We could still shoot down a Russian airplane or two just to make some folks happy over here. So what if that puts the entire US Eastern Seaboard in jepoardy since we'll be showing the world just how tough we are!
Nice misinformation. The no fly list was adopted by the Bush Administration. But of course from your perspective George W. Bush probably is a leftist. You are a clown. Attacks like San Bernardino are a wakeup call to look at any likely way such a terrorist attack could have been committed, not limited to the particulars of how the two involved actually proceeded. For example in the Paris attacks most of those involved were NOT Syrian immigrants. Only one MIGHT have been. Yet all the right wingers here were talking about was stopping immigration. Was that fair? Personally I think it's INSANE that foreigners on the no fly list can walk into a gun shop and buy a toothpick let alone an automatic weapon, but that seems to be the difference between a reasonable position like mine and those in thrall to the gun lobby like you. And don't get me started on the second amendment - what well regulated militia do you belong to? That's a rhetorical question, btw. Have a nice day.
This is a silly response. I suspect you already know that. The point was that both the left and right use fear mongering to push their agenda. Your opinion on the second amendment is irrelevant as is mine when it comes to that, so let's leave that out of it. The left has an anti 2nd agenda. Of course the no-fly list already existed. Obama tried to use fear mongering from the San Bernardino incident to further his agenda. As you know, flying is not a right as much as driving isn't. Using that list to bypass the 5th amendment deny citizens their second amendment right is unconstitutional. ftr even though bush is irrelevant to the point I think he was an awful president. Why you tried to suggest I think he's a leftist is beyond me.
citizens cannot be denied rights without due process. Using the no-fly list to deny the 2nd would be doing just that. of course no one wants terrorists to be able to buy guns though.
Well. You could use that logic against any executive action at all. "Denying rights" is so broad as to be meaningless. Due process doesn't necessarily mean you are entitled to full hearing before your rights are affected. I've posted this before, but the second amendment isn't impervious to interpretation, regardless of what you may hear from gun nuts with an axe to grind over it. It's a species of law, just like all other species of law, written in an imperfect language by imperfect humans who were competing strenuously amongst themselves and making all kind of low compromises all along the way. What it truly means at any given point in time is what the judge you are standing in front of says it means. Its not beyond the realm of imagination that the executive power that gives the president the ability to restrict people from flying can be employed to restrict people from obtaining firearms. Whether or not that is wise or asinine is not the point. The fifth amendment has nothing to do with it.
if you have some examples of executive actions that have completely denied citizens rights from the bill of rights I'd like to see them. part of the problem with the no-fly lisy is it's nearly impossible to get off. there's no due process associated with it.
anyway, fear mongering is clearly used by both sides. my example upsets you guys because you happen to agree with the agenda being pushed with it. thank god btw, presidents cannot just take rights away using a secret government list. imagine what president trump would pull? he'd likely have the deirking and big blocker portions of the Internet shut down by bill gates
Off the top of my head I'd probably go with the entire city of Boston being instructed to stay inside for a day, but it's admittedly not an apples to apples example.
I can actually answer some of this for Dierking.. Bush signed a few that fit this criteria actually... -He signed an executive order allowing CIA interrogators to skirt the laws of the Geneva Convention at guantanamo and other places (goes against the 8th Amendment) -He signed an executive order allowing "Faith-based groups" that receive federal funding to hire folks based on their religion (goes against the 1st Amendment) -He signed an executive order allowing the government to seize property and assets from people here and abroad that they broadly deemed as aiding the insurgency in Iraq and Afghanistan (goes against the 5th amendment) that's just Bush though. There is a long history of our Presidents and executive actions that skirt the Bill of Rights to some degree- most of the time in war time but with your broad use of criticism in your example you could probably find an example from each president. Hell our greatest president ever Abraham Lincoln violated habeus corpus with executive action, he also sent union troops into Baltimore (maryland - a union state) to confiscate weapons (i don't have to tell you which amendment that violates!) --- this thing about the no fly list and guns that I don't get, it was conservatives that pushed for this damn no fly list, now they are all of a sudden against it?? IF there's a problem with no due process associated with it, that's a problem with the list itself.. which has been around since 2001. Where was the criticism then? how absurd is it to think we put these people on the list because we don't trust them to fly in an airplane but we want to fight for those same people to own a gun. that's absurdity.... and yet its not so much the list that people have a problem with its the second part. that's absurdity. Gun rights people lose credibility with stupid battles like this.
Christie acting like people shouldn't leave their homes, or LA schools shutting down being Obama's fault, or saying we are in World War III, is fear mongering. Wondering why people on the no fly list, especially foreigners, should be able to buy guns is not fear mongering. It is common sense.
As crazy as Ann Coulter is, she makes quite a few valid points here: It's Time for the Other 13 Candidates to Drop Out
I guess I'm not doing a good job of articulating my issue with the recent proposal by Obama. First of all, I never said or insinuated I was against the no-fly list. I haven't shared an opinion on the list itself one way or another. What I'm against is using the list for something new, that it wasn't intended for. The original intent was to prevent people from flying, which is not a right. Let's talk about it in more general terms, because that's where my problem lies. My problem is the government building up __A_LIST__ and using it to deny __A_RIGHT__ from citizens without giving them due process. Obviously I'm a big 2a supporter and discuss that quite a bit, but that's distant second in terms of importance here. The bigger issue is the general idea of the power that would give the government. Here's an article from the Huffington Post, a left-leaning news outlet, about the no-fly list. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/25/terrorist-watch-list_n_5617599.html You should read the entire article, but this part is particularly shitty. Thank you for the examples, I will look at them. I honestly have not had time to do it yet, had to do some house work after work. I really appreciate your ability as a poster to look at things reasonable and not take a hard line on one side or the other politically. We have agreed and disagreed on a lot of things, probably more disagreement, but there's always respectful & reasonable discussion. I wish there was more of that here.
There are a lot of differences between the two of us, but one big one that needs to be stated is this. You have far more trust in the government than I do. The no-fly list is a bureaucratic mess created by government hacks. You think it's common sense to allow them to determine whether or not you have one right or another? I laugh at you.
I very much dislike Trump as a candidate. After what Paul Ryan and the RINO hacks pulled with the omnibus I'm strongly considering changing my mind against my best judgement, for the sole purpose of sending a message that needs to be sent. They're all on the same team. I'm almost ready to say Washington, YOU'RE FIRED.
