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.

 

DHS Official: Using Terror Watch Lists To Infringe On Second Amendment Rights*Snipped

page: 4
21
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 06:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Joneselius
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Where would you draw the line then? I'm just saying comments like that don't help. So as you're clearly better informed and willing to be sarcastic to prove it, I'm sure you're about to tell us? Noi?

If not, why say anything at all?



I don't like profiling of any form. I hate being profiled for wearing a damn tie dyed t-shirt when I drive to a music festival and I'd hate being profiled as a gun owner. And if I was a Muslim, I wouldn't want to be profiled for that either. Profiling is lazy detective work.

No it isn't, that is a cop out and you know it.

The cops are more likely to find drugs on a hippie on the way to a phish concert than they are people in suits on the way to church.

It is a fact.

It doesn't matter if you like it, it is still true.




posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 06:57 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

I'm sorry, what?

There have been more guns sold over the last 7 years than were sold over a hundred years prior.

I can't throw a brick in any direction without hitting an SUV with a gun sticker on it.

Gun loving is more out now than Caitlyn Jenner. Bumper stickers, tee-shirts, you name it. It feels a little like compensation, honestly.

I have no problem with legal gun owners. I just don't understand why they are always trying to show me their weapon.

"Hey bro, check this out."

No, I don't want to touch your gun. And no, I don't need a tour of your armory. Would you like a tour of my steam account? No? Why not?

Gun owners are under attack like Christians are feeling the effect of a "War on Christmas." Both are media constructs with little or no basis in fact or reality.

There is no force on earth large enough to go door to door confiscating American guns. All of Obama's talk is just political posturing. He would need Hogwarts and Star Trek combined to magically beam your guns away from your armory.

Relax and go skeet shooting or something. Hell -- I'd tag along for that. Clay discs make great target practice.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 07:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: DBCowboy

NO ONE is disregarding your rights!

"Due process" applies if you are accused of something. It does not excuse you from showing responsibility.

If door-to-door gun confiscation were to happen in some fantasy-land of yours, THAT would be "without due process."
But that is not what we are talking about.



Are you insane?

Due process is them presenting evidence in a court of law, where a jury of your peers judges you innocent or guilty.

This is stripping rights by fiat.

No evidence required, no jury, no legal judgements.

Just a buerocrat pointing and saying put him on the list.

That is not due process by any stretch of the imagination.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 07:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: DBCowboy

It should be noted that the ability to fly on airplanes isn't a right guaranteed by the Constitution so the existence of a no-fly list isn't taking your rights away without due process. I can't speak to denying gun ownership because you are on it though.


The right to travel freely is a right, and there are absolutely zero qualifiers to that statement.

Meaning , it doesnt say " as long as you walk, or ride a horse...etc"

Is riding in a plane traveling?

Then it is most definitely a right.
edit on 18-12-2015 by forkedtongue because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 09:45 PM
link   
a reply to: forkedtongue


Are you insane?


No. Are you?

"Due process" is having your credit record checked before being given a loan. It is being required to prove that you are able to drive a car before being given a license. It is proving that you are an American citizen before getting a passport. It is COMMON LAW.

If I am blind, I should not expect to be given a driver's license.....



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: 0zzymand0s


Relax and go skeet shooting or something. Hell -- I'd tag along for that. Clay discs make great target practice.

Don't they? I'd tag along for some target practice myself!!
( Clay pigeons are easier to shoot if you wait for them to land, though. Just saying.....
)

Mr Wigs was a skeet-shooting champ when he was in high school...and an expert (beyond marksman and sharp-shooter) in the military after that. He also taught me to shoot.



edit on 12/18/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 10:18 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Actually, "Due Process" is


the regular administration of the law, according to which no citizen may be denied his or her legal rights and all laws must conform to fundamental, accepted legal principles, as the right of the accused to confront his or her accusers.


dictionary.reference.com...



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 10:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: forkedtongue


Are you insane?


No. Are you?

"Due process" is having your credit record checked before being given a loan. It is being required to prove that you are able to drive a car before being given a license. It is proving that you are an American citizen before getting a passport. It is COMMON LAW.

If I am blind, I should not expect to be given a driver's license.....





Credit record?

That is monetary, not legally binding, and most definitely, not a metric of law.

Travelling is a guaranteed right, driving is not.

So yes they can limit me driving, but not riding in a vehicle.

You are grasping at straws, from a ball of yarn.

You are talking about everything but law and rights.

It is not a right to not have your credit checked.

Either be in the same zip code as rights and law, or I will ignore your trollery.

I have had more relevant conversation with a toddler.

At least they understand the difference between cops and crayons.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 10:41 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Yes. And?????

Fundamental, accepted legal practices are:
oh, let's say -

having your background checked before letting you buy a gun.

making sure you are capable of driving before being given a license to drive.

sending in a transcript to show that you are a qualified and certified teacher before being given a job in a school.


etc

Sorry this is so confusing for you, man.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 10:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Actually, "Due Process" is


the regular administration of the law, according to which no citizen may be denied his or her legal rights and all laws must conform to fundamental, accepted legal principles, as the right of the accused to confront his or her accusers.


dictionary.reference.com...


I don't think they understand the difference between wants and law.

