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 Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)

hack89

(39,181 posts)
Wed Dec 9, 2015, 11:56 AM Dec 2015

Should people on the no-fly list be able to buy guns? Yes. [View all]

One problem is that the people on the no-fly list (as well as the broader terror watch list from which it is drawn) have not been convicted of doing anything wrong. They are merely suspected of having terror connections. And the United States doesn't generally punish or penalize people unless and until they have been charged and convicted of a crime. In this case, the government would be infringing on a right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution — and yes, like it or not, the right to buy a gun is a constitutional right according to the U.S. Supreme Court.

How certain is it that the people on the two lists are dangerous? Well, we don't really know, because the no-fly-list and the broader watch list are government secrets. People are not notified when they are put on, nor why, and they usually don't discover they have been branded suspected terrorists until they try to travel somewhere.

What's more, it's not clear how much impact Feinstein's law would have. The broader watch list, which is actually a database maintained by the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center, apparently had about 480,000 names on it in 2011, according to the FBI, and it has since swelled to about 1.1 million names, according to the ACLU. Of those, the vast majority are noncitizens living overseas; the number of American citizens on the list is believed to be fewer than 10,000 people.

That's important because federal law already bars gun sales to most people who are not U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents or holders of valid visas, which means the vast majority of the people on the suspected terror list would already be barred from buying a firearm in the U.S. even without Feinstein's law. That leaves us with about 10,000 American citizens (and some legal residents) who, under the proposed law, would be barred from exercising a constitutional right. That gives us pause.


http://www.latimes.com/opinion/editorials/la-ed-terrorist-watch-list-20151207-story.html

The LA Times is strongly pro-gun control. They also understand the importance of civil liberties.
28 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I'd be ok with this if we knew the list was 100 percent accurate. yeoman6987 Dec 2015 #1
So you are fine with no due process? hack89 Dec 2015 #3
I don't endnote know the requirements for getting on the list yeoman6987 Dec 2015 #5
If they are that bad they should be in the criminal justice system hack89 Dec 2015 #6
One of the ways of getting on those lists is having either the same name, or a similiar name. GGJohn Dec 2015 #8
True beltanefauve Dec 2015 #14
What other rights should we strip away at the same time??? ileus Dec 2015 #2
It never ceases to amaze me that some progressives are wholly against the Bush era secret govt lists GGJohn Dec 2015 #4
Hypocrisy? More like evil brilliance. Dr. Strange Dec 2015 #15
Finally some common sense from the media on this topic tularetom Dec 2015 #7
No it does not make any sense, just safeinOhio Dec 2015 #9
Another person in need of a civics class and the role of the judiciary. nt hack89 Dec 2015 #10
A conundrum zipplewrath Dec 2015 #11
Like getting into a squirting contest with a skunk: You will lose. Eleanors38 Dec 2015 #18
abso-effin-lutly zipplewrath Dec 2015 #23
I'm glad to see the Times taking this position, and I agree that we should petronius Dec 2015 #12
But why the * is the no fly list okay to begen with? Johonny Dec 2015 #13
I am on a species of the no fly list. Or I was. AngryAmish Dec 2015 #16
You are not on the list, the other guy is. ManiacJoe Dec 2015 #25
Nothing stops someone on that list from getting firearms from someone who isnt 951-Riverside Dec 2015 #17
Could you kindly link to the thread you started condemning the No Fly List itself? Darb Dec 2015 #19
I would support the no fly list if it was transparent and there was real due process hack89 Dec 2015 #20
So, your objections to the No Fly became public when it included tools of mass murder? Darb Dec 2015 #21
ok. nt hack89 Dec 2015 #22
Yeah, I frankly found that problematic Matariki Dec 2015 #24
If you are too dangerous to fly, you are too dangerous to be out of jail. ManiacJoe Dec 2015 #26
I would like to see the no-fly list struck down as unconstitutional. (nt) Nye Bevan Dec 2015 #27
Nope. deathrind Dec 2015 #28
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Should people on the no-f...