Same ole same ole....was this guy on the no-fly list?

[RichardPeterJohnson]

...meaning he would be a suspicious character and too much of a risk to fly....yet he can go legally buy an AR15? And the right supports that? Really? When will the NRA-paid-for-politicians grow a pair and do the right thing?

 

[TarHeelEer]

If they only could've unlocked his phone.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

...meaning he would be a suspicious character and too much of a risk to fly....yet he can go legally buy an AR15? And the right supports that? Really? When will the NRA-paid-for-politicians grow a pair and do the right thing?

To put into context what you are saying. You are ok with violating someone's Constitutionally protected rights because they are Muslim, not because they've committed a crime, moreover, because they've most likely been exercising the 1st.

What crime was committed to violate said freedom? We just do this in advance based on what we think will happen?

Do you really not see how stupid your idea sounds or actually is?

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

To put into context what you are saying. You are ok with violating someone's Constitutionally protected rights because they are Muslim, not because they've committed a crime, moreover, because they've most likely been exercising the 1st.

What crime was committed to violate said freedom? We just do this in advance based on what we think will happen?

Do you really not see how stupid your idea sounds or actually is?

Stupid? The guy actually was on the watch list at one time. Apparently he was removed from that list at some point. Yet, a bill that would've banned anyone on that list from buying a gun failed. It defies common sense.

 

[EERs 3:16]

...meaning he would be a suspicious character and too much of a risk to fly....yet he can go legally buy an AR15? And the right supports that? Really? When will the NRA-paid-for-politicians grow a pair and do the right thing?

Where was he flying to?

 

[EERs 3:16]

...meaning he would be a suspicious character and too much of a risk to fly....yet he can go legally buy an AR15? And the right supports that? Really? When will the NRA-paid-for-politicians grow a pair and do the right thing?

"The Pink Pistols gives condolences to all family and friends of those killed and injured at Pulse. This is exactly the kind of heinous act that justifies our existence. At such a time of tragedy, let us not reach for the low-hanging fruit of blaming the killer's guns. Let us stay focused on the fact that someone hated gay people so much they were ready to kill or injure so many. A human being did this. The human being's tools are unimportant when compared to the bleakness of that person's soul. I say again, *GUNS* did not do this. A human being did this, a dead human being. Our job now is not to demonize the man's tools, but to demonize his acts and work to prevent such acts in the future. It is difficult to foresee such an event, but if such things cannot be prevented, then they must be stopped as fast as someone tries to start them."

Gwendolyn Patton
First Speaker, Pink Pistols
www.pinkpistols.org

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Stupid? The guy actually was on the watch list at one time. Apparently he was removed from that list at some point. Yet, a bill that would've banned anyone on that list from buying a gun failed. It defies common sense.

Should the FBI be able to raid his house whenever they want to as well?

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

Should the FBI be able to raid his house whenever they want to as well?

If they have a court order. It's pretty simple....terror watch list--no getting on an airplane, no buying guns, someone watching you. But the NRA doesn't like this idea. So the Republicans won't go for it. Cowards.

 

[rog1187]

If they have a court order. It's pretty simple....terror watch list--no getting on an airplane, no buying guns, someone watching you. But the NRA doesn't like this idea. So the Republicans won't go for it. Cowards.

I've got no problem with a no-fly list hurdle for purchasing a gun in theory. I think the list needs to be vetted/scrubbed before implanting such a thing. And I think there should be some sort of appeal process - if you accidently got put on the no-fly list, wouldn't you want to clear your name?

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

I've got no problem with a no-fly list hurdle for purchasing a gun in theory. I think the list needs to be vetted/scrubbed before implanting such a thing. And I think there should be some sort of appeal process - if you accidently got put on the no-fly list, wouldn't you want to clear your name?

That's reasonable. Did your account get hacked?

 

[rog1187]

That's reasonable. Did your account get hacked?

Speaking of hacks (using it as a golf term here) met your WVU Golf coach over the weekend...he was at a baseball camp with his son that I attended. Seems like a really good guy...had nothing but bad things to say about you though.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

If they have a court order. It's pretty simple....terror watch list--no getting on an airplane, no buying guns, someone watching you. But the NRA doesn't like this idea. So the Republicans won't go for it. Cowards.