Or commerce and law.

Or rights and law.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 10:44 PM
link   
a reply to: forkedtongue


It is not a right to not have your credit checked.

Either be in the same zip code as rights and law, or I will ignore your trollery.

I have had more relevant conversation with a toddler.

At least they understand the difference between cops and crayons.


LOL!!!!

are you serious?

Wow.
You're going to 'ignore my trollery' ?

Classic. Careful that you don't break the Terms and Conditions that give you a right to post here, brand new person!!



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 10:52 PM
link   
a reply to: forkedtongue

It's actually quite simple. I don't know why people want to complicate the issue.

I use actual legal definitions, quote the actual amendments.

This no-fly-list to inhibit gun ownership is unconstitutional.

It is dictatorial. It is something I would expect in North Korea. Not in the US.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 10:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: DBCowboy

Yes. And?????

Fundamental, accepted legal practices are:
oh, let's say -

having your background checked before letting you buy a gun.

making sure you are capable of driving before being given a license to drive.

sending in a transcript to show that you are a qualified and certified teacher before being given a job in a school.


etc

Sorry this is so confusing for you, man.


It is not codified in law that you have to send in transcript info to teach.

It is not licensed like say a lawyer or dentist or doctor.

That is not even the same ballpark.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 10:57 PM
link   



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: forkedtongue


It is not a right to not have your credit checked.

Either be in the same zip code as rights and law, or I will ignore your trollery.

I have had more relevant conversation with a toddler.

At least they understand the difference between cops and crayons.


LOL!!!!

are you serious?

Wow.
You're going to 'ignore my trollery' ?

Classic. Careful that you don't break the Terms and Conditions that give you a right to post here, brand new person!!


Lol, I have been here for years.

Trying to use the " your new so you don't matter" line yawn.....

Had several different names, get bored and make a new one, get a new phone make new generic email can't remember the old ones password since I never use it.

Can't remember old ats password since it's saved on my phone and I never enter it....

My accounts age is irrelevant to this discussion, and yes, trollery is what you are doing.

Don't like it, then be relevant, and don't confuse law, you know legally binding codified law, with civilian rules.

Which are not laws or rights.

There is a very large difference between them.



posted on Dec, 18 2015 @ 11:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: forkedtongue

It's actually quite simple. I don't know why people want to complicate the issue.

I use actual legal definitions, quote the actual amendments.

This no-fly-list to inhibit gun ownership is unconstitutional.

It is dictatorial. It is something I would expect in North Korea. Not in the US.


Agreed!


I didn't spend 6 years of my life to empower Lil Kim or Pol pot.



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 05:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Nah, they just get harassesed, beaten, and attacked by xenophobes while politicians actively ponder banning them from the country.


Do you actually know that there are Muslim extremists in many European countries, and even some moderates are also racists, and violent?...







One of the many instances of Muslim refugees attacking native people.


WARNING, EXPLICIT LANGUAGE





Here is a Muslim preacher, Anjem Choudary, from the UK who says the Islamic radical who murdered the soldier in the streets of London by decapitation was "a good Muslim".



How Muslims want to ban religious artifacts, including crosses from Catholic private schools.





There is even a mosque in France that French tax payers are paying, and it's name is "CONQUEST" (Al-Fath) .


...
In fact, 93 percent voted for socialist President Francois Hollande in the last election.

Former Muslim Pascal Hilout took CBN News to a mosque in the Paris district of Barbes that the city government of Paris is paying to renovate.

The name of the mosque is in Arabic, so perhaps the French don't realize that they're paying to renovate a mosque named "Conquest" (Al-Fath).

www1.cbn.com...


edit on 19-12-2015 by ElectricUniverse because: add links and comment.



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 05:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: neo96

So profiling Muslims as terrorists is ok, but as soon as gun owners are profiled that is when the line is crossed? Gotcha.

Yes.



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 06:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Joneselius
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Where would you draw the line then? I'm just saying comments like that don't help. So as you're clearly better informed and willing to be sarcastic to prove it, I'm sure you're about to tell us? Noi?

If not, why say anything at all?



I don't like profiling of any form. I hate being profiled for wearing a damn tie dyed t-shirt when I drive to a music festival and I'd hate being profiled as a gun owner. And if I was a Muslim, I wouldn't want to be profiled for that either. Profiling is lazy detective work.

Profiling as you call it is what every human and animal in the world do. You walk into the woods and you see a snake. You may recoil or stomp on it if it frightens you. That is profiling. A strange dog comes running toward you and you react, run, whatever...that is profiling. You see a member of a religious group who are known to hate Americans carrying something under their coat going into a mall...you are profiling.

Profiling has done every creature on Earth quite well for many, many generations. It ain't going anywhere and shouldn't. It works. If that makes you or the people profiled unhappy or uncomfortable...maybe don't dress or act like one of the problem people.

And no...I'm no angel. I have long hair, love metal music, am 6'2" 250lbs. I'm profiled all the time and don't cry about it. Hell...I embrace it.



posted on Dec, 19 2015 @ 06:09 PM
link   
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

On an individual level, you are completely correct.

But as far as an official government policy, it is against the constitution and the spirit of the Bill of Rights.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join