Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

femmedem

(8,187 posts)
23. I think most Democrats would prefer stricter gun control for everyone.The terror watch list
Tue Jun 21, 2016, 05:07 PM
Jun 2016

is a compromise they thought the Republicans might accept out of fear of looking completely unreasonable.

I am for very strict gun control for everyone but think that Greenwald has a valid point.

No right is beyond limits. I can't slander Glen, despite free speech. Terrorists shouldn't get guns. CrowCityDem Jun 2016 #1
How about suspected terrorists? discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2016 #3
How often will someone NEED that gun before they can prove their innocence? CrowCityDem Jun 2016 #19
Exactly. Justice Jun 2016 #26
I'm not okay with the burden being on the individual discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2016 #33
How does a person on that list "prove their innocence"? anoNY42 Jun 2016 #51
Just read today that someone got off after an eight-year appeal scscholar Jun 2016 #76
I can't tell anoNY42 Jun 2016 #86
Obviously, we're fine with it since we're fighting for that right no in congress! (ntxt) scscholar Jun 2016 #91
Passing a law to limit sales to folks on the watch list anoNY42 Jun 2016 #92
" ... prove their innocence?" dumbcat Jun 2016 #57
"Proving ones innocence" is found where in American jurisprudence? Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #125
I never thought I would argue this side but no Florencenj2point0 Jul 2016 #133
Many feel the same way discntnt_irny_srcsm Jul 2016 #138
Thanks, CrowCityDem. elleng Jun 2016 #31
You can slander or defame Glen all you want, and you won't be charged with a crime. Captain Stern Jun 2016 #62
I've yet to see a gun nut that didn't change their The_Casual_Observer Jun 2016 #2
IME, the opposite is true... jack_krass Jun 2016 #42
where did that happen? maxsolomon Jun 2016 #82
Yes, I would like to hear of this mythical place where guns are "strictly controlled." Orrex Jun 2016 #90
still waiting to hear about your experience maxsolomon Jun 2016 #103
Sorry, casual, but I have seen people arm up when "affected by gun violence." Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #126
amazing how this became a due process issue when guns got involved nt geek tragedy Jun 2016 #4
Isn't it a due process issue? hack89 Jun 2016 #6
the point was the due process concern existed when this geek tragedy Jun 2016 #7
Not sure that getting on a airplane is a civil right. hack89 Jun 2016 #9
the right to travel is considered a constitutional right nt geek tragedy Jun 2016 #11
Yes....but use of airports, drivers licences are considered privileges. nt msanthrope Jun 2016 #13
The right to travel doesn't mean the right to get on a private plane. n/t X_Digger Jun 2016 #40
with respect to international travel, the courts have ruled that it does JustinL Jun 2016 #44
Umm, no. Read your own excerpt, dear. n/t X_Digger Jun 2016 #46
Um, read post 54. Is that clear enough for you? n/t JustinL Jun 2016 #55
Perhaps you should read it yourself. n/t X_Digger Jun 2016 #84
It isn't. The right to travel is a fundamental right. But using airports is a privilege. nt msanthrope Jun 2016 #12
with respect to international air travel, your position has been rejected by the courts JustinL Jun 2016 #43
Thanks.....but what you cite actually proves my point. Google Law School is generally msanthrope Jun 2016 #45
You should tell that to the Court. They continued to reject your point in a later ruling. JustinL Jun 2016 #54
Yes....It's interesting how you think a single decision in the 9th circuit confers a fundamental msanthrope Jun 2016 #58
The Ninth Court didn't "confer" a right. It recognized a restriction of a constitutional liberty. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #128
Thank you for agreeing with me. nt msanthrope Jul 2016 #142
People complained about that too. aikoaiko Jun 2016 #14
Maybe you didn't notice before now. Scootaloo Jun 2016 #78
It was a due process issue ten years ago... arendt Jun 2016 #16
