I'm confused by NRA-funded efforts to let suspected terrorists buy guns in the US.

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by Explorer, Nov 19, 2015.

  1. Explorer

    Explorer He seldomly knows...

    Messages:
    6,394
    Likes Received:
    971
    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Location:
    Formerly from Cucaramacatacatirimilcote...
    So, I was reading about how 2000 suspected terrorists on the No Fly list have been able to buy firearms thanks to the efforts of the NRA.

    And now I've been reading about how a Texas legislator, and supporter (and supportee) of the NRA, doesn't want Texas to accept any refugees because he has successfully created loopholes allowing terrorists to buy guns without screening.

    If terrorists having guns is a bad thing, why are the NRA and its purchased representatives upset about the results of their efforts to ensure terrorists can buy guns in the US?
     
    Randy likes this.
  2. vilk

    vilk Very Regular

    Messages:
    4,598
    Likes Received:
    588
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    Chicago
    because they weren't expecting to be faced with the issue of taking in Muslim refugees probably. They were imagining white christians buying guns while they wrote the laws?
     
  3. Ibanezsam4

    Ibanezsam4 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    1,304
    Likes Received:
    213
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Location:
    Providence, RI
    Because getting a driver's license is considered to be a valid form of I.D. to do pretty much anything in the US.

    background checks are performed at the store. so he would get pinged in a database if he had known affiliations.

    what complicates the issue is not everyone who takes up jihad does comes with a known criminal record. so standard checks wouldn't work if say a chemistry students who got recruited decided to join the diaspora
     
  4. ElRay

    ElRay Mostly Harmless

    Messages:
    3,173
    Likes Received:
    437
    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Location:
    NoIL
    It's because they haven't figured out a way to keep weapons from the extremist Muslim terrorists without also preventing Christian terrorists from getting them too.

    The GOPuritan propaganda has been so effective, that people don't know that, since 9/11, Muslim-Americans have been involved in around six plots/year, resulting about 50 fatalities. Contrast that to Christian-Americans, that have averaged 337 religiously-motivated attacks/year (actual attacks not including the thwarted plots), killing over 250 people -- including 25 police officers.

    Also, the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) listed “militias, neo-Nazis and sovereign citizens” (almost all of which have a core of extreme christianity) as the biggest threat we face in regard to extremism.
     
  5. Explorer

    Explorer He seldomly knows...

    Messages:
    6,394
    Likes Received:
    971
    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Location:
    Formerly from Cucaramacatacatirimilcote...
    @sam - Your examples are interesting regarding someone with no known affiliations, but they ignore the number of suspected terrorists on the US No Fly list who have managed, with NRA-sponsored legislation, to purchase firearms.

    The NRA does what it can to subvert screening processes. That means that the terrorist chickens coming home to roost on the GOP chickenhawkhouse are armed.
     
  6. TheStig1214

    TheStig1214 Mr. Tophat Jones

    Messages:
    1,134
    Likes Received:
    146
    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2012
    Location:
    Lawn Guyland
    Because the NRA doesn't work for gun owners, they work for gun makers. Anything that gets Barret, Browning, Colt, H&K, S&W, ect. more money is what they will push. Because, after all, "gun manufacturers don't kill people, people kill people."
     
  7. Ibanezsam4

    Ibanezsam4 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    1,304
    Likes Received:
    213
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Location:
    Providence, RI
    i must have been living under a rock because i didn't see this story get reported earlier this month. i blame lack of sleep.

    alright, so after reading up on this we have a few problems with the premise, specifically the word choice of "loophole" which Sen. Schumer has been using.

    it's not a loophole, its the 5th amendment. i'll explain.

    you see, the terror watchlist does not legally convict people of terrorism. it just means they've been flagged for whatever (broad) criteria ranging from purchases of books and a bunch of qualifiers to be monitored for suspicious activity.

    So when Schumer says "known terrorists" he's not saying they are legally defined as a terrorists, or a judge has signed a warrant, or they're on the most wanted list, he's referring to people not convicted of a crime being monitored for behavior which could be potentially bad.. but we have to wait and see what happens.

    so a civics reminder, the 5th amendment states several things, but this one is important for this discussion "[no person can] be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"

    it basically states that unless you are convicted of a crime you can't be deprived of personal rights (life, voting, the right to own property etc.).

    so in the case of a terror watchlist: if you are on the list and are not found to be guilty of a crime (terrorism) you can't be denied a right guaranteed under the constitution... like owning a firearm.

    the easy argument is we could just pass a law barring someone on this list from buying a firearm. but there's a problem i'll emphasize in all caps

    THE TERROR WATCHLIST IS FRIGGIN SKETCHY AS HELL

    there is no public oversight of it, we don't know who is on it and why. to illustrate this isn't aright-wing NRA argument, the ACLU has been complaining about the watchlist for years.

    https://www.aclu.org/watch-lists?redirect=technology-and-liberty/watch-lists

    its a million plus (according to the ACLU) list that just gobbles up information and has been known to be inaccurate as fooook. in fact, congress passed a bill to make up for people who were placed on the list by mistake.

    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2...iation-with-recognized-terrorism-groups.shtml

    so if we had trusted the accuracy of this list as our barometer of who to deny rights to, we've basically screwed over a lot of law abiding people.

    do i want terrorists with guns, no. i dont want anyone convicted of a felony to have a firearm.

    but if we had real life known terrorists running around the US i would be more concerned that they hadn't been arrested.


    so tl;dr

    terror watchlist bloated, inaccurate, not a legal definition of terrorism. right to bare arms, protected right, 5th amendment protects, denial of any rights without a conviction is unconstitutional.
     
  8. Explorer

    Explorer He seldomly knows...

    Messages:
    6,394
    Likes Received:
    971
    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Location:
    Formerly from Cucaramacatacatirimilcote...
    So... what you're saying is that Republicans who state that it is too easy for terrorists to buy weapons in the US are full of chit, and that they have no reason to be agitating against Syrian refugees because those refugees are not terrorists.

    Thanks for clearly defining the bullchit they are spouting!
     
  9. hairychris

    hairychris Hairy Old Bloke

    Messages:
    4,176
    Likes Received:
    272
    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Location:
    London, UK
    You need to remember that those nice Christians with guns are "Freedom Fighters" not "Terrorists". Only them stinky foreigners are "Terrorists"...

    :spock:
     
  10. Ibanezsam4

    Ibanezsam4 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    1,304
    Likes Received:
    213
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Location:
    Providence, RI
    this is the greatest counterpoint i have ever seen you crap out in my life. your opinion was ill-researched, get over it. its ok to be wrong, you'll be the better person for accepting it.

    the "laws" you are trying to cite have been on the books for ages and lots of them were passed with the support of democrats. but that's too inconvenient for you to admit.

    you jumped on a bandwagon opinion crafted by the DNC cuz you're a drone.

    i dont like the NRA because they only care for manufacturers.... and their dues are really inconvenient. however i like my constitutional rights, especially the one that allows people like yourself and i to have all their rights an freedoms guaranteed unless convicted of a felony... something you have no problem giving up if it only affects people you disagree with.

    isn't that what McCarthy wanted?

    so for everