So, we should be afraid of Syrian refugees killing us and we need govt action to protect us

[Yavin4]

BUT...born and bred American gunmen can shoot up schools, movie theaters, and churches AND THERE'S NOTHING THAT WE CAN DO ABOUT IT.

Do I have that right? Can someone explain the logical inconsistency?

[Vinca]

1. This is driving me totally nuts.

Paris was, of course, a tragedy, but we have this kind of body count from American on American violence on a weekly, sometimes daily, basis. It would be nice if they would spend a couple of minutes on the latest American massacre a few days ago in Texas. Americans should definitely be afraid of terrorists . . . but the homegrown variety are a much bigger threat to us.

[Yavin4]

2. Indiscriminate mass violence done by an immigrant is bad.

Indiscriminate mass violence done by an American? Eh, what can you do? "These things happen."

[flamingdem]

3. We need to point out over and over that the NRA's power allows those on the terrorist watch list

to buy guns legally!!!!!!!!!!!

[Lizzie Poppet]

7. The thing is...

The thing is, that watch list is over 1.5 million and growing. Somehow I don't think there are more than a small fraction of that number of legit "possible terrorists" here. If even a small portion of that number were really terrorists, we'd be having Paris-style incidents daily. That we don't tells me that the large majority of people on that list are probably there for no better reason than they look Middle Eastern.

This creates a tough situation (and one I haven't really come to a conclusion about, myself): are we ready to deny an enumerated constitutional right based on what amounts to racial profiling? It's not an easy question to answer, imo...

[flamingdem]

8. The NRA should not have the power to endanger US citizens by allowing

anyone on a watchlist to easily and legally buy guns.

That is beyond the pale, you have not come up with a good justification in my opinion.

There are also millions of mentally ill and they might be unfairly barred, that doesn't mean we suspend for them.

[Lizzie Poppet]

10. I'm not trying to justify anything.

As I said, my issue is with the legitimacy of the list. I'm undecided about whether those objections weigh more heavily than the desire to prevent legal weapon sales to possible terrorists. In other words, is preventing (or, more realistically, slowing) the acquisition of weapons by those who turn out to really be terrorists more important than legitimizing a use of racial profiling and denying an enumerated right w/o due process? I don't think that's a simple matter at all.

[flamingdem]

11. I see, an issue for the ACLU

I agree that's important

[2naSalit]

4. Could it be that

murikin exceptionalism?

[Yavin4]

5. Ah, Possibly so

I guess it's a freedom thing to be killed by a fellow American.

[2naSalit]

6. according to some

it's one of our godgivnrights doncha know.

[Avalux]

9. It's mind-boggling isn't it?

They are trying to terrify us into believing that terrorists disguised as refugees are going to come here and kill us. Evidence shows that we should be more concerned about our lax gun laws and home-grown terrorists (because that's what they are). Is that a concern for them? No.

Why do something about American terrorists when it feeds their objective - to keep us scared, and persuade us to vote for whomever will protect us.

[Shandris]

12. Well, I can explain it from their viewpoint (since that's not hard).

They don't see it as government ACTION to protect us. All that is required for special immigrants not to get into the country is...nothing. That's the default status. So it would be government INACTION, which is the same thing they want for gun control.

Obviously I don't agree, but there's the logic.

(Edit to add: This is in reference to 'rank and file', not Party Republicans. I'd never dream of trying to get into the head of those...entities.)

[treestar]

13. Both military action

And accepting no refugees are not effective means of preventing terror.

I suspect right wingers will tell you the difference is that the shooters are US citizens. They have Second Amendment rights. Furriners don't

[Myrina]

14. Simple.

White, paranoid, sociopathic rednecks with unlimited access to guns = good patriots.

Anyone else with unlimited access to guns = potential terrorists and race rioters.


Got it?

[bigwillq]

15. I think most refugees are of little threat

I just feel we should take care of folks already living in the USA before we take care of folks from other countries.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

16. Insanity in individuals is something rare - but in groups, parties, nations and epochs,

"Insanity in individuals is something rare - but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule." - Friedrich Nietzsche

When I was a kid it was the Russians. Then the bogeymen became the Chinese, the Cubans, the Vietnamese, Congolese, the Angolans, the Nicaraguans, the Salvadorans. Now, it's the Mexicans and Syrians. And, the scary Grenadians might make a comeback.

[moondust]

17. I think it's less about public safety

and more about rejecting presumably poor people of little means who will need some gov't assistance which means Republicans paying taxes.

Aren't some of these red state governors tacitly encouraging their poor to pack up and move somewhere else by making their states inhospitable for the poor, refusing to expand Medicaid, closing women's health clinics, etc.? "You folks would be better off in Minnesota." Kansas and Texas come to mind.

If the Syrian refugees were billionaires they'd be welcomed with open arms in 50 states.