Serious question for Gun Advocates.

[Taichiliberal]

I recently watched some podcaster state that while you can be on a "terrorist" watch list (whether you're actually one or not) that can prevent you from getting on an airplane, you can still buy as many guns you want, depending on individual state laws.

Is this true? If so, does that make sense to you and why?

 

[WinterBorn]

Taking a gun on an airplane is not happening as a casual carry-on. You don't have to be on any watch list.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Taking a gun on an airplane is not happening as a casual carry-on. You don't have to be on any watch list.

The point I'm making is that if you are considered a security/safety risk to the safety of airline passengers, why are you okay to purchase a weapon(s)?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I recently watched some podcaster state that while you can be on a "terrorist" watch list (whether you're actually one or not) that can prevent you from getting on an airplane, you can still buy as many guns you want, depending on individual state laws.

Is this true? If so, does that make sense to you and why?

It depends on the laws. Gun shops still run a background check on buyers. If there is anything in the background check, it will be denied.

Remember when Obama wanted to ban vets from owning guns if they had counseling for PTSD? LOL

 

[WinterBorn]

The point I'm making is that if you are considered a security/safety risk to the safety of airline passengers, why are you okay to purchase a weapon(s)?

The airlines have to make snap judgements on who gets on a plane. And often, the judgement is made on the spot.

When buying a gun from a licenced dealer, the customer's name is entered into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
This is designed to prevent certain people from buying a gun. Felony convictions, domestic violence convictions, unlawful users of or those addicted to controlled substances, adjudicated as mentally defective, committed to a mental institution, or being dishonorably discharged from the US military.

 

[Taichiliberal]

The airlines have to make snap judgements on who gets on a plane. And often, the judgement is made on the spot.

When buying a gun from a licenced dealer, the customer's name is entered into the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).
This is designed to prevent certain people from buying a gun. Felony convictions, domestic violence convictions, unlawful users of or those addicted to controlled substances, adjudicated as mentally defective, committed to a mental institution, or being dishonorably discharged from the US military.

1. People who are put on the no fly list are done LONG BEFORE they buy a ticket. This is done by the FBI or NSA or Secret Service that deem an organization a security risk. Recent history shows that is more political than practical (i.e. members of Code Pink) and not always efficient (i.e. the 9-11 hijackers were all on that list).
2. You left out people with criminal records or with pending criminal investigations. Being deemed a security risk and banned from commercial flights fits that category. Yet are they loopholes to buy a gun? A bit absurd that, n'cest pas?

 

[Taichiliberal]

It depends on the laws. Gun shops still run a background check on buyers. If there is anything in the background check, it will be denied.

Remember when Obama wanted to ban vets from owning guns if they had counseling for PTSD? LOL

Your missing the point and the question: If your national security agencies are saying you are a enough of a potential threat to people that you're banned from flying commercial, then why isn't that are flag for a background check prior to buying a gun?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Your missing the point and the question: If your national security agencies are saying you are a enough of a potential threat to people that you're banned from flying commercial, then why isn't that are flag for a background check prior to buying a gun?

Disagreed. First, you made a vague reference without facts. Who says it's okay for someone on a terrorist no-fly list to pass a background check to buy a gun? Link please.

Second, you are overlooking the fact that the No-Fly list is a matter of law. Flying is not an enumerated right in the Constitution. Own a gun is an enumerated right. It's the Second Amendment. Perhaps you've heard about it. SCOTUS has ruled on it several times.

Lastly, the more We, the People, chip away at rights by banning things instead of trying to understand why someone would harm others is why we have people like Donald J. Trump in the White House.

 

[Phantasmal]

Disagreed. First, you made a vague reference without facts. Who says it's okay for someone on a terrorist no-fly list to pass a background check to buy a gun? Link please.

Second, you are overlooking the fact that the No-Fly list is a matter of law. Flying is not an enumerated right in the Constitution. Own a gun is an enumerated right. It's the Second Amendment. Perhaps you've heard about it. SCOTUS has ruled on it several times.

Lastly, the more We, the People, chip away at rights by banning things instead of trying to understand why someone would harm others is why we have people like Donald J. Trump in the White House.

It’s a fact, there is no law to prevent people on the “no fly list” from purchasing guns.

On No-Fly List, But Can Buy Guns

“People on the government's terrorist watch list tried to buy guns almost 1,000 times in the last five years, a federal study finds. In nine out of 10 cases, federal authorities let them do it, the report finds, because there was no legal way to stop them.

And that appears to be OK with the gun lobby, which sounds less fired up by the suspicious gun purchases than by Congress' efforts to stop them.

