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
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Complain to the families of the Pulse and Sandy Hook victims about your right to due process [View all]Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)155. Well, we "slipped" from No-Fly to No-Buy with fluid-drive ease.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
164 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Complain to the families of the Pulse and Sandy Hook victims about your right to due process [View all]
lindysalsagal
Jun 2016
OP
We're a largely anti-gun website, so I'm not sure who you're addressing.
DisgustipatedinCA
Jun 2016
#1
There are plenty here who are pro-gun and who are apologists for private citizens owning
Squinch
Jun 2016
#2
There may indeed be folks on DU claiming that "everyone and anyone who wants to bear arms be allowed
TeddyR
Jun 2016
#65
As I understand it, the Feinstein bill called for anyone on the No-Fly list any time within the
calimary
Jun 2016
#54
Yes. You're correct. He wasn't on the no-fly list at the time of the massacre.
calimary
Jun 2016
#139
Well, we (DU) already support the extrajudicial killing of American citizens on the POTUS' say-so,
TransitJohn
Jun 2016
#122
Complete silliness to apply so much credence to such a relatively small amount of money
pipoman
Jun 2016
#23
I NEED not to be singled out as someone who doesn't have the same rights everyone else does.
Donald Ian Rankin
Jun 2016
#18
Due Process is very over-rated, especially for suspicios people. CHicago PD has a great list,
jmg257
Jun 2016
#22
Proof? FBI doesn't need any proof, or even evidence. Reasonable suspicion is plenty.
jmg257
Jun 2016
#26
No, your claim is bullshit. This was posted years *after* you joined:
friendly_iconoclast
Jun 2016
#36
Fuck that police-state cheerleading. Here's how DU *used* to feel about attitudes like that:
friendly_iconoclast
Jun 2016
#34
Not ALL civil rights: just assault semi-automatics. So, yes . You have no right to deprive people of
lindysalsagal
Jun 2016
#44
Representatives. And americans overwhelmingly want semi-automatics banned.
lindysalsagal
Jun 2016
#47
"...another gun lover on ignore" because he/she put-paid to your argument? Understandable.
Eleanors38
Jun 2016
#159
Your 'conclusions' are merely an old political tactic currently known as Lovejoying:
friendly_iconoclast
Jun 2016
#90
A lot of children were (and still are) harmed by their families' alcohol use
friendly_iconoclast
Jun 2016
#132
You keep making statements about how you "know" what your opponents really care about
friendly_iconoclast
Jun 2016
#133
I value *all* of the Constitution. In your own words, are there any other parts of it that...
friendly_iconoclast
Jun 2016
#137
No reply? Ok then:Your stance is a moral-panic fuelled special pleading
friendly_iconoclast
Jun 2016
#148
Correction: No mass murders in the U.S. have occurred using "automatic assault rifles" (redundant).
Eleanors38
Jun 2016
#160
Maybe we do care and we want to see something done. Something that works to save lives.
Kang Colby
Jun 2016
#144
Due process is not so important that you should expect others to be willing to die for it
anigbrowl
Jun 2016
#128
Neither of those murders were on the no fly list, were they? I don't understand the point here.
uppityperson
Jun 2016
#129
Which, if the polls were correct, includes far more people than will admit it now (nt)
LongtimeAZDem
Jun 2016
#151
Banning assault weapons would not have anything to do with due process and they know it.
Rex
Jun 2016
#150
The "where were the rights of the victim?" argument has often been used to defend abuses of
LongtimeAZDem
Jun 2016
#152