• 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

I could be wrong, but I see the Media giving this story a good leaving-alone.

They don't want to report Trump saying anything "Reasonable" (in their eyes).

So far I have only read that Trump wishes to discuss this with the NRA.

I'm certain Trump will emerge from any discussion with a new appreciation of the corruption inherent in the NO-FLY LIST.
 
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...

How does voting for Johnson take a vote away from Trump but abstaining not?

How about this, not sure where you live, but anybody who lives in MA already voted for Hillary. And voted for Obama twice. Since it is a guaranteed D win (this cycle at least) all of the electors go to the D. And the number of electors is determined by population. So by living in MA you are voting D for president. You want to change that jump on the move to the purple state bandwagon. Or you can fight to really change it by helping make something else viable. You don't do that by abstaining. Something other than D or R could win in MA in the not so distant future.

If you live in a competitive state then you can vote for Trump to vote against Hillary. But voting third party or no party instead of abstaining is not helping her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
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...

Was that a national poll? The national polls are next to worthless because of the Electoral College. Hillary could have 99% of MA voters she's still only getting 11 electoral votes. Now say Trump takes 51% of Washington state (population is abut 300,000 more people than MA and it has 12 electoral votes). In this case (and assuming these are the only two states whose votes mattered) Hillary would take approximately 75% of the popular vote (what the poll is tallying), while Trump would take the electoral votes and win the election.
 
If the only people on the no fly list have been convicted of felonies then I'm all for it. But this current no fly list have thousands of innocent civilians on it. I think even Senator Ted Kennedy was on the no fly list by accident LOL
 
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...

I lived through the whole third party thing back in the UK in the 70s and 80s.

I am at heart a libertarian but have moved on from the Libertarian Party due to the Libertarian stance on open borders among other things.

The best that can be said for a third party is it may take votes from your political opponent. But in the US the Libertarian Party will always take more votes from the Republicans than from the Democrats.

Three words. Will. Never. Happen.
 
GrendelKhan said:
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?
Click to expand...

The people I know that are on the list have to really jump through hoops to get on a plane, social security numbers and all, and even then sometimes they can't.
 
People don't understand the list!

Howie talked about a Congressman who when asked if the list is a good idea that Loretta Lynch could restrict your rights and he said yes. The Congressman was then asked if Trump gets in would he having a problem with his AG running the list and denying rights and he got upset that is a bad idea!

So it depends on who is in power for the libs.
 
HiCap said:
If the only people on the no fly list have been convicted of felonies then I'm all for it. But this current no fly list have thousands of innocent civilians on it. I think even Senator Ted Kennedy was on the no fly list by accident LOL
Click to expand...

AND HE COULDN'T GET OFF - let that sink in, A US Senator couldn't get off the list and if he did it took years.
 
jhblaze1 said:
just abstain from voting then. A vote for GJ is a vote for Hillary.








come on you two, he's going to make America great again. How many times does he have to say it?
Click to expand...

A vote for Gary Johnson is a vote for Gary Johnson. If the rest of the country is so stupid they can only ever pull a "red" or "blue" lever then the consequences are their fault not mine
 
The whole "No fly list" is freaking BS, if someone has made or attempted to make contact with ISIS or another scumbag Muslim Extremist organization in pursuit of doing a personal Jihad then F**K putting them on any list, shoot them, throw them in jail, or ship them immediately out of the country otherwise F'in move along and wait for him or her to kill innocents and then cry about it, sometimes they watch these guys for years until they do something horrific and it's totally unacceptable. Not letting them buy a gun is BS, if they want to buy get a firearm they will one way or another. I'm so tired of the gov trying to disarm good people and look the other way when someone contacts a terrorist organization.
 
HiCap said:
If the only people on the no fly list have been convicted of felonies then I'm all for it. But this current no fly list have thousands of innocent civilians on it. I think even Senator Ted Kennedy was on the no fly list by accident LOL
Click to expand...

Punishing people not in prison is just a path to controlling us all. Look no further than gun "background checks" where all of us have to assert and prove we are not banned from buying or owning a gun. We need only two classes of people: those in prison, and those that are free. Creating a third class of quasi-free people is nothing more than handing power and control to government over all of us.
 
HiCap said:
If the only people on the no fly list have been convicted of felonies then I'm all for it. But this current no fly list have thousands of innocent civilians on it. I think even Senator Ted Kennedy was on the no fly list by accident LOL
Click to expand...

