General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSo who gets to decide who's placed on a "terror watch list" and thus can't buy a gun?
Do we have an established criteria of who would qualify for this list? Or are people just picked to be on it by some big shot in the Justice Department or DHS?
If you are on the list, are you on for life? When do you ever get removed? What about people who are placed on it wrongly? We know that happens because people with the same names get mistakenly put on no-fly lists.
Where is the check and balance? Can a person sue the government to be removed from the list?
This proposal Obama has sounds unconstitutional and dangerous. You are taking away a person's constitutional right without a conviction in a court of law....all because the federal government has formed a certain opinion of you.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
rexcat
(3,622 posts)There are antiwar activist that are on the list, including nuns. There are a lot of people on the list that absolutely deserve to be listed bit some put on the list for purely political reasons. Once on the list it is near impossible to get off. The government, or I should say the current administration, was trying to correct some of this but I don't think it went anywhere.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)
onecaliberal
(32,898 posts)
dumbcat
(2,120 posts)Were you on a debate team?
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)Who needs due process, amirite?
onecaliberal
(32,898 posts)might take you seriously. GMAFB
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)I'll take you seriously.
The unfounded accusation demonstrates you've not actually thought this through, and are just convulsing with a knee-jerk reaction.
When you want to have an adult conversation, I'll be here.
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)Supposedly the terror watch list is far, far more accurate, but we really have no way to check that.
If a panel of Federal judges were to decide if a person's name went "on the list" I would be less wary, but -- while I'm a crazy gun grabber -- it would take some serious convincing to get me to trust a government list, even for an excellent cause. I realize the slippery slope is a logical fallacy, but less fallacious than most.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)1.52 In reviewing whether to include the TERRORISM INFORMATION about the KNOW or SUSPECTED TERRORIST in the Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment (TIDE), the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) reviews the totality of information. The totality of information is evaluated based on the experience of the reviewer, and the facts and rational inferences that may be drawn from those facts, including past conduct, current actions, and credible intelligence concerning future conduct. As part of this review, NCTC will determine if the information pertains to, or is related to, TERRORISM.
EL34x4
(2,003 posts)Extracts are provided to outside government agencies which they can use to compile their own lists, including the consolidated Terrorist Watchlist that is germane to this subject.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)
H2O Man
(73,622 posts)
msongs
(67,443 posts)madville
(7,412 posts)"no-fly list" misinformed? On all the Sunday morning shows all I heard was no-fly list, no-fly list, no-fly list. I didn't hear a single commentator or politician say "terror watch list".
EL34x4
(2,003 posts)It is a different list of which the no-fly list is only part of. The list Congress wants to use to prohibit gun purchases by suspected terrorists is the consolidated Terrorist Watchlist, maintained by the Terrorist Screening Center, a division of the National Security Branch of the FBI and created in 2003.
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/nsb/tsc
"Leading the U.S. government’s consolidated approach to terrorism watchlisting/screening.
That’s what the Terrorist Screening Center, or TSC, is all about. Born out of the events of 9/11 and created in 2003, the TSC maintains the U.S. government’s consolidated Terrorist Watchlist—a single database of identifying information about those known or reasonably suspected of being involved in terrorist activity.
By supporting the ability of front-line screening agencies to positively identify known or suspected terrorists trying to obtain visas, enter the country, board aircraft, or engage in other activity, the consolidated Terrorist Watchlist is one of the most effective counterterrorism tools for the U.S. government."
In theory, anyone who fills out a 4473 and submits to a NICS background check could immediately be considered a "suspected terrorist" and denied.
7 Ways That You (Yes, You) Could End Up On A Terrorist Watch List
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/25/terrorist-watch-list_n_5617599.html
meaculpa2011
(918 posts)
Dr. Strange
(25,925 posts)Texasgal
(17,048 posts)my little nephew ( all of 12 years old ) was placed on the "no fly" list. He has a very common name. My brother and family were trying to fly to NY for a family vacation.
He was taken from security and questioned without his parents. After this ordeal and after many letters and research he was finally removed. It took a year.
I'm not sure what to say about this, but my nephew was just traveling for a vacation with his family. Could we not question gun owners with the same zeal as "no fly" people?
Why or why not?
Glassunion
(10,201 posts)According to the US Census there are about 35,000 people of all ages alive today that carry that name here in the US.
darkangel218
(13,985 posts)And he was a prominent politician. I don't know how long it would take the average Joe to prove to the HS that a mistake was made.
Taking citizens rights away is never the right solution.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List
moondust
(20,006 posts)As long as there is a process by which one can appeal being on the list...
Not rocket science. 
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)Nope. Sorry. Not in favor of that at all.
moondust
(20,006 posts)Slightly delaying a tiny percentage of the population from obtaining their fix of death gadgets in the interest of public safety.
I WANT MY DEATH GADGET RIGHT FUCKING NOW AND I DON'T CARE HOW MANY INNOCENTS HAVE TO DIE FOR MY ADDICTION!!!!!!
Got it, Wayne.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)Who picks who gets placed on the list? What is the criteria?
How long does someone stay on it?
If someone is mistakenly put on it, how do they get off?
