IF your on the FBI's terrorist watch list, should you be free to own an AK?

Jarod said:
What I don't understand is why Republicans cannot write a bill that prohibits people on the no-fly list from attaining an assault rifle unless they have gone through a court hearing which determines whether or not there was probable cause for them to be on the list in the first place.
Click to expand...

What I can't understand is why you think this is a Republican issue and didn't cry about it when Democrats controlled all two branches of Government.
 
Why is it okay, in fact encouraged to violate the Constitutional Rights of Gay Americans, but not okay to violate the rights of Terrorists?
 
Superfreak said:
the rights of every citizen Desh. Innocent until proven guilty. Yes, bad things will continue to happen... they always have and always will. No matter how many laws we create, that will always be the case. When you start proclaiming people guilty prior to providing proof/evidence, then we are on a very slippery slope.
Click to expand...

What can the U.S. do to prevent gun violence?
 
Jarod said:
Why is it okay, in fact encouraged to violate the Constitutional Rights of Gay Americans, but not okay to violate the rights of Terrorists?
Click to expand...

Do you not understand the difference between the "terror watch list" and the "no fly list"?

Are you lefties really that ignorant and gullible?
 
Superfreak said:
Wrong... you are still equally dead. Bombs can be far more effective than a gun... in terms of numbers dead in a short period of time (if that is what you are referring to in terms of effectiveness). A knife too can be more effective as it is silent. It may take a longer amount of time, but effectiveness is not necessarily defined by time.
Click to expand...

According to the FBI's crime stats firearms are far and away the most used weapon to kill. In 2011, 8583 firearm homicides v. 1694 knife/cutting weapon homicides.

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/u....-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-11
 
NOVA said:
At least 72 employees at the Department of Homeland Security are listed on the U.S. terrorist watch list, according to a Democratic lawmaker.

Rep. Stephen Lynch (D., Mass.) disclosed that a congressional investigation recently found that at least 72 people working at DHS also “were on the terrorist watch list.”

“Back in August, we did an investigation—the inspector general did—of the Department of Homeland Security, and they had 72 individuals that were on the terrorist watch list that were actually working at the Department of Homeland Security,” Lynch told Boston Public Radio.

“The [former DHS] director had to resign because of that,” he said.
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/72-dhs-employees-on-terrorist-watch-list/
Click to expand...

mostlyfalse.gif
MOSTLY FALSE

WHAT'S TRUE: An investigation by the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security found 73 airport workers may have been improperly vetted against a terror watch list.

WHAT'S FALSE/UNDETERMINED: 72 DHS employees were on the list; the discovery occurred in December 2015; the head of the DHS was forced to resign over the scandal.

http://www.snopes.com/72-dhs-employees-terrorist-watch-list/
 
Superfreak said:
Wrong... you are still equally dead. Bombs can be far more effective than a gun... in terms of numbers dead in a short period of time (if that is what you are referring to in terms of effectiveness). A knife too can be more effective as it is silent. It may take a longer amount of time, but effectiveness is not necessarily defined by time.
Click to expand...

I've wondered why the Islamists are so slow to start with the car-bombing here like they do just about every where else. But the liberals implied premise---that jihadists will quit the jihad when it becomes illegal to own assault weapons is tragically wrong.

They'll just adapt and we may end-up wishing they stuck to guns.
 
Jarod said:
When it was the right to fly being taken away from people I argued that something needed to be set up so the due process could be had by those whose right was being taken away. Now that it suggested that someone's right to own an assault rifle be taken away I make the same argument.
Click to expand...

and I argued that it was unconstitutional in the first place, denying a right with zero due process. why are you 'guilty until proven innocent'?
 
Jarod said:
What I don't understand is why Republicans cannot write a bill that prohibits people on the no-fly list from attaining an assault rifle unless they have gone through a court hearing which determines whether or not there was probable cause for them to be on the list in the first place.
Click to expand...

what I don't understand is why Jarod is not on the no-fly list.........
 
Jarod said:
Why is it okay, in fact encouraged to violate the Constitutional Rights of Gay Americans, but not okay to violate the rights of Terrorists?
Click to expand...

because it is not obvious that a person is a terrorist, simply because they want to buy a gun.......however it is obvious a person is gay when they try to marry someone who is the same sex........
 
christiefan915 said:
mostlyfalse.gif
MOSTLY FALSE

WHAT'S TRUE: An investigation by the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security found 73 airport workers may have been improperly vetted against a terror watch list.

WHAT'S FALSE/UNDETERMINED: 72 DHS employees were on the list; the discovery occurred in December 2015; the head of the DHS was forced to resign over the scandal.

http://www.snopes.com/72-dhs-employees-terrorist-watch-list/
Click to expand...

I'm glad it was 73 instead of 72......the statistic kept tempting me to ask if they were all virgins.....
 
Jarod said:
Why is it okay, in fact encouraged to violate the Constitutional Rights of Gay Americans, but not okay to violate the rights of Terrorists?
Click to expand...

You haven't answered the questions that I left for you Jarod; but I understand that it's your MO to just post something and then not support it. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top