• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Trump - we need to stop people on no fly list from buying guns

jhblaze1 said:
just abstain from voting then. A vote for GJ is a vote for Hillary.
Click to expand...

A vote for Johnson is a vote for Johnson. This kind of thinking, of settling for one candidate for fear of a shittier candidate, is lazy IMO. Vote with who represents you the best, even if it's the only vote that person gets.
 
mibro said:
This is where I part ways with Trump. Trump is gung-ho for state-sanctioned torture and the national security state. I am not.

However, it's childish to expect your candidate's position to be 100% congruent with yours.

So enjoy the yuks as you prepare to vote for Hillary.
Click to expand...

For gun owners this is like saying "So do you want to vote for the guy who is known to be shitty on RKBA issues, or some broad that is known to want to ban all of the guns?"

Not like it matters anyways, this will not be an issue for Trump... a lot of the public, even a lot of his base, is so ****ing dumb on this issue that they don't care or give two shits about due process. They don't even know what it is. The lack of awareness by most of the voter base (on both sides) as to the importance of civil rights is so gross and gigantic that it's pretty disgusting. If one guy in this thread thinks its "cool" because "everyone on that list is a scumbag" think about how many others feel that way without knowing WTF they're talking about. These are usually the same guys that hurr and durr when some guy gets let off because of an illegal search, first thing they will shout is "THEY EVENTUALLY FOUND THE DRUGZZZ THO HES GUILTEEEEY!" etc.

It would be pretty funny (or perhaps, very, very sad) if everyone had to take a BASIC Civics test that covers these kinds of things every 10 years in order to vote, to see how bad the failure rate would be.....

-Mike
 
A Defiant Goose said:
A vote for Johnson is a vote for Johnson. This kind of thinking, of settling for one candidate for fear of a shittier candidate, is lazy IMO. Vote with who represents you the best, even if it's the only vote that person gets.
Click to expand...

That's why I said abstain. A vote for GJ is a vote for GJ sure, in your heart of hearts, but in the real world in practice it's a vote for Hillary.

I totally agree with not choosing between the lesser of two evils but until a real third party gains traction it really is a wasted vote. GJ is the only person I could vote for with a clear conscience but I'd feel guilty the day after the election when President Elect Hillary Clinton is thanking everyone who voted for her, as it would essentially include me.
 
jhblaze1 said:
So great, tremendous. We're doing, and it's really going to be a terrific thing, we're going to make America great again.
Click to expand...

It's going to be Biggly Yuge!

new guy said:
The statement is indefensible, the best that he can do at this point is see the light and change his stance on the topic.
Click to expand...

Oh I am sure next week when no one cares about this event anymore, he will have gotten enough hate mail he will flip back on his statement and pander to us again.

Thanks guys, Trump is awesome! Way to vote.
 
jhblaze1 said:
That's why I said abstain. A vote for GJ is a vote for GJ sure, in your heart of hearts, but in the real world in practice it's a vote for Hillary.

I totally agree with not choosing between the lesser of two evils but until a real third party gains traction it really is a wasted vote. GJ is the only person I could vote for with a clear conscience but I'd feel guilty the day after the election when President Elect Hillary Clinton is thanking everyone who voted for her, as it would essentially include me.
Click to expand...
How do you expect a third party to gain traction when you're going around telling people that a vote for a third party candidate is "a vote for Hillary"?
 
NeverMiss said:
I dunno, this one's tough. I love Trump and am a hardened gun guy, but I can't help think this might make a little bit of sense. There's a reason those people are on the "list", they are scumbags. So, why not keep scumbags away from guns?
Click to expand...

I have heard that all it takes to get on the list is having a name similar to a known criminal. And it takes nearly an act of God to get off the list, once mistakenly added.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
jhblaze1 said:
That's why I said abstain. A vote for GJ is a vote for GJ sure, in your heart of hearts, but in the real world in practice it's a vote for Hillary.

I totally agree with not choosing between the lesser of two evils but until a real third party gains traction it really is a wasted vote. GJ is the only person I could vote for with a clear conscience but I'd feel guilty the day after the election when President Elect Hillary Clinton is thanking everyone who voted for her, as it would essentially include me.
Click to expand...
I don't think Gary Johnson has a chance of winning, but this is the best opportunity the Libertarian party has of putting their name on the map. Letting it go to waste by not voting with your conscience and abstaining or voting for the lesser evil would be a shame.
 
mibro said:
With transparency and due process I'd be a little more sympathetic.
Click to expand...

If this "watch list" was constrained soley to foreign nationals and not US citizens or lawful aliens, nobody would give a shit... but it is pretty obvious there are lots of citizens on that list, too...

The problem (or I should say feature) of our legal system with regards to this entire idea- is that if the state/government wants to apply criminal law against people it has to accuse them of an actual crime, it can't just say "We're restricting your rights because we don't like your friends. Or we don't like the mosque/church/whatever you pray at. Or we don't like the group of gun enthusiasts you hang out with." This means that the state, as an actor, is compelled to formally charge someone with a crime after an arrest. You can't just say "we're burdening you with this nebulous legal status as a human being because even though we don't have any hard proof of you committing a crime, we don't like you and think that you may be about to commit a crime."