It's not the NRA you fvcking moron. It's the ACLU. What you are talking about is discrimination against a group of individuals based on their religion, exercising of their first amendment of free speech and their freedom of religion. Theyve broken no laws, and yet you think it's ok for us to infringe on their freedoms. Wow! If you're trolling, good job. If you're serious, you're a racist a worst and a moron at best.

 

[Popeer]

...meaning he would be a suspicious character and too much of a risk to fly....yet he can go legally buy an AR15? And the right supports that? Really? When will the NRA-paid-for-politicians grow a pair and do the right thing?

No, he wasn't on a no-fly list nor was he on a terror watch list. And as the president has repeated, as the laws are currently written just being on a no-fly list doesn't automatically disqualify a citizen from legally buying a gun or a whole arsenal.

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

No, he wasn't on a no-fly list nor was he on a terror watch list. And as the president has repeated, as the laws are currently written just being on a no-fly list doesn't automatically disqualify a citizen from legally buying a gun or a whole arsenal.

he was on the list. and it should.

 

[TarHeelEer]

he was on the list. and it should.

He was taken off the list a year or two ago. Taking away a right without due process? Quite a leap there in the name of keeping us safe. Perhaps tomorrow they decide to put all farmers on the no fly list, then the ranchers, then the white collar workers, then finally they get to you doc.

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

He was taken off the list a year or two ago. Taking away a right without due process? Quite a leap there in the name of keeping us safe. Perhaps tomorrow they decide to put all farmers on the no fly list, then the ranchers, then the white collar workers, then finally they get to you doc.

Therein lies our problems....common sense has left us.

 

[bornaneer]

If they have a court order. It's pretty simple....terror watch list--no getting on an airplane, no buying guns, someone watching you. But the NRA doesn't like this idea. So the Republicans won't go for it. Cowards.

I have no problem with what you say.

 

[WVUBRU]

I have no problem with what you say.

What? You having a love fest? Lol. I think you had a hissy fit over someone else agreeing with someone that they are normally in disagreement with. Nice hypocrisy but glad my words prove out to be absolutely reasonable even though most already knew it did.

 

[bornaneer]

What? You having a love fest? Lol. I think you had a hissy fit over someone else agreeing with someone that they are normally in disagreement with. Nice hypocrisy but glad my words prove out to be absolutely reasonable even though most already knew it did.

You must have me confused with someone else. I acknowledge and sometimes give a like when I agree with the content of the post. Unlike you I can leave politics out of the process. I think I may have even given you a thumbs up before.

 

[WVUBRU]

You must have me confused with someone else. I acknowledge and sometimes give a like when I agree with the content of the post. Unlike you I can leave politics out of the process. I think I may have even given you a thumbs up before.

You have and then call me a fool and agree with another dumbass when he attempts to insult me for agreeing with a conversation from a conservative. It is the latter that is hypocritical and no, I don't have your name confused. Nice attempt at deflection though.

 

[bornaneer]

You have and then call me a fool and agree with another dumbass when he attempts to insult me for agreeing with a conversation from a conservative. It is the latter that is hypocritical and no, I don't have your name confused. Nice attempt at deflection though.

We both have called each other names. When you are out of line, I will call you on it. Why have you NOT STAYED on topic in this thread.......

 

[WVUBRU]

We both have called each other names. When you are out of line, I will call you on it. Why have you NOT STAYED on topic in this thread.......

As i said the other day, i will post as i see fit. If you don't like it that is your problem. Deal with it and quit whining 24 hours a day

 

[WVUBRU]

As i said the other day, i will post as i see fit. If you don't like it that is your problem. Deal with it and quit whining 24 hours a day

And one more thing, you will rarely see me post to you on anything of substance anymore as you haven't for months. I previously have explained why.

 

[bornaneer]

As i said the other day, i will post as i see fit. If you don't like it that is your problem. Deal with it and quit whining 24 hours a day

You're the one doing the whining........not me. You're the one that went off topic in this thread......I just was concerned since you get your panties all wadded up when others go off topic.

 

[bornaneer]

And one more thing, you will rarely see me post to you on anything of substance anymore as you haven't for months. I previously have explained why.

Feel better now? If not....Hoppy has "Steam Release" every Friday at 11:30 am on his Metro News show.

 

[Popeer]

He was taken off the list a year or two ago. Taking away a right without due process? Quite a leap there in the name of keeping us safe. Perhaps tomorrow they decide to put all farmers on the no fly list, then the ranchers, then the white collar workers, then finally they get to you doc.

