Active Shooting in San Bernardino, California

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Even if you appeared on the no-fly list? Therein lies the problem. Right now there are 72 DHS employees on the no-fly list. Is that merely a mistake? If it is, in what respect? That they shouldn't be on the list or that they shouldn't be employed by DHS?

A government that can use the IRS to go after you can also use a no-fly list to void your second amendment rights. Then, they can wrap it all up in enough red tape that it will take years to unravel. A bloated government that puts DHS employees on a no-fly list cannot be trusted to maintain that same list.

Superficially, I agree with you. Practically, not so much.

Well so the flaw is the No Fly List in itself. Why is it a no fly list to begin with? Is it a knee-jerk reaction to 9/11 because we thought the next attack would surely come from a plane? Why not just call this a suspected terrorist list where you would likely fail background checks, can't fly, can't buy a firearm, etc?

How is this any different than a red flag placed on your name like on the Interpol Watch List or whatever?

Perhaps we need to do a better job of allowing people to dispute their statuses and allow due process, but from a theoretical point of view I think it makes sense if you're on some sort of suspected list you should likely fail a background check to purchase a weapon.

As it stands today though the no fly list seems to have too many false positives.

 

[WackyDan]

Perhaps we need to do a better job of allowing people to dispute their statuses and allow due process,

If they are put on the list then Due Process was not allowed to begin with. You do not allow Due Process only when they object. The list is equal to a conviction without trial. You get that right?

https://reason.com/blog/2015/12/07/why-the-aclu-is-suing-no-fly-list

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

If they are put on the list then Due Process was not allowed to begin with. You do not allow Due Process only when they object. The list is equal to a conviction without trial. You get that right?

https://reason.com/blog/2015/12/07/why-the-aclu-is-suing-no-fly-list

As it stands today yes it's a problem. I'm advocating for a way to dispute your status and appeal your case. The police can name you a person of interest too--you can't just say that's a conviction without trial.

 

[Indus]

As it stands today though the no fly list seems to have too many false positives.

Well you can wager a guess because how many terrorists names have Muhammaed, Mohammed, Ali, Ahmed, Akbar or a variation of these names and how common a name it is, and then you know why there are false positives.

 

[JSt0rm]

So trump advocates making all mooslims in the country carry id cards and his poll numbers go up... But if we try to stop anyone from buying high capacity long guns thats a no no.

 

[WackyDan]

As it stands today yes it's a problem. I'm advocating for a way to dispute your status and appeal your case. The police can name you a person of interest too--you can't just say that's a conviction without trial.

Police can name you a person of interest. That is distinctly different than limiting your freedom of travel.

 

[WackyDan]

Well you can wager a guess because how many terrorists names have Muhammaed, Mohammed, Ali, Ahmed, Akbar or a variation of these names and how common a name it is, and then you know why there are false positives.

Yes... Jan Adams is a popular terrorist name.

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/how-no-fly-lists-are-used-punish-political-protesters

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Police can name you a person of interest. That is distinctly different than limiting your freedom of travel.

If someone is actively plotting to carry out a terrorist attack involving airplanes, should they be allowed to fly or purchase weapons? I'm thinking most people would say no.

The problem you keep talking about is that there are false positives--if you work to remove false positives then what's wrong with the list? The list is just getting overblown by the media because its called a no fly list which inherently is stupid because its just a knee jerk reaction after 9/11. It's no different than something like the Interpol Terrorism Watch List or any other list any other agency uses. You don't think there's dozens of other lists law enforcement uses?

What's the point of these lists if you aren't using them to do anything? Then it's just a list for the sake of having a list.

Well you can wager a guess because how many terrorists names have Muhammaed, Mohammed, Ali, Ahmed, Akbar or a variation of these names and how common a name it is, and then you know why there are false positives.

The concept of a list isn't inherently bad. Otherwise you'd be against ANY categorization of our citizens including police suspect lists, person of interest lists, etc. It's how you generate that list. Obviously purely racial profiling is dumb, and putting people on lists because of their name alone is dumb.

 

[JockoJohnson]

I'm pro gun rights, but even I agree that people on the No Fly List probably shouldn't be able to buy a gun without having a damn good reason to own one.

Even the NRA-ILA is going to have trouble convincing Republicans not to support that law. Of course, Congress would probably still screw it up by attaching it to a spending bill.

Seriously? Even the late, great Ted Kennedy was on that list:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17073-2004Aug19.html

Do you seriously fucking believe that it is ok to take away someone's rights because they appear on a list without due process? How fucking idiotic. Would you say the same if it was to take away free speech or voting rights too?

There is hope since there are those on the left that actually don't want this to pass either. Sometimes, life isn't just left or right. We can all agree on something sometimes. One of these times is this. This is a stupid bill. Just another knee-jerk reaction to a shooting, whether it be terrorist or right-winger or nut job.

 

[JockoJohnson]

This is a really weak and short sighted response.

You should expect nothing less.

 

[jackstar7]

You should expect nothing less.

I don't get a lot to work with here.

 

[Fern]

His brother is a US Navy vet, hasn't that made the news circles down there yet?

I suspect the brother is thankful for his privacy and that he's not being dragged into this.

Fern

 

[JSt0rm]

So I looked up some of the guns talked about in this thread and online gun stores are funny. "DUE TO IMPENDING GUN LAWS DEMAND IS HIGH BUY NOW OR ELSE" lmao. FEAR FEAR HATE

No wonder gun supporters think they are about to lose their guns. The industry uses that fear to sell sell sell.

 

[norseamd]

A Minnesota man, Mohamed Abdullahi Hassan, gave himself up in early November in Mogadishu. He had connections to both the Garland shooter, and the San Bernardino shooters.

http://kstp.com/article/stories/s3984569.shtml

 

[Phanuel]

So I looked up some of the guns talked about in this thread and online gun stores are funny. "DUE TO IMPENDING GUN LAWS DEMAND IS HIGH BUY NOW OR ELSE" lmao. FEAR FEAR HATE

No wonder gun supporters think they are about to lose their guns. The industry uses that fear to sell sell sell.

Because it's actually true. They're not selling butter or napkins here. National events usually lead to additional legislation that takes away additional rights.

 

[jackstar7]

Because it's actually true. They're not selling butter or napkins here. National events usually lead to additional legislation that takes away additional rights.

Like when the black guy became president!

 

[JSt0rm]

Like when the black guy became president!

Or after 25 8 year olds got killed.

A tender aged white boy saying "I dont want to be here anymore" with the killer responding "Well too bad you are here" and filling him full of lead had no effect on our gun laws. And yet "ZOMG YOUR RIGHTS IS ABOUT TO MOOSLIM BLACKS REMOVE?!?!?"

 

[JSt0rm]

Because it's actually true. They're not selling butter or napkins here. National events usually lead to additional legislation that takes away additional rights.

Show me any new gun laws that came after a mass killing.

 

[TheVrolok]

No wonder gun supporters think they are about to lose their guns. The industry uses that fear to sell sell sell.

Obama has been the best thing for guns. I can't even imagine how much money they have made while simultaneously no meaningful legislation to limit gun proliferation/violence has been passed.

As you said, "OMG OBOZO IS GOING TO TAKE ALL OUR GUNS" ... guns/ammo sell like hotcakes.

 

[HumblePie]

Show me any new gun laws that came after a mass killing.

NY, Connecticut, California, and I think another few states added new guns laws after Sandy Hook. Other states added gun laws after Columbine and Virginia Tech. Heck even Texas did it before.

Oh you want Federal laws that apply to the nation? How about the Federal Assault weapon ban of 1994?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban

 

[JSt0rm]

NY, Connecticut, California, and I think another few states added new guns laws after Sandy Hook. Other states added gun laws after Columbine and Virginia Tech. Heck even Texas did it before.

Oh you want Federal laws that apply to the nation? How about the Federal Assault weapon ban of 1994?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban

Yes I wanted fed laws. Thansk for proving my point. 20 years ago. "20 YEARS AGO GUN LAWS PRICES HAVE TO BE HIGHER RIGHT NOW BECAUSE NEWS ARE COMING FROM THE MOOSLIM BLACK"

The caps were a nice touch.

 

[Orignal Earl]

I suspect the brother is thankful for his privacy and that he's not being dragged into this.

Fern

The media was showing his picture (the vet) instead of his brothers picture

 

[Bowfinger]

[ ... ]
11% of Muslims believing that people should be murdered because they disrespect Islam is hardly a "tiny minority".

First, I agree that's too many and already said so. Second, note that this is the percentage who expressed some support for attacking Charlie Hebdo specifically, not terrorism against the general population. Third, that is comparable to the Christian conservatives who support violence against abortion providers, The point is this isn't a Muslim problem, it's a religious nuts problem.

And that doesn't even include people like Farook's father who supposedly do not support violence but also believe that Israel somehow will cease to exist within two years.

That story appears to be grossly distorted.

 

[brycejones]

That story appears to be grossly distorted.

Are you saying the Daily Dog Whistle would distort something?

 

[HumblePie]

Yes I wanted fed laws. Thansk for proving my point. 20 years ago. "20 YEARS AGO GUN LAWS PRICES HAVE TO BE HIGHER RIGHT NOW BECAUSE NEWS ARE COMING FROM THE MOOSLIM BLACK"

The caps were a nice touch.

Uhh how about after ever mass shooting happens many politicians push very vehemently for the strictest forms of gun control they can. You do realize the first ban was authored by Feinswine who has since try to have pushed in again as law as often as she opens her mouth in the last 20 years.

After Sandy Hook, the amount of politicians pushing for gun control that they actually drafted a bill at the federal level again made a lot of people take notice again and it did drive up prices. Add to the fact that in the previous case the bill had major presidential backing, just like the last one drafted after Sandy Hook, that is why many gun rights people were worried another one would pass. The original one passed because of a mass shooting that involved the death of children which is a very similar situation with Sandy Hook mass shooting.

Even though no federal law passed after Sandy Hook, many states passed stricture gun laws that did ban some guns based on cosmetics of the guns. Many of the same people in power that passed the original AWB of 1994 are still alive and in power today.