trust the govt. to manage health care reform, social security, medicare, ... are sure to trust the validity of the no-fly list and therefore demand civil rights be truncated.

    Those who don't, would not want those on the list to be banned, probably because they feel that they are on it, or going to be.

    Here is the believers' position as addressed by Rahm: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=an8Moh3xuUs Check out minute 1:15

    Towards the end Rahm says you are NOT a member of the "American Family" if you are on that list.

    HAHAHAHAHA.... hmmm.
     
    #2 B_spiker067, May 15, 2010
    Last edited: May 15, 2010
  3. sargon20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    11,387
    Likes Received:
    2,126
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Atlantis
    But the Constitution doesn't guarantee you 'The Right to Fly' and the government hasn't actually charged you with a crime which you can then challenge. To actually reveal to the masses what the government has on you could and most likely would reveal the methods in which the government uses to put people on the list. In time the list would become useless as the turrorist's figured out how not to get on the list. It's like if you've ever lost a credit card the bank will never discuss what they know and how they intend to track down and prosecute the fraudulent activity as to do so would reveal ways to circumvent them.

    That said I think there's been a vast misguided response to the threat of terrorism with staggering costs attached to 'the war on terrorism' vs. the other many ways of how people die. And most likely will die. It's quite alright to spend trillions killing in Iraq and Afghanistan rather than spending it on saving lives through better health care but that's another thread.
     
  4. B_Mister Buildington

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    The second amendment is outdated- I don't see any reason that the government should allow suspicious people (if ANYONE) to have weapons with the singular purpose of killing other humans
     
  5. B_spiker067

    B_spiker067 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    2,189
    Likes Received:
    0
    The human condition has been basically the same for thousands of years with all the same emotions and impulses motivating behavior; pride being the central vector.

    That said I don't believe the second amendment is outdated. It is within the Bill of Rights (which is a list of INDIVIUDUAL rights) ONLY second after the most important right which is freedom of speech. It is listed second because it protects the first and is only second in importance.

    Already there is clear documentation of political forces trying to undermine freedom of speech. Our latest SCOTUS nomination has history that makes it doubtful she truly appreciates our long standing way of life.

    The Bounds of Silence - Reason Magazine

    As much as conservatives in the past have tried to censor speech in books, liberals today are doing the same and in a manner worse.
     
  6. D_Fiona_Farvel

    D_Fiona_Farvel Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,790
    Likes Received:
    17
    I support the limited scope of restrictions that are already in place.
    However, as "terrorist" is already a nebulous term, I do not favor allowing the government further latitude to impose restrictions on people who have not committed crimes or are not currently facing prosecution.

    As with any other "gun control" debate, my position is that adding further firearm restriction does not work to keep guns out of the hands of terrorists, criminals, general wack jobs, or the like.
     
  7. Industrialsize

    Staff Member Moderator Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2006
    Messages:
    24,307
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    2,173
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    United States
    It's fine by me if those on the "no Fly" list are not allowed to purchase firearms.
     
  8. sargon20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    11,387
    Likes Received:
    2,126
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Atlantis
    now that would be unconstitutional
     
  9. D_Fiona_Farvel

    D_Fiona_Farvel Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,790
    Likes Received:
    17
    Yes, I see your point. Further, I think we should definitely not question how or why people are on this "list", nor the origin or value of its contents. We should just deny people their constitutional rights because, you know, meaningless, ill-considered policy sounds great. Initially.

    Yeah, that's it.
     
  10. HazelGod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,531
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow
    So, you're OK with the government arbitrarily violating the constitutional rights of certain citizens? Decided by an undisclosed authority using secret criteria and with no avenue of public recourse?

    I hate the idea of channeling Glenn Beck, but that sounds a lot to me like Germany in the late 1930s.
     
  11. Bbucko

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,413
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    58
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sunny SoFla
    I'm with _eK and HG on this one. If we cannot agree on what constitutes "terrorism" or exactly who is/might be a "terrorist", then I can't see how it's justifiable to deny civil rights to anyone based on innuendo or supposition.

    FWIW, there are millions of Americans who would find me (at the very least) suspicious because of my years of involvement with ACT-UP.
     
  12. D_Fiona_Farvel

    D_Fiona_Farvel Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,790
    Likes Received:
    17
    Suspicious? No, ACT-UP was definitely a group one could deem subversive, much like trade unions used to be in the early days of the movement. Which is exactly how members of my family found their way on a "list - for decades with no legal action taken against them.

    Call me alarmist, but I definitely see a slippery slope to impeding constitutional rights through secret lists.

    When Bucko and I are married, we are so gonna have conversations like this when cuddling at night. :05:
     
  13. Bbucko

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,413
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    58
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sunny SoFla
    Because this is a completely open forum, I'll not elaborate on the hows and whys. But I know for a fact that I am on one of several lists (though I can still fly within the US, at least as of Oct 2008) and have doubts as to whether or not I'd be able to renew my passport, but I am very aware that the DHS knows who I am, where I lived, and with whom I've signed leases or shared joint checking accounts dating back at least as far as 1986.

    I have have been detained, though never arrested (certainly never been convicted) for subversive (though not illegal) activities more than once. My paranoia is entirely justified, as is your alarmism.

    Just to warn ya, I snore like a helicopter landing on the roof :redface:

    Otherwise I'd be an ideal husband, in a totally queer, long-term HIV/AIDS survivor, SMBD Dom kinda way; the cuddling sounds divine :cool22:
     
  14. D_Fiona_Farvel

    D_Fiona_Farvel Account Disabled

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    3,790
    Likes Received:
    17
    Such a bad ass! Strange how that sort of agency is almost completely lost in our nation. When I see active protests in Greece, France, or Gaza, I realize what pussies we've become. :no:

    *in*
     
  15. B_Mister Buildington

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    592
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Agreed, our dissidents are pussies.
     
  16. 1kmb1

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Messages:
    790
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    15
    Gender:
    Male
    Verified:
    Photo
    do you think if someone said baby seals were terrorists, they would be okay with baby seal clubbing?

    but for the record, there is a difference between the broad "terror watch list" and the no-fly list

    and Bloomberg didnt say they shouldnt be allowed to buy guns, just that they should take a closer look at these people first.
     
  17. midlifebear

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    5,908
    Likes Received:
    11
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
    Uh. . . sort of related, but is there also a "No get on a boat" list? Or does the no fly list cover "suspicious" folks considering a Carnival Cruise?
     
  18. Bbucko

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,413
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    58
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sunny SoFla
    Though I cannot affirm this with any certainty, I'd be shocked and amazed if there weren't, given the extent of information already in the DHS database.

    The only reason why I'd hesitate in confirming it absolutely is that there have been no reported incidents of mis-identification: at least none that I've seen publicized.
     
  19. HazelGod

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,531
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    The Other Side of the Pillow
    Citation, please.

    Oh, wait, you can't provide one...because the whole business is cloaked in secrecy from top to bottom.
    :rolleyes:
     
  20. vince

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2007
    Messages:
    14,785
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    540
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Asia
    The fact that there are secret lists of suspected people, with no process in place to know who is on it, or why, or how to clear your name from it, is a bigger problem and threat to freedom than restricting gun sales to those on it.

    I agree that there should not be restrictions of anyone's rights based on secret lists. But don't put the cart before the horse. The main threat is that there are these secret lists in the first place.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted