It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

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

page: 3
26
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 03:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
I swear most of you people cannot read.

Two percent on the list are U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents legally able to buy guns

Now try again.


I can read, actually fluently in English, German, and Old Norse.

Anyways, the main issue at hand is the lack of oversight of the list process. I look at laws not for what its stated goal is, but for the unintended consequences and possible future abuses made possible by said law.

What happen if Trump gets elected and decides all Muslims should be on that list. Do they not get 2nd Amendment rights?

What happens if they enact another ban on semi-auto rifles with detachable magazines, then anyone who owns one is then put on that list?

What if anyone on independent media forums is decided to be deserving of being on the list?

We have no control over it. It may be only 2% (which is just shy of 10,000 US citizens by the way), but what if in two years or six years that number is way higher?

This really highlights the crux of 2nd Amendment proponents seemingly hardline approach, the tyrants and cultural Marxists are playing the long game, and laws like this are just more efforts to chip away at our Liberty, cut by cut.




posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 03:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
there were 680,000 people on the government’s master terrorism watchlist,” the American Civil Liberties Union noted, and “even according to the government’s own records, 280,000 of them have no affiliation with a recognized terrorist group.” www.newsweek.com...


Thank you for proving my point.

They have fixed much of this.

And to your other point. If it's 800 people on the watchlist then perhaps the states should know about them and be able to do a more thorough investigation.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Oh you, dont you change lol.


You know you love me



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 03:52 PM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Yes, because once they are here, they can become citizens and then they can buy.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 03:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: ketsuko

Might stop the next one. Or the one that gets you.


I will at least have a better chance at defending myself, because I carry concealed every day.

Last try ISIS sympathizers made in my state found them on the pavement without even making across the parking lot, after taking a head shot each from a Glock.

Not saying one could never be caught totally off guard, but I would definitely have a better shot than folks who are disarmed by gun free 'safe zones'.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 03:53 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Or...we could put them on the watch list. You know. Just in case.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 03:54 PM
link   
a reply to: SonOfThor

What's that got to do with watch lists and this thread?



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 03:55 PM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity

If they fixed it then why complain about them needing to fix it. A list is not due process and I wont help deny due process because some people are scared of their own shadow.

Tell me - If you have to be a US citizen to by a gun why do they need legislation and a list?

Since checks are done through the federal government easier said than done. Your attempt to justify the action ignores due process. The government must have probable cause to charge you with a crime and even then absent certain felonies sit does not restrict a persons ability to obtain a firearm.

This list dolls out punishment without charge or a court being involved.

A list has been used to many times throughout history to oppress and that is what this list will do. If they have 280k people on a terror list with no links to terror groups whats to stop them from doing the same with this list.

The liberal left is killing this country through their knee jerk reactions and efforts to punish law abiding citizens,

You want to deny someone a gun, get some probable cause, file charges and go from there.


A question.

Are you antigun?


edit on 4-12-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-12-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Most people don’t find out they’re on a watch list until they try to board a plane. In the unlikely chance that legislation sponsored by Feinstein and other Democrats passes, a person wrongly placed on one of the terrorist watch lists could be prevented from buying a gun for a few days.


What's a few days wait? Is that going to really infringe so much?



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 03:58 PM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity

like the shooter who passed a DHS background check to get his wife here?
www.foxnews.com...

Officials said Thursday that Malik underwent and passed a Department of Homeland Security counterterrorism screening as part of the process of getting the K-1 visa. The visa would have been effective for 90 days, after which Malik would have had to apply for green card status through the Department of Homeland Security as the wife of an American. It was not immediately clear whether she did so.
until they can get the system working better then it is now for vetting i can understand some of the concern if not some of the hatred about the refugee issue
www.nytimes.com... from NY times

Ms. Malik entered the United States on a K-1 visa, a 90-day visa given to fiancés planning to marry Americans. The couple applied on Sept. 30, 2014, for a permanent resident green card for Ms. Malik, which requires passing criminal and national security background checks using F.B.I. and Department of Homeland Security databases, and she was granted a conditional green card in July 2015.
so if they passed those checks and still managed to pull off what they did can you at least understand why some people may be skeptical about how effective the vetting process really is?



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 03:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: ketsuko


Four years earlier, there were a million people on the terrorist watch list, according to figures gathered by USA Today, which cited the FBI and office of the Director of National Intelligence as sources. The two numbers could not be immediately reconciled. But they revealed problems in keeping accurate entries. Between 2007 and 2009, 51,000 people filed “redress” complaints that they were wrongly put on the watch list, according to the Department of Homeland Security. “In the vast majority of cases reviewed so far,” USA Today reported, “it has turned out that the petitioners were not actually on the list, with most having been misidentified at airports because their names resembled others on it.” www.newsweek.com...


And most of you all are the same people who won't let a few thousand very well vetted refugees find safe haven, aren't you? And these same representatives scare you daily too. Ludicrous.


Are you changing the topic mid thread?

Keeping it about firearms, only a tiny fraction of a percent of the hundreds of millions of legally owned firearms in this country are ever used in a crime, yet you are advocating for more regulations and control against those hundreds of millions of legally owned guns despite this tiny fraction.

At the same time, people being cautious about a group of people that are coming from the main area that ISIS exists are wrong?

Your logic doesn't work one way but not the other.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 03:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: ~Lucidity

If they fixed it then why complain about them needing to fix it. A list is not due process and I wont help deny due process because some people are scared of their own shadow.

Tell me - If you have to be a US citizen to by a gun why do they need legislation and a list?

Since checks are done through the federal government easier said than done. Your attempt to justify the action ignores due process. The government must have probable cause to charge you with a crime and even then absent certain felonies sit does not restrict a persons ability to obtain a firearm.

This list dolls out punishment without charge or a court being involved.

A list has been used to many times throughout history to oppress and that is what this list will do. If they have 280k people on a terror list with no links to terror groups whats to stop them from doing the same with this list.

The liberal left is killing this country through their knee jerk reactions and efforts to punish law abiding citizens,

You want to deny someone a gun, get some probable cause, file charges and go from there.


A question.

Are you antigun?


If they're a U.S. citizen and they're on a terrorist watchlist, then there's probably a reason. Also see above.

I wasn't the one complaining.
edit on 12/4/2015 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 04:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
...its obamas, the liberals, socialist fault.


Wow, I agree with you yet again, Duke.

You are spot on lately.




posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 04:01 PM
link   
With all of the 'pro-rights' voices, on behalf of 3.8%, it seems rather odd to see many of the same voices as 'anti-rights' for 2%.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: ~Lucidity

Most people don’t find out they’re on a watch list until they try to board a plane. In the unlikely chance that legislation sponsored by Feinstein and other Democrats passes, a person wrongly placed on one of the terrorist watch lists could be prevented from buying a gun for a few days.


What's a few days wait? Is that going to really infringe so much?


A few days too long. That would be an infringement on a constitutional right. What if you just won custody of your kids from an abusive ex. They threatened your life leaving the court room, so you wanted to go get a firearm to protect yourself.

You had to wait 3-4 days, but the next day you were murdered by said ex.

Any infringement, on a natural, constitutionally reinforced right, is unacceptable.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 04:01 PM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Yes..

The constitution says we have a right to address our accusers. When we remove the judicial branch we lose that ability. If the government is going to accuse someone of being a terrorist then they have to make their case in court in order to punish the person.

This list removes the court and is a back door gun grab.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 04:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: SonOfThor

What's that got to do with watch lists and this thread?


I was responding to your fear mongering that "one of the next ones might get you" if we allow people on the list the ability to purchase firearms.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 04:03 PM
link   
Obama and his attorney general have made it very clear that anyone who is critical of Islam or muslims are somehow inciting violence and will almost certainly be added to their version of a "terror watch list".


Meanwhile the muslim terrorists responsible for this recent massacre were not on any such list as far as we are being told.

edit on 4-12-2015 by Deny Arrogance because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: SonOfThor

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
a reply to: ketsuko


Four years earlier, there were a million people on the terrorist watch list, according to figures gathered by USA Today, which cited the FBI and office of the Director of National Intelligence as sources. The two numbers could not be immediately reconciled. But they revealed problems in keeping accurate entries. Between 2007 and 2009, 51,000 people filed “redress” complaints that they were wrongly put on the watch list, according to the Department of Homeland Security. “In the vast majority of cases reviewed so far,” USA Today reported, “it has turned out that the petitioners were not actually on the list, with most having been misidentified at airports because their names resembled others on it.” www.newsweek.com...


And most of you all are the same people who won't let a few thousand very well vetted refugees find safe haven, aren't you? And these same representatives scare you daily too. Ludicrous.


Are you changing the topic mid thread?

Keeping it about firearms, only a tiny fraction of a percent of the hundreds of millions of legally owned firearms in this country are ever used in a crime, yet you are advocating for more regulations and control against those hundreds of millions of legally owned guns despite this tiny fraction.

At the same time, people being cautious about a group of people that are coming from the main area that ISIS exists are wrong?

Your logic doesn't work one way but not the other.


Nope. Just pointing out a bit of cognitive dissonance amongst our illustrious representatives who speak with forked tongue in comparing their stances on the two issues.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 04:03 PM
link   
Dupe post but I will add...maybe it's flat out hypocrisy. Or maybe they're just out to block whatever they can, as usual.
edit on 12/4/2015 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join