On Facebook, a friend of a friend is advocating rounding up all Muslims in America and putting them in camps as FDR did Japanese-Americans in 1942. And what's funny is that he (and my friend whose post he was commenting on) are in the crowd that calls Obama a dictator and supports the Bundy Clan's pushback against "government overreach." I guess irony isn't in their dictionary if they can't see that interning people for their ancestry or their religion in the name of keeping us safe would be the ultimate overreach of a dictatorial government.

 

[bornaneer]

On Facebook, a friend of a friend is advocating rounding up all Muslims in America and putting them in camps as FDR did Japanese-Americans in 1942. And what's funny is that he (and my friend whose post he was commenting on) are in the crowd that calls Obama a dictator and supports the Bundy Clan's pushback against "government overreach." I guess irony isn't in their dictionary if they can't see that interning people for their ancestry or their religion in the name of keeping us safe would be the ultimate overreach of a dictatorial government.

He surely must have been joking.

 

[Popeer]

He surely must have been joking.

He wasn't. Here's his post: When Pearl Harbor was attacked the United States placed every Japanese American in internment camps until the end of World War II. Sounds like a plan for the Muslims until they are sorted out. The native Americans were put on reservations and left. And when I took exception to the idea of locking up people because of their religion, another one chimed in with this: No because of their theology, The act that initiates thet is article 50 of the USC - war powers act. And surprise surprise, these people are outspoken Trump supporters. This is the America they envision for us.

 

[MountaineerWV]

...meaning he would be a suspicious character and too much of a risk to fly....yet he can go legally buy an AR15? And the right supports that? Really? When will the NRA-paid-for-politicians grow a pair and do the right thing?

As long as his name is from Middle Eastern origin or his religion is that of Islam.....then the Right Wingers would blame Obama and the Democrats for not doing something about it....

 

[MountaineerWV]

He wasn't. Here's his post: When Pearl Harbor was attacked the United States placed every Japanese American in internment camps until the end of World War II. Sounds like a plan for the Muslims until they are sorted out. The native Americans were put on reservations and left. And when I took exception to the idea of locking up people because of their religion, another one chimed in with this: No because of their theology, The act that initiates thet is article 50 of the USC - war powers act. And surprise surprise, these people are outspoken Trump supporters. This is the America they envision for us.

These people are the ones that think "I'm American, and I have nothing to fear" until that fear knocks on their door....and it WILL! Once you go down this road, it won't stop. Muslims first, then who's next? Yeah, maybe one of them. I've heard the same kind of talk with some people around my area. They call Obama a Muslim......and worse.....and call him a dictator as well. Then, when discussing terrorism, they say we should drop a bomb on the Middle East, kill all Muslims or put them on an island and wall it off......scary conversation to say the least. Of course when I chime in with my "you are a ****ing idiot" claims, I'm labeled a liberal who wants to bring the country down.
There was a guy who actually said "I hope we have another Civil War and that way we can overthrow this dictatorial government of Obama". WOW!

These are the people wanting Trump as president....and THAT is scary.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

If they have a court order. It's pretty simple....terror watch list--no getting on an airplane, no buying guns, someone watching you. But the NRA doesn't like this idea. So the Republicans won't go for it. Cowards.

Why do we need a court order? In your world, you've already violated their 2nd amendment right for exercising their 1st, what's it matter if we violate their 4th?

 

[EERs 3:16]

...meaning he would be a suspicious character and too much of a risk to fly....yet he can go legally buy an AR15? And the right supports that? Really? When will the NRA-paid-for-politicians grow a pair and do the right thing?

Wouldn't this unfairly discriminate against Muslims?

 

[WhiteTailEER]

...meaning he would be a suspicious character and too much of a risk to fly....yet he can go legally buy an AR15? And the right supports that? Really? When will the NRA-paid-for-politicians grow a pair and do the right thing?

Based on what I heard on the radio this morning, the NRA is supposed to be meeting with Obama and they support measures to restrict gun purchases to those that are on the no-fly list. To me it's just common sense. Of course, they have to clean up the other things too like the gun show purchases. And then you have to restrict private sales too ... and that one to me gets a bit more sticky and probably really isn't doable.

I'm not saying I'm advocating all of those steps ... but if they can't get it legally through a gun store, then they just go to a gun show. If they can't get it at a gun show, then they just buy from private parties. I think that will be a bridge too far.

