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
 

Darb

(2,807 posts)
21. So, your objections to the No Fly became public when it included tools of mass murder?
Wed Dec 9, 2015, 04:41 PM
Dec 2015

Seems so. As for the No Fly itself, I think there are probably some people that I would rather not be able to board a plane. As for whom should be on that list, someone has to make the call. Someone also has to define the criteria for being on it. I think it should be reviewable and I think there should be a way to get off of it if somehow you ended up on it by mistake. A legal, judicial path to getting off of the list.

I think adding No Gun to the No Fly list is a good idea quite frankly. Not being able to get a gun isn't as big a problem as some of you make it out to be and the positive from it outweighs the negative by ton. And I get the point you are trying to make with that "civil liberties" reference. It is a civil liberty only if you are a member of the militia, of which only the National Guard applies as far as I can tell. I deny the legitimacy of the judicial decision (for multiple reasons) upon which you base your view and expect that it will be over-turned in the future.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

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...»Reply #21