GOP blocks efforts to deny guns to those on terrorist watch lists

As for people from other countries interposing their ideas on what an american should do:

"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of."
- James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788

and from the lips of your own European or UK fellows:

"This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty.... The right of self defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction."
- St. George Tucker, Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, 1803

and

"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
- William Pitt (the Younger), Speech in the House of Commons, November 18, 1783

We are Americans. We fought wars to not be subjects. Our birthright was won with guns and our continued freedom depends upon them.

and for Americans who are ready to give up or take our rights:

Samuel Adams >

“If you love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE
a reply to: ~Lucidity

I think it is time to stop people coming here that are of any possible threat. Allow me to ask you this. Lets pretend (or maybe this is correct) that you agree that the USA should allow Syrian refugees to come to the USA. I would ask you this. How many American lives are you willing to risk by bringing these people, who we know have been infiltrated by ISIS? I would hope your answer would be...none...your not willing to risk a single American life to bring these people here. And my response would be that you therefore can't let them in.

You did not seem to understand the point I made.

There are far, far easier ways for those who intend us harm to get into the country. They don't have to come in as refugees and endure the 18-24 month screening processes and background checks and time in DP camps.

They can fly right in and be here in a matter of hours...on K1 visas, which the president mentioned we will be clamping down on, and on H1B visas, on visitor visas, and in some cases on no visas. And if there was no no-fly list, you would have far more permeable borders.

So the refugee issue is pretty much a red herring.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

When I first saw this, my thinking was, why are people on watch lists even allowed in this country? Why aren't they deported?

originally posted by: openminded2011
a reply to: ~Lucidity

When I first saw this, my thinking was, why are people on watch lists even allowed in this country? Why aren't they deported?

because the watch list is about 75 percent crapulous. At the rate that thing is growing in about ten years everyone in america will be on it.

a reply to: openminded2011

Because anyone setting foot in the US, legally or illegally, is afforded due process.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

Considering that those involved in San Bernardino were not on any watch list, seems this is simply a political ploy to further a political agenda.

I don't buy the hype.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Understood, but if the level of suspicion is high enough to defer them from flying, shouldn't they be checked out a bit further? If they are not a threat, remove them from the list, if they are a threat remove them from the country. That's all I am saying.

a reply to: Feltrick

Doesn't mean it won't catch people in the future though, does it?

I mean, how do you propose the people at the borders and airline checkout counters determine who poses a threat? Just by looking at them or something? Even having a list is no guaranty.

a reply to: openminded2011

When the feds enter the name T. Kennedy into the list, with nothing else, it blocks the 7k people with that first letter and last name from flying. The courts ruled there has to be a mechanism for people to challenge but its designed to drag on and on.

Its a slippery cliff argument. When all that's required to deprive someone freedom of movement simply by putting a name on a list with no legal remedies its a problem. Currently foreign nationals cant legally purchase a weapon in the US. That means this push is geared towards Americans on the list and not foreigners.

When the government can prevent a US citizen from lawfully purchasing / owning a firearm by putting there name on a list where does it stop?

A member of the tea party?
Republicans?
Communists?
Atheists?
Gun advocates?
NRA members?
People who think climate change is not occurring?
Giving a negative opinion on Islam (see comments by the AG and her attempt to walk her comment back).

Investigating is fine. Its when the investigating agency denies due process while also filling the role of judge and jury does it becomes a problem and what the dems are proposing is a whopper of a problem.

In this instance using the excuse of "national security" is right up there with the excuse "I was only following orders".

a reply to: Xcathdra

So fix the damn list. Improve it to make it what it was intended for.

That's mainly old news anyway. As noted a few times in this thread.

Beyond that, because the jag off politicians and their cronies abuse things like no-fly lists and NSA spy data doesn't make those things inherently bad. It makes the people who abuse things bad.

And so what's your proposal for ensuring that the bad guys don't get in? If you suggested anything, I probably missed it.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

What part of unconstitutional do you just not understand. There is no fix to a document that denies due process and a persons 2nd amendment rights.

Do you get it now?

The laws in place prevent foreign nationals from obtaining firearms. This is geared at US citizens.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

In my opinion it's all political rhetoric. As the attack was unfolding the POTUS stated that we did not have to worry about an ISIS type Paris attack. Yet there it was unfolding before us on tv. Now it's because we are not stopping those on no fly lists from purchasing ARs. But these two weren't on a no fly list. So what's the agenda?

Never let a crisis to go to waste, right?

Look, no one wants a terrorist or other person intent on killing to get a gun but it's really more complicated than anyone understands. There are people on the "list" that shouldn't be but I guess denying them constitutional rights is okay based on an imaginary fear.

It's all BS to push forward an agenda.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: ~Lucidity

What part of unconstitutional do you just not understand. There is no fix to a document that denies due process and a persons 2nd amendment rights.

Do you get it now?

What part of this isn't all about the 2nd amendment don't you get.

And while we're at it, let's not pretend lots of these lists, in one form or another, don't exist at every level of law enforcement already.

If an American citizen with know terrorist ties is on a list that doesn't let him or her fly or purchase weapons, I'm not losing sleep over it.

a reply to: Feltrick

I'm trying my hardest to ignore the political rhetoric and opportunism no matter where it comes from and gather ideas for some real solutions.

But it seems all people want to do is shout their stand and not offer a single, concrete idea or solution. All we get is BS like "keep all Muslims out" or "have them pass a religion test" or

People keep saying how "we must protect out borders" or "we must keep arms from the terrorists" but can't really say how.

What sense does any of that make? If you can't offer viable ideas or solutions, and just want to shout and scream about your precious rights and how all Muslims are evil, just keep it to yourself.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: ~Lucidity

What part of unconstitutional do you just not understand. There is no fix to a document that denies due process and a persons 2nd amendment rights.

Do you get it now?

The laws in place prevent foreign nationals from obtaining firearms. This is geared at US citizens.

Show me the breakdown of the no-fly list. Citizens vs non-citizens.

ETA: Hint: the info might be closer than you realize.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

It is.. When the bill only applies to Americans while being sold as targeting foreign terrorists it is all about the 2nd amendment. Sadly I dont think you are going to comprehend this issue at all. You keep asking for a solution when there is not one for this type of bill.

If the government wants to prevent an American they put on a list from obtaining a firearm then they file charges and prosecute and if found guilty then we can go from there.

originally posted by: openminded2011
a reply to: Xcathdra

Understood, but if the level of suspicion is high enough to defer them from flying, shouldn't they be checked out a bit further? If they are not a threat, remove them from the list, if they are a threat remove them from the country. That's all I am saying.

Ted Kennedy was on it. Did anyone check to see if he was a terrorist? (conservative humor aside.)

a reply to: Xcathdra

You've said all that before.

And still no ideas? No tangible suggestions? And still no numbers. I see how you play. And it's boring.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

Unfortunately there is no solution. That's the biggest problem. Everything that is being said on both sides erodes the rights of the people.

Should we put Muslims in camps? Should we strip citizens of their right to self defense? Maybe we should spy on our own citizens? Perhaps have the military patrol the streets?

No law or executive order wil prevent an attack like the one in San Bernardino or columbine or Sandy hook. It's just a fact. People bent on killing will find a way to do it.