As I've said a dozen times ... the solution to our gun violence issues probably have nothing to do with guns at all.

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

Why do we need a court order? In your world, you've already violated their 2nd amendment right for exercising their 1st, what's it matter if we violate their 4th?

You (and others) talk as if there are absolutely no restrictions on the 2nd Amendment. Not everyone (special permit, etc.) can own a fully-automatic rifle. Not everyone (special permit, etc.) can own a RPG launcher. There are federal restrictions on barrel length. Silencers are illegal, etc. etc. There are numerous restrictions and regulations in place already. So, the 2nd Amendment is not without restrictions already and the logic to argue against any more regulation as being a violation of the 2nd Amendment doesn't hold water.

 

[TarHeelEer]

You (and others) talk as if there are absolutely no restrictions on the 2nd Amendment. Not everyone (special permit, etc.) can own a fully-automatic rifle. Not everyone (special permit, etc.) can own a RPG launcher. There are federal restrictions on barrel length. Silencers are illegal, etc. etc. There are numerous restrictions and regulations in place already. So, the 2nd Amendment is not without restrictions already and the logic to argue against any more regulation as being a violation of the 2nd Amendment doesn't hold water.

That's not what I've said, ever. It shouldn't be up to just executive branch only to put someone on the no-fly list, if it's going to have ramifications of taking rights away. It needs to go through a court. And not a jinky ultra secret FISA court

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

You (and others) talk as if there are absolutely no restrictions on the 2nd Amendment. Not everyone (special permit, etc.) can own a fully-automatic rifle. Not everyone (special permit, etc.) can own a RPG launcher. There are federal restrictions on barrel length. Silencers are illegal, etc. etc. There are numerous restrictions and regulations in place already. So, the 2nd Amendment is not without restrictions already and the logic to argue against any more regulation as being a violation of the 2nd Amendment doesn't hold water.

I've never said legislating against AWs would violate someone's rights. I've said that its fodder for the rubes. It's taking action for the appearance of action. We've already done it and the FBI and ATF both said it had no statistical effect.

I want gun control, I just want it to make a true impact and not violate someone's freedoms the way this latest one is going to. Mark my words, it will be challenged in court and it will go down.

 

[RichardPeterJohnson]

That's not what I've said, ever. It shouldn't be up to just executive branch only to put someone on the no-fly list, if it's going to have ramifications of taking rights away. It needs to go through a court. And not a jinky ultra secret FISA court

I wish you wingnuts were as worried about 4th Amendment rights when it comes to police depts confiscating money and property from people "suspected" of drug law violations....you know, people who've not been the subject of a court order confiscating their property and have to prove their innocence (ie legal fees and pia factor) to get their property back.

 

[bornaneer]

I've never said legislating against AWs would violate someone's rights. I've said that its fodder for the rubes. It's taking action for the appearance of action. We've already done it and the FBI and ATF both said it had no statistical effect. Mark my words, it will be challenged in court and it will go down.

I have no problems with gun control. As far as I am concerned,they could ban them all because if they did we would see the results which would be nothing. The mass shootings by nuts and the slaughter in our cities would continue. It also would prove the two sentences from your quote that I bolded and ULed. The next question will be what the rubes will dream up next in the attempt to drum up votes.

 

[bornaneer]

I wish you wingnuts were as worried about 4th Amendment rights when it comes to police depts confiscating money and property from people "suspected" of drug law violations....you know, people who've not been the subject of a court order confiscating their property and have to prove their innocence (ie legal fees and pia factor) to get their property back.

Right on "cue". But I do agree with you.

 

[rog1187]

Based on what I heard on the radio this morning, the NRA is supposed to be meeting with Obama and they support measures to restrict gun purchases to those that are on the no-fly list. To me it's just common sense. Of course, they have to clean up the other things too like the gun show purchases. And then you have to restrict private sales too ... and that one to me gets a bit more sticky and probably really isn't doable.

I'm not saying I'm advocating all of those steps ... but if they can't get it legally through a gun store, then they just go to a gun show. If they can't get it at a gun show, then they just buy from private parties. I think that will be a bridge too far.

As I've said a dozen times ... the solution to our gun violence issues probably have nothing to do with guns at all.

IMO the NRA needs to find a way to back the gun-show-loophole...I'm okay with the no-fly list restriction as well and I hope the NRA can back that one.

Still waiting for folks to address mental health aspect of the issue.