NYTimes Editorial: Congress Should Secretly Suspend Second Amendment Rights

[Grand Torino]

http://dailycaller.com/2016/06/14/nyt-congress-should-secretly-suspend-second-amendment-rights/

A New York Times editorial advocates for a new law allowing a secret court to take away citizens’ right to own a gun at the discretion of the federal government.

Citing the Orlando terror attack that left 50 dead including the shooter and 53 wounded at a gay nightclub, the piece advocates for a “no-buy” list similar to “no-fly” lists. Under the law, suspected terrorists would not be able to buy a gun. In an attempt to ensure the integrity of the lists and preserve due process, the author proposes people only be added to this no-buy list after a secret court rules they are ineligible, similar to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court hearings where the federal government obtains permission to wiretap. Under this proposal, an American who has never been convicted of a crime could be denied their right to buy a gun simply because a secret court decided it should be that way.

Read more.

 

Edited June 16, 2016 by Grand Torino

[DWARREN123]

Got to be able to appeal and no secret courts!

[A.J. Holst]

Do you suppose any elected government servant has actually read the Declaration of Independence? 

[Pete123]

I went and read the article from the NY Times in addition to the one referenced above.  The Daily Caller completely took the article out of context.  Their article is a bold faced lie similar to folks that demonize the NRA.

The article talks about how to make it harder for terrorists to buy guns while having procedures and protections for those that wind up on it.  This is the kind of article that I would like to see the liberals from up north reading.

The article doesn't call for any restriction on the second amendment.

[Wingshooter]

 

Quote

tyr·an·ny

ˈtirənē/

noun

1. cruel and oppressive government or rule.

   "people who survive war and escape tyranny"

   synonyms:

   despotism, absolute power, autocracy, dictatorship, totalitarianism, Fascism; More

   • a nation under cruel and oppressive government.
   • cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary use of power or control.

     "she resented his rages and his tyranny"

 

[battleop]

If you are on a no fly and terror watch list and you buy a gun there should be a red flag somewhere that says "Maybe you want to look into this guy you are already looking into".   That doesn't mean you get denied for being on the list but it at least raises an eyebrow.   That being said there has to be a process in which you can get off these lists instead of putting you on it and not being able to get off because you have a similar name.

[A.J. Holst]

Here's the problem with the no fly list, it's not clear who is on it, how you get on it and no real process to get off it.

Carry overs from the Patriot Act, which interestingly  impacts the BSA (bank secrecy act), which forces your financial institution to financially profile in cooperation with law enforcement. 

Meant to originally catch drug dealers laundering money, currently to catch terrorist transferring funds.

Strange transactions in your personal account cause reportable red flags. If LE, including the IRS think it's not legally your money, they'll lock you down.

[Ugly]

DOJ overrules FBI on gun sales debate, says no-fly list can be used for ban

http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/16/doj-overrules-fbi-gun-sales-debate/

looks like the dept of no justice will do what they want. 

[Pete123]

19 hours ago, battleop said:

If you are on a no fly and terror watch list and you buy a gun there should be a red flag somewhere that says "Maybe you want to look into this guy you are already looking into".   That doesn't mean you get denied for being on the list but it at least raises an eyebrow.   That being said there has to be a process in which you can get off these lists instead of putting you on it and not being able to get off because you have a similar name.

That is the short version of the article in The New York Times.  I was very pleased that they published it.

[A.J. Holst]

2 hours ago, Pete123 said:

That is the short version of the article in The New York Times.  I was very pleased that they published it.

I didn't see the article, my post was a result of a conversation with a friend  (who happens to be one of them armed commercial airline pilots)

Edited June 17, 2016 by Gotthegoods

[Pete123]

Gotthegoods, my comment was not geared toward you.  It was meant to point out that the Daily Caller, which wrote the article that started this thread , are big fat liars who are demonizing a voice of reason for the liberal media.

I had to Google to find the actual article from the New York Times.

[battleop]

Maybe it's time for Tump to be that big negotiator....    So let's say we give in and allow people on the terrorist watch list to get denied a gun or alt least flag it for a follow up.    That's OK if you have a reasonable process to get off that list if it's really a mistake and if you are a terrorist tough.    

If we're going to give up on something they need to give up on something.  So let's trade that for removing Suppressors from the NFA.   

[btq96r]

Anything potentially involving the FISA court has me shaking my head.  The entire premise of a secret court where Judges serve as a rubber stamp anytime the words "national security" are used is disgusting.

[JayC]

15 hours ago, battleop said:

Maybe it's time for Tump to be that big negotiator....    So let's say we give in and allow people on the terrorist watch list to get denied a gun or alt least flag it for a follow up.    That's OK if you have a reasonable process to get off that list if it's really a mistake and if you are a terrorist tough.    

If we're going to give up on something they need to give up on something.  So let's trade that for removing Suppressors from the NFA.   

How about we not give up anymore of our fundamental rights, instead of allowing the NRA to Negotiate Rights Away.