Been an issue since the Bush years. Just thought we'd be rid of these lists by now. NutmegYankee Jun 2016 #25
But... but, GUNZ! Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #130
Opposed "no-fly," oppose "no buy," then and now... Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #127
Greenwald calls it a war on due process but if anybody ever MattP Jun 2016 #5
Everybody knows his game by now... Blue_Tires Jun 2016 #8
+1 JoePhilly Jun 2016 #94
^^^AMEN to this!^^^ Surya Gayatri Jul 2016 #116
This would mean his White Supramacist civil clients would not be able to buy guns. msanthrope Jun 2016 #10
When Ted Kennedy couldn't fly cuz Watchlist, we all hated it... arendt Jun 2016 #15
^^^This. Kang Colby Jun 2016 #17
We all hated the watchlist until 1/20/2009 n/t arcane1 Jun 2016 #27
Clever generalization, sir. n/t arendt Jun 2016 #28
Funny how that goes. rhett o rick Jun 2016 #34
Inaccurate and unsupported generalizations are often funny. LanternWaste Jun 2016 #60
That's the problem with it treestar Jun 2016 #88
This is true..nt G_j Jun 2016 #99
THIS^^^^^^^+1 AntiBank Jul 2016 #111
He's correct. Hassin Bin Sober Jun 2016 #18
They are trying to legitimize the no-fly list. Guns are the excuse. n/t arendt Jun 2016 #22
^^^This^^^ Gormy Cuss Jun 2016 #87
The Feds already have: the 4th Amendment the Feds took away our rights without due process MagickMuffin Jun 2016 #98
Yep. One prohibition (the WOD) got the 4th; the other attempt (on GUNZ!) goes after the 5th. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #131
Lynch refuses to say even how many Americans are on the terror watch list cali Jun 2016 #20
Not even Ted Kennedy-- the no fly list included the name, "T. Kennedy" X_Digger Jun 2016 #41
"Maybe the Libertarians can get two percent of the vote this year!" struggle4progress Jun 2016 #21
Dream big! zappaman Jun 2016 #72
I think most Democrats would prefer stricter gun control for everyone.The terror watch list femmedem Jun 2016 #23
how about a process to *get off* the watch list? 0rganism Jun 2016 #24
I wouldn't expect anything less from the man who supported President Bush when he signed the Patriot still_one Jun 2016 #29
Don't like GG's criticism? Quit giving him reason to criticize. Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #30
He needs no reasons other than his gigantic ego and tiny mind. nt arely staircase Jun 2016 #32
His hair is unkempt also. How childish. rhett o rick Jun 2016 #35
I never said a word about his.appearance. nt arely staircase Jun 2016 #38
LOL. You don't get it. You are attacking him personally and not what he says or what he rhett o rick Jun 2016 #39
You need a dictionary. arely staircase Jul 2016 #110
What do you fear from those that want the truth? Will they rock your comfy bubble rhett o rick Jul 2016 #114
--Asshat who lives in Brazil. NuclearDem Jun 2016 #36
Many same sex couples had to live outside the US because the US did not give LGBT any rights Bluenorthwest Jun 2016 #70
Greenwald is right as usual. DesMoinesDem Jun 2016 #37
Bernie Sanders vs. Greenwald re Citizens United? TomCADem Jun 2016 #61
Greenwald is an asshole. He's always been an asshole. baldguy Jun 2016 #47
Once we get this passed we can change the definition of terrorist to suit us. ileus Jun 2016 #48
We all hated the watch list when Dim Son was president. Odin2005 Jun 2016 #49
Yep, the new normal Hydra Jun 2016 #50
We wanted gun control when he was president oberliner Jun 2016 #52
So by any means necessary then? NickB79 Jun 2016 #75
No oberliner Jun 2016 #80
I don't object to the watch list.... Adrahil Jun 2016 #53
I didn't hate the watch list...believe it is needed for some sick fucks out there snooper2 Jun 2016 #74
Did we? treestar Jun 2016 #89
The problem is that it is easily turned into a way for the government to persecute... Odin2005 Jun 2016 #100
greenwald sucks for not being able to read the first part of the second amendment. La Lioness Priyanka Jun 2016 #56
Maybe he's right, maybe not Bradical79 Jun 2016 #59
I think Glenn right. That just illustrates the insanity of the 2nd Amendment and why it needs to go RAFisher Jun 2016 #63