There were 963 attempts by people on the government's "no fly" list to buy guns from licensed dealers over the past five years ending in February, according to the Government Accountability Office report, and 865 were approved. At least one person on the watch list was able to buy explosives.”

 

[Dutch Uncle]

It’s a fact, there is no law to prevent people on the “no fly list” from purchasing guns.

On No-Fly List, But Can Buy Guns

“People on the government's terrorist watch list tried to buy guns almost 1,000 times in the last five years, a federal study finds. In nine out of 10 cases, federal authorities let them do it, the report finds, because there was no legal way to stop them.

And that appears to be OK with the gun lobby, which sounds less fired up by the suspicious gun purchases than by Congress' efforts to stop them.

There were 963 attempts by people on the government's "no fly" list to buy guns from licensed dealers over the past five years ending in February, according to the Government Accountability Office report, and 865 were approved. At least one person on the watch list was able to buy explosives.”

Thanks for the link. A couple of thoughts:
1. I didn't see a date on it, but Page complains about something that has already been ruled upon by SCOTUS: "I support the Second Amendment's right to bear arms, even though the debate continues as to whether that right was meant to apply only to members of a militia." While I agree that some of our laws and actions are non sequiturs, it seems that pesky Constitution keeps getting in the way. MAGAts want to get rid of it. I think some gun banners share a bond of agreement with them. LOL

2. The No-Fly list is easy to get on but notoriously hard to get off. It doesn't require adjudication, since there is no such thing as a "right to fly".

Michigan Father Wrongly Placed on No Fly List is Removed After ACLU Files Lawsuit on His Behalf | American Civil Liberties Union

NEW YORK — The U.S. government removed Ahmad Chebli, a Michigan father, from the No Fly List after the ACLU filed a lawsuit on his behalf challenging...

www.aclu.org

Note that the link is dated May 12, 2021 and that "Mr. Chebli was placed on the No Fly List in 2018".

"For nearly two decades, the U.S. government has operated a No Fly List that indefinitely bars thousands of U.S. citizens and residents from flying to, from, within, or over the United States, and stigmatizes them as terrorism suspects. The government places people on the No Fly List based on vague criteria, and U.S. citizens and residents on the No Fly List are disproportionately Muslim and those of Arab, Middle Eastern, or South Asian heritage. In recent years, the government’s use of the No Fly List to pressure people, particularly Muslims, to become informants has come under increasing scrutiny and challenge."

 

[Taichiliberal]

Disagreed. First, you made a vague reference without facts. Who says it's okay for someone on a terrorist no-fly list to pass a background check to buy a gun? Link please.

Second, you are overlooking the fact that the No-Fly list is a matter of law. Flying is not an enumerated right in the Constitution. Own a gun is an enumerated right. It's the Second Amendment. Perhaps you've heard about it. SCOTUS has ruled on it several times.

Lastly, the more We, the People, chip away at rights by banning things instead of trying to understand why someone would harm others is why we have people like Donald J. Trump in the White House.

1. I'm sorry. I did a quick search and found this is relatively old news. Check it out from 9 years ago:

Why can people on the terrorist watch list buy guns, and other FAQs​

www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/why-can-people-on-the-terrorist-watch-list-buy-guns-and-other-faqs

2. You state 2 moot points while overlooking the connecting factor. POLICE AND NATIONAL SECURITY ENTITIES are there to protect all citizens from violators of STATE AND FEDERAL law. That is why you have parole boards and officers, crimes that are categorized as "treason", etc., etc. A right to bear arms does not equate a gun owner being able to carry their weapon anywhere they want regardless of individual state law .... this is why the gun reciprocity bill has not to date been passed.

3. Spare us all the gun monkey mantras. To date, any law-abiding citizen can choose from a plethora of handguns, rifles, shotguns, etc. That SOME are prohibited for civilian use (i.e., full auto) has been the law long before you or I were born. That the second the 1994 AWB law was let sunset by GOP gun monkey flunkies, the weapon du jour for a hefty amount of mass shootings has been AR-15 style weapons that were previously on that list. You can't BS past that no matter how hard you try ... especially with the default "mental illness" mantras, since the GOP is now fulfilling it's wet dreams of cutting various forms of public health resources (recent example being the ACA).

 

[T. A. Gardner]

If you are a domestic terrorist who has not been caught / arrested AND have yet to commit your terrorist act(s), yes you can buy a firearm.

If you are either a foreign terrorist, or a domestic one that has committed terrorism and are wanted, legally no, you cannot buy a firearm.

See 11d and 12.