-Mike
 
bigblue said:
Common sense gun laws, its for the children. Unless your child is on the no fly list, then you are screwed.

7 MONTH old
18 MONTH old
4 year old
14 year old



Do the research before agreeing with such a dangerous proposal.
Click to expand...

Wait... There is the name of a person on the list. Is that person, and only that person kept from flying? Or are all people with that name kept from flying?
 
kalash said:
How do you expect a third party to gain traction when you're going around telling people that a vote for a third party candidate is "a vote for Hillary"?
Click to expand...

It's a conundrum dude. The party needs to have more than a few % of the vote by this time in the cycle though. i don't have the answers. but I know voting for GJ is taking a vote away from the Orange Buffoon. Like it or not that's the practical reality.

For one thing, to gain traction the Libertarian party has to get serious and not have fat ****s stripping on stage. And stop calling Bill Weld a libertarian.


One of the more recent polls had Hitlery at 47 Trump at high 30 something and Johnson at 9%.

Take Jonson away and it would be neck and neck.
 
Shotgun Scully said:
I agree with the theory. However, I believe it could easily be corrupted (good guys getting screwed). I think that if your are in fact under scrutiny(no fly list etc) you need to be officially notified and then proceedings need to be run through a court and the burden of proof needs to be on the Gov. I.E. you are still "free" unless found to be a security risk through a clear judicial process and there also needs to be a clear appeal policy. In actuality it would probably still become a complete shit show.
Click to expand...

Yes it's a complete shit show because this concept you are thinking of "pre crime, possibly maybe someone might be bad, so we'll just put them on ice until we can figure that out or not" is not supported as a tenet in law. The state is compelled to "shit or get off the pot" when it wants to restrict someone's rights in any way... and typically this means, applying criminal charges. Not sure where you come from but "Some guy sorta kinda, possibly maybe, but maybe kinda, wants to be a muzzie terrorist... because we don't like him or his friends etc. " You can't possibly think, with a straight face, that detaining someone based on nebulous accusations is suitable for a free country, can you?

-Mike
 
I don't think he really knows all there is about this list. to the un informed it does seem to make common sense.
Just wait , the NRA will fill him in and he'll walk back on this, I'm pretty sure he'll change his stance to be being on the FBI watch list.
this guy really needs a go between to filter his remarks, how many times can he put his foot into his mouth before it's one too many?
 
drgrant said:
Yes it's a complete shit show because this concept you are thinking of "pre crime, possibly maybe someone might be bad, so we'll just put them on ice until we can figure that out or not" is not supported as a tenet in law. The state is compelled to "shit or get off the pot" when it wants to restrict someone's rights in any way... and typically this means, applying criminal charges. Not sure where you come from but "Some guy sorta kinda, possibly maybe, but maybe kinda, wants to be a muzzie terrorist... because we don't like him or his friends etc. " You can't possibly think, with a straight face, that detaining someone based on nebulous accusations is suitable for a free country, can you?

-Mike
Click to expand...


"At least its not me"
 
jhblaze1 said:
It's a conundrum dude. The party needs to have more than a few % of the vote by this time in the cycle though. i don't have the answers. but I know voting for GJ is taking a vote away from the Orange Buffoon. Like it or not that's the practical reality.

For one thing, to gain traction the Libertarian party has to get serious and not have fat ****s stripping on stage. And stop calling Bill Weld a libertarian.


One of the more recent polls had Hitlery at 47 Trump at high 30 something and Johnson at 9%.

Take Jonson away and it would be neck and neck.
Click to expand...
The Libertarian candidate, from what I hear, pulls more from liberal voters and disenfranchised Bernie Sanders voters than from Trump. I understand your mentality, but the truth is it has to get worse before it gets better, and it is going to get worse this year whether we like it or not. Sure, I'd like to have Trump before Clinton, but I prefer Johnson over both. And if he's able to make some noise in this election and get 10-15% of the vote we have an uphill but winnable battle in future elections. If we just elect to go with the lesser of the two evils and Trump wins while Johnson gets 8% of the vote or anything in single digits, we only prolong the inevitable. My best case scenario would be splitting the electoral college and neither party receiving 270 votes, then the electoral college meeting in the middle with Johnson. But then, I would love to shit cupcakes and piss rainbows, so I will settle for a Trump presidency with a 10-15% vote going for Johnson as well
 
robjax said:
rights cannot be restricted without due process.
Click to expand...

Correct. When the government suppresses the fundamental rights of its people without due process, it is tyranny, plain and simple. If someone is a "known" terrorist, they should already be under arrest. If they are a "suspected" terrorist, then their attempt to buy a gun should kick off a process where they have the right to challenge their placement on the list. As to the argument it will reveal intelligence to tell them they're on the list, the first time they're turned away from a gun store, they'll know.
 
The No Fly List is Unconstitutional as it Stands Today.

It's Secret and there is No Appeal Process.