It's bullshit that somebody who has a felony conviction on their record permanently loses their 2A rights.

edit - or what economist said
 
Can anyone legitimately defend putting people on a super secret squirrel list that you're not allowed to see or know about and deciding that that list will decide whether or not someone can purchase a firearm? And the NRA supports the idea. Further proof that the NRA doesn't actually want to do away with the federal firearms laws because they make too much money from gun owners grasping for anyone who claims to represent them. Trump is merely showing his colors again.
 
Extra-judicial denial of the Right to Bear Arms is about the most un-American thing imaginable, because what follows is arrest without due process.

It's sickening that people are willing to give the Government this power.
 
economist said:
Punishing people not in prison is just a path to controlling us all. Look no further than gun "background checks" where all of us have to assert and prove we are not banned from buying or owning a gun. We need only two classes of people: those in prison, and those that are free. Creating a third class of quasi-free people is nothing more than handing power and control to government over all of us.
Click to expand...

This X 1000
 
kalash said:
Can Dump supporters use any other tactic besides fear-mongering? This lesser of two evils mentality is how we end up with shitty presidents.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree. We have ended up with shitty presidents due to people voting for someone because of the color of their skin or there gender.
I have seen some really good presidents in my time and some really shitty ones. none of the bad ones have done the type of damage Obama has done and personally I believe Hillary will make Obama look good.
I don't ever remember voting for someone I didn't want elected just to take a vote from the other candidate. it is like voting for an independent candidate, it may make you feel good but it is a waste of time.
 
economist said:
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?
Click to expand...

The problem is there are enough useful idiots on both sides at this point that will always show up... even based on the lesser of two evils doctrine of lunacy alone.... although it would become somewhat of a farce if only like 30% of all elegible voters actually voted. That'd be entertaining.

-Mike
 
Fairfax, Va.— The executive director of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action, Chris W. Cox, released the following statement regarding terror watchlists:
We are happy to meet with Donald Trump. The NRA's position on this issue has not changed. The NRA believes that terrorists should not be allowed to purchase or possess firearms, period. Anyone on a terror watchlist who tries to buy a gun should be thoroughly investigated by the FBI and the sale delayed while the investigation is ongoing. If an investigation uncovers evidence of terrorist activity or involvement, the government should be allowed to immediately go to court, block the sale, and arrest the terrorist. At the same time, due process protections should be put in place that allow law-abiding Americans who are wrongly put on a watchlist to be removed. That has been the position of Sen. John Cornyn (R.-Tex.) and a majority of the U.S. Senate. Sadly, President Obama and his allies would prefer to play politics with this issue.
 
Noreaster78 said:
Fairfax, Va.— The executive director of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action, Chris W. Cox, released the following statement regarding terror watchlists:
We are happy to meet with Donald Trump. The NRA's position on this issue has not changed. The NRA believes that terrorists should not be allowed to purchase or possess firearms, period. Anyone on a terror watchlist who tries to buy a gun should be thoroughly investigated by the FBI and the sale delayed while the investigation is ongoing. If an investigation uncovers evidence of terrorist activity or involvement, the government should be allowed to immediately go to court, block the sale, and arrest the terrorist. At the same time, due process protections should be put in place that allow law-abiding Americans who are wrongly put on a watchlist to be removed. That has been the position of Sen. John Cornyn (R.-Tex.) and a majority of the U.S. Senate. Sadly, President Obama and his allies would prefer to play politics with this issue.
Click to expand...

The NRA is pandering to fear and attempting to deflect the issue at the same time. We'll see how well that works. Trump is an unprincipled gasbag, and the NRA is playing with fire by giving him any credibility.

Off topic: There are many memetic elements of modern language that need to go. High on the list is any sentence beginning with "Sadly, ..." as in the above quote. It's almost always an insincere construction meant to elevate the writer ("look at my deep feelings on this issue, so apart from politics") and to denigrate the subject ("now this guy over here is a politically motivated hater of America"). The clear manipulative intent undermines the message. Furthermore, we all know the writer is far from "sad", but rather gleefully participating in politics and happy for an enemy to spur everything from attention to fund raising.
 
Last edited:
So say you're on the list and can't buy a gun.


what happens to the ones you already own? Do they come get those too?

is that the end game? (well, obviously it is but you know what I'm saying..)
 

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
919
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
3
Views
164
pupchow
pupchow
Back
Top Bottom