Where is the due process?
How do you appeal?
Would you mind answering these questions instead of making insults and trying to change the subject?
You actually want me to support an idea where the federal government has a blank check power to restrict a person's 2nd amendment rights without due process of law? Fuck that! I ain't going down that road! Maybe you trust Obama, but I don't trust Hillary and certainly don't trust Donald Trump. But you want to just hand over our freedoms to the government in exchange for a feeling of security.
And answer me this.....if we had this law...which mass murder would be prevented? Malik and Farook were not on ANY list. Dylann Roof was not on any list. James Holmes was not on any list. Adam Lanza was not on any list.
These are legit questions and concerns.
moondust
(20,006 posts)Paranoid much?
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)The government can't put restrictions on the Bill of Rights.
moondust
(20,006 posts)Are you fighting for your constitutional right to yell FIRE! in a crowded theater?
Antonin Scalia: There Are 'Undoubtedly' Limits To A Person's Right To Carry Guns
GGJohn
(9,951 posts)you most certainly can yell fire in a theater if you reasonably beiieve that there is a fire.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Your if-then qualifer moves the goalposts from the statement's original and implicit premise.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)Someone saying they "hate muslims" or "hate the government" or "hate this president" is protected speech. Correct?
Saying those things are not a threat, it's just an opinion, correct?
Now Should someone say that kind of thing, should they be barred from having a gun, in your opinion? If your answer is yes, then you are restricting a 2nd amendment right because a citizen exercised their 1st amendment right.
See the problem?
And you didn't answer my other important question....which mass murder would have been prevented had we had a law that bans guns for people on a "terror watch list?"
moondust
(20,006 posts)And ask Scalia about those "limits to a person's right to carry guns."
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)Which mass murder would this prevent?
hughee99
(16,113 posts)You have every right to your free speech, once you get your name off the no-fly list. The government will need to get a warrant to search your house, once you get your name off the no fly list. You have the right to remain silent... once you get off the no fly list. We haven't REMOVED those people's rights, we've just slightly delayed them.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)Trailing behind, but only by a bit, "Think of the children"... when excuses are trotted out.
Gag...
hughee99
(16,113 posts)cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)Seems more like fascism to me.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)And it sounds like they add names randomly to make it look like we're not racially profiling (which we clearly are), like Ted Kennedy and David Cole.
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)Obviously, not the former senator.
Yupster
(14,308 posts)How can a Constitutional lawyer even propose something like this.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts) krispos42
(49,445 posts)Can we prohibit them from political speech? Can we force them to adopt a state religion? Can we have them quarter soldiers in times of peace and war? Can we seize their papers and effects? Can we force them to testify against themselves? Can we try them without a jury? Can we try them over and over and over again? Can we deny them lawyers? Can we punish them with flogging and billion-dollar penalties? Can we make them slaves? Can we revoke their US citizenship? Can we deny them the right to vote?
TipTok
(2,474 posts)... and then once they conclusively prove they aren't a threat... in any way... to anyone... They can have all their rights back...
It would help if we could allow anyone in authority to add to the list and start a public awareness campaign to encourage neighbors, friends, family and coworkers to call and 'inform' about the scary nature of some folks.
Can't see that one going pear shaped... Nope.. Bulletproof..
Whoops.. Firearm related statement... Guess I'm on the list...
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)is that if you are too dangerous to be allowed on an airplane, then you are also too dangerous to be out of jail.
onecaliberal
(32,898 posts)Although abortion is legal, certain states make it impossible.
uppityperson
(115,681 posts)smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts) philosslayer
(3,076 posts)If you're name is on that list, why not stop at guns? It seems to me we should take away every right we can. No drivers licenses, social security numbers suspended so they can't work, bank accounts frozen, etc. If someone is on a terror watch list, shouldn't every basic right be suspended?
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)over this.
What a bunch of buffoons.
EL34x4
(2,003 posts)Watching people who have loathed everything George W. Bush has ever done suddenly become cheerleaders for his secret lists.
Todays_Illusion
(1,209 posts)
Recursion
(56,582 posts)The No-Fly List is maintained by the Terrorist Screening Center of the FBI.
They also maintain "Four-S", the Secondary Security Screening Selection list.
The Terrorist Watch List, or TSDB, is also maintained by TSC, but with independent input from other agencies.
The criteria by which any name appears on any of these lists are classified.
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)sarisataka
(18,774 posts)GOP presidential front-runner Donald Trump said late Tuesday that everyday Americans should monitor their neighbors for questionable behavior.
“The real greatest resource is all of you, because you have all those eyes and you see what’s happening,” he told listeners in Myrtle Beach, S.C.
ScreamingMeemie
(68,918 posts)pintobean
(18,101 posts)What is the justification for this proposal?
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)It's like a glory-hole quickie: when you think no one is watching, just wade right in and take care of bidness. I mean it don't involve me, and someone else is gettin' it, must be their fault.
Once due process goes, all constitutionally-protected legal procedures from the Fourth through the Eighth go with it, to say nothing of the Second. The whole gun-control debate has been taken down a couple of notches, and now we know which side owns that.