Guilty until proven Innocent.
 
I dont know of any other list that can you can arbitrarily be placed on where a constitutional right can be removed without due process.
 
NeverMiss said:
I dunno, this one's tough. I love Trump and am a hardened gun guy, but I can't help think this might make a little bit of sense. There's a reason those people are on the "list", they are scumbags. So, why not keep scumbags away from guns?
Click to expand...

Total scumbags...every last one of them:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/14/nyregion/14watchlist.html?_r=0
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/10725741/...ld-turns-government-no-fly-list/#.V2Gep_krKM8
https://www.rt.com/usa/list-tsa-jetblue-riyannas-950/
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/syed-adam-ahmed-no-fly-list-1.3475934

They all deserve to have their rights denied because they're on a list. I do realize these are all children and couldn't currently buy firearms, but if an 18 month old baby can end up on the list (and not get removed) then it can happen to anyone, and almost certainly is happening to a lot more people than you realize.

I've got a great idea. Let's double down on that policy. If you're on "the list" you shouldn't be allowed to attend religious services, or own a computer or smart phone, or protected against cruel and unusual punishments. You shouldn't get a speedy or fair trial. You should be forced to quarter soldiers in your home. You shouldn't be allowed to vote. Why allow these "scumbags" who are on an arbitrary list to have any civil rights at all?
 
Last edited:
Here's the beast herself with the new Amerkian mindset- Prove you're innocent!
[video]https://archive.org/details/KQED_20160614_010000_PBS_NewsHour#start/1434.4/end/1455[/video]
 
NickyB said:
Gary Johnson 16'
Click to expand...

gary's for open borders, and doesn't even own a flipping gun, he has a massachusetts republican as a running mate.

then there's the story about him throwing a gift pistol in the trash.

http://rightwingnews.com/election-2016/gary-johnson-hurls-replica-george-washingtons-pistol-garbage/

http://www.ammoland.com/2016/06/libertarian-candidate-gary-johnson-throws-gift-gun-in-garbage/

I don't think he's a savior of the 2a either....doesnt own a gun and supposedly threw one away. He may just talk the talk.

Petersen reduces Johnson to stutters here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pzXivAJnwA
 
Last edited:
Pete85 said:
Total scumbags...every last one of them:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/14/nyregion/14watchlist.html?_r=0
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/10725741/...ld-turns-government-no-fly-list/#.V2Gep_krKM8
https://www.rt.com/usa/list-tsa-jetblue-riyannas-950/
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/syed-adam-ahmed-no-fly-list-1.3475934

They all deserve to have their rights denied because they're on a list. I do realize these are all children and couldn't currently buy firearms, but if an 18 month old baby can end up on the list (and not get removed) then it can happen to anyone, and almost certainly is happening to a lot more people than you realize.
Click to expand...


Post 11.
 
mg42doc said:
gary's for open borders, and doesn't even own a flipping gun, he has a massachusetts republican as a running mate.

then there's the story about him throwing a gift pistol in the trash.

http://rightwingnews.com/election-2016/gary-johnson-hurls-replica-george-washingtons-pistol-garbage/

http://www.ammoland.com/2016/06/libertarian-candidate-gary-johnson-throws-gift-gun-in-garbage/

I don't think he's a savior of the 2a either....doesnt own a gun and supposedly threw one away. He may just talk the talk.
Click to expand...
So what? I'm not gay, does that mean I don't support gay rights? I don't go to church, does that mean I don't feel strongly that people should freely exercise their religion so long as it doesn't infringe on others' rights? He's for an easier path to citizenship. He's been on record saying he supports deporting illegal undocumented immigrants if they are ever discovered in a way that does not violate due process. As for Weld, he sees things differently now as far as gun rights. Call me naive, but I think it's completely within reason to change your political views over time. You're not bound to your opinion for life
 
The two big parties are hopeless. Stop voting, vote for an independent, or write someone in. What if they held an election and nobody showed up?
 
Was Omar on the no fly list? He wasn't he WAS on the Terror Watch List from 2013-2014 and the FBI found nothing (kind of like what will happen with Hillary's server - but lets not get distracted).

What does it take to get on the No Fly List - ????

What does it take to get on the Terror Watch List ????


I can make some suggestions; Tea Party, GOP, Conservative, Libertarian, NRA - things like that.

Either we have due process FOR ALL CITIZENS (he was a citizen - born in NY) or we are no better than a third world hell hole.
 

Similar threads

Pennsylvania Court Upholds Right of Young People to Carry Guns in Public
Replies
6
Views
204
Coyote33
Coyote33
Democrat CA Gov. Newsom – ‘We Need To Pass Constitutional Amendment’ Against Guns
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
Picton
Picton
just what we need, another hypothetical question...
2
Replies
47
Views
921
commodon
commodon
Democrat Ruben Gallego Would Prohibit Arizonans From Buying AR-15s
Replies
6
Views
226
Lank
Lank
Suspect Dead After Opening Fire on Officer During NY Traffic Stop
Replies
5
Views
244
kevin9
kevin9
Back
Top Bottom