Why is this idiot always against Democrats.. even to the point of siding with Republcans?? DCBob Jun 2016 #64
He was a big George W. Bush cheerleader. Cali_Democrat Jun 2016 #66
Then why is he seen as such a hero by many on this board? DCBob Jun 2016 #67
Bullshit. But you knew that already. AntiBank Jul 2016 #112
Mark it on your calendars: I disagree with Glenn Greenwald about something. nt Electric Monk Jun 2016 #65
Why do we have to mark it on our calendars? Cali_Democrat Jun 2016 #68
To Protect Hillary Clinton, Democrats Wage War on Their Own Core Citizens United Argument Electric Monk Jun 2016 #69
Greenwald Trying to Deflect Again TomCADem Jun 2016 #71
To Protect Hillary Clinton, Democrats Wage War on Their Own Core Citizens United Argument Electric Monk Jun 2016 #73
Wow! Bernie is Actually Protecting Hillary! TomCADem Jun 2016 #83
Greenwald thinks he's 'cool' by taking contrary positions on almost everything. randome Jun 2016 #77
Contrary to who? You? Someone always has a contrary position. DesMoinesDem Jun 2016 #81
As in contrarian. One who takes provocative posititions arely staircase Jul 2016 #144
The ACLU is a bunch of trolls! DesMoinesDem Jul 2016 #148
libertarian nut laureate - I am so stealing that! Rex Jun 2016 #79
+1 JoePhilly Jun 2016 #95
Much as I loathe and despise Greenwald, on this specific point he's not wrong. Donald Ian Rankin Jun 2016 #85
well, since the only purpose of an assault weapon is for the killing of people renate Jun 2016 #93
And Glenn Greenwald issues another Manichean screed. MineralMan Jun 2016 #96
So imagine this scenario - Vinca Jun 2016 #97
That senerio shows more about your ignorance of the current laws oneshooter Jun 2016 #104
A person calling me ignorant should check their spelling and punctuation. Vinca Jun 2016 #105
So you do not deny that what was said is true. oneshooter Jun 2016 #108
It would be nice if you would elaborate. Vinca Jun 2016 #109
These "young arab men" are not legal residents nor are they citizens of the US. oneshooter Jul 2016 #117
Well, I hope you have the opportunity to fly with them. Vinca Jul 2016 #120
????? oneshooter Jul 2016 #122
The point of the thread is "no fly, no buy." Vinca Jul 2016 #123
Then run away. n/t oneshooter Jul 2016 #136
To quote you: ??????????????????????. Vinca Jul 2016 #140
The picture you paint is silly, like a caricature jack_krass Jun 2016 #107
I know a couple people on the watch list. HooptieWagon Jun 2016 #101
who? stonecutter357 Jun 2016 #102
I Agree with Glen. The establishment wants a "quick fix" so they can pat themselves on the back jack_krass Jun 2016 #106
nothing like a little Greenwald to get the authoritarians buzzing. AntiBank Jul 2016 #113
I would agree if guns weren't weapons and being denied guns was a burden. It's not. kcr Jul 2016 #115
So you would not mind it if your name is on the list? n/t oneshooter Jul 2016 #118
Of course I would mind if my name was on the list. kcr Jul 2016 #119
And a eight year process to be removed from the list, and the funds needed to do so. oneshooter Jul 2016 #121
Why would you ask that? Are you assuming they would be? kcr Jul 2016 #124
You keep going back to guns. I am speaking of loosing the right to board an airplane, possably oneshooter Jul 2016 #135
No one said you had to reply to my post in the first place n/t kcr Jul 2016 #139
OK then, be rude THEN run away. n/t oneshooter Jul 2016 #141
Remember when liberals were against the government declaring people terrorists with no due process? portlander23 Jul 2016 #129
Hats off to the DUers here who support gun-control, but do not support the Terrah Watch List. Eleanors38 Jul 2016 #132
What the hell were these 10 people doing on the terrorist watch list? portlander23 Jul 2016 #134
Not getting on an airplane? n/t oneshooter Jul 2016 #137
Fuck that rat fucking libertarian fool. bettyellen Jul 2016 #143
I disagree profoundly. He is a vital force that uplifts the country. AntiBank Jul 2016 #145
Brazil? nt arely staircase Jul 2016 #147
The lists are badly flawed and arbitrary bluestateguy Jul 2016 #146
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Greenwald: People on watc...»Reply #23