 

[Taichiliberal]

If you are a domestic terrorist who has not been caught / arrested AND have yet to commit your terrorist act(s), yes you can buy a firearm.

If you are either a foreign terrorist, or a domestic one that has committed terrorism and are wanted, legally no, you cannot buy a firearm.

See 11d and 12.

Yes, but that does NOT address what the OP has put forth. See Post #11 here.

 

[WinterBorn]

Your missing the point and the question: If your national security agencies are saying you are a enough of a potential threat to people that you're banned from flying commercial, then why isn't that are flag for a background check prior to buying a gun?

Is boarding a plane a constitutional right?

 

[Taichiliberal]

Is boarding a plane a constitutional right?

Jeez, you're grasping at straws. Is walking down the street a constitutional right? Is asking stupid ass questions in a lame attempt to dodge the point of the OP a constitutional right?


Post #11 should clarify things for you.

 

[WinterBorn]

Jeez, you're grasping at straws. Is walking down the street a constitutional right? Is asking stupid ass questions in a lame attempt to dodge the point of the OP a constitutional right?


Post #11 should clarify things for you.

No, I am not grasping at straws. I am discussing the fundamental rights our forefathers saw fit to guarantee.

Any of the other first 10 amendments (also known as the Bill of Rights) that you want to arbitrarily remove?

 

[Taichiliberal]

No, I am not grasping at straws. I am discussing the fundamental rights out forefathers saw fit to guarantee.

Any of the other first 10 amendments (also known as the Bill of Rights) that you want to arbitrarily remove?

Actually, you're doing the usual shuffle done by magats and gun monkeys when they can't logically or factually defend their beliefs or positions.

Essentially, you're trying to conflate a gun monkey mantra that any gun control is akin to infringement (preceding a dismantling) of the 2nd Amendment .... a trope that has been disproven and debunked time and again.

You stupidly ask a silly question that has NOTHING to do with the OP, despite your inept attempts to build that bridge.

I strongly urge you to read my content on Post #11, click the contained link and READ CAREFULLY AND COMPREHENSIVELY THE CONTENT there of. When you're up to speed, come back and we'll have a decent discussion.

 

[WinterBorn]

Actually, you're doing the usual shuffle done by magats and gun monkeys when they can't logically or factually defend their beliefs or positions.

Essentially, you're trying to conflate a gun monkey mantra that any gun control is akin to infringement (preceding a dismantling) of the 2nd Amendment .... a trope that has been disproven and debunked time and again.

You stupidly ask a silly question that has NOTHING to do with the OP, despite your inept attempts to build that bridge.

I strongly urge you to read my content on Post #11, click the contained link and READ CAREFULLY AND COMPREHENSIVELY THE CONTENT there of. When you're up to speed, come back and we'll have a decent discussion.

What shuffle?

The right to bear arms is a constitutionally guaranteed right. And there have been numerous gun control measures put in place. From age limits to denying ownership to some, and more.

I get that some gun nuts want no restrictions ever. But, in case you didn't know, I am not one of those people.

I read post #11. It does not change anything I said.


As for the question I asked, it was a sarcastic response to your obvious desire to remove the 2nd amendment.

 

[Taichiliberal]

I find the knee jerk reactions here fascinating. Like Charlie Kirk, their bottom line (whether they realize it or not) is that civilian deaths due to cross fire and mass shooters is acceptable, as they perceive ANY gun control as the prelude to a fascist/authoritarian/communist gov't putting the iron heel to them via mass gun confiscation.

Kirk ironically got to live the results of his beliefs. The OP and subsequent Post #11 questions the rationality of the loophole that allows gov't security and police agencies to keep people off airplanes because they are a potential "security risk", yet it's okay for same persons to purchase weapons. Weird or what?

 

[Taichiliberal]

What shuffle?

The right to bear arms is a constitutionally guaranteed right. And there have been numerous gun control measures put in place. From age limits to denying ownership to some, and more.

I get that some gun nuts want no restrictions ever. But, in case you didn't know, I am not one of those people.

I read post #11. It does not change anything I said.


As for the question I asked, it was a sarcastic response to your obvious desire to remove the 2nd amendment.

Yeah, the exact shuffle.....parroting the 2nd Amendment line as if that's the be all, end all answer to ANY reasoning for restricting guns from various persons in the populace.

You have a criminal record, you don't get a gun. Yet you're a potential "security risk" on an airliner (i.e. 9-11) and it's okay to buy a gun.

That just doesn't make horse sense. But you stupidly insist that it's a prelude to remove the 2nd amendment.

So explain to us all how that works. The reading audience awaits.