Susan Collins Unveils a Gun-Control Compromise : No-Fly-No-Buy

Sad talking point as the ACLU also takes issues with these "lists"..

Due Process is common ground.

 

Excellent point! There must be "due process", propelled forward by due diligence! If there's a reason -- a real reason why someone is on a "no-fly" list, there must surely be CAUSE. Bring them in, investigate them, and make a determination either to take them off the list, or nail their ass to the wall!

Sounds good, and it gets the heart pumping to say it, but unfortunately, not even an organization with the reputed professionalism of the FBI was able to figure out "WHAT'S UP" with Omar Mateen! They investigated him for TEN MONTHS, but, you know the rest.

Does anyone actually do their (*)(*)(*)(*)ing jobs anymore? Or are we so choked and clogged with smothering, blubbering political-correctness that nobody is ever found guilty of doing anything wrong until AFTER they've committed crimes...?!

"All the King's horses and all the King's men" couldn't deal with Omar Mateen...?

. "I look down on your 'police' from Islamo-heaven and laugh my ass off!"

 

Beltway Brains believe this kind of irrational compromise is politically expedient. They are wrong.

“Record High in U.S. Say Big Government Greatest Threat, Now 72% say it is greater threat than big business or big labor”, by Jeffrey M. Jones, Gallup, 12/18/13.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/166535/r...syndication&utm_content=morelink&utm_term=All

Hence Trump and Sanders.

 

They are crooked politicians. They support whatever they believe will serve their personal interests.

 

If it was common ground, why will the NRA want to defeat said bill?

 

They serve each other, both sides work a little to take a right away that the other side "supports" while they don't and vise Versa.

They honestly work hand in hand and nobody gives a flying (*)(*)(*)(*).

It's pathetic at this point.

 

Common sense regulation. Get it done.

 

For the same reasons the ACLU will challenge it.

 

I can't wait until the UK is a majority Muslim.

People like you made me that way.

 

Simple; because the flood of funding for the NRA to advertise and promote their product, from the gun makers, would slow to a trickle.

 

Because there is a difference between suspicion and probable cause. If probable cause exists, then that person is going to be arrested. If suspicion, then they are placed on the list to be informed quicker of any new developments.

At the same time, investigations do have limited time frames as long as there is evidence. Even cold cases are placed in a holding pattern because there is not enough time, money, and manpower to constantly investigate such crimes with little or no leads.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think the ALCU will challenge the bill.

 

Yes, well as it stands the Muslim population of Britain is a whopping 5%. When should I expect the ritual beheading to begin, do you think?

 

...No, that's shields & body armor.

 

Were they citizens or prisoners of war?

 

Actually, I was thinking that the NRA will be exposed to having direct links to extremist groups that are violent with some of its members on said list.

 

Because violating civil rights is common sense.

 

Correct, The way the RP/DP political class work together is now well documented.

“What if the problem is not bribery … but extortion? What if the Permanent Political Class in Washington, made up of individuals from both political parties is using its coercive public power to not only stay in office but to threaten others, and to extract wealth, and in the bargain pick up private benefits for themselves, Their friends and their families?” EXTORTION, "How Politicians Extract Your money, Buy Votes, And Line Their Own Pockets, Peter Schweizer, HMO, NY, NY, 2013, p. 2.

The 2 party system works to threaten each other's pet "special interests" to extract money and other support. Political opposition is now just a phony show - a kabuki dance for those who live outside the DC beltway.

 

Looks like we need to remove more smokers rights then because its still more dangerous than guns. Once smoking becomes less dangerous than guns then we can focus on guns. Until then you need to tell smokers they cant smoke in their homes or in their cars with children present and enforce that. Are you willing to remove some smokers rights to save children?

 

Listen very carefully: NO.

The no fly lacks due process. It is bare suspicion. There is also NO BILL OUT YET THAT COLLINS HAS RELEASED. Therefore we don't know what the (*)(*)(*)(*) she wants to pass, just her summary. She hasn't described what process will be in place, what burden etc.
http://reason.com/blog/2016/06/22/no-fly-no-buy-proposal-takes-away-gun-ri

 

If it doesnt have an avenue for Due Process of course they will. They have a history of challenging the no fly list.

 

Doesn't matter; your Bill of Rights extends the right of habeas corpus all people under US jurisdiction, whether or not they are citizens. The Geneva Conventions (to which the US is also a signatory), also extend those same rights and protections to prisoners of war. Of course clever semantics (never POW but always 'detainee'), the cynical imprisonment of 'suspects' on foreign soil in order that US domestic law could be circumvented, all contribute to the blatant disregard for human rights by America.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/06-1195.ZS.html

 

Mmmkay....now can you answer my question?

 

I don't support banning guns or any increased regulation beyond universal background checks.

I'm pointing out you picked a (*)(*)(*)(*)ty example.

 

Trump wants no fly no buy. Your argument is invalid.

 

I dont recall him saying he doesnt want due process involved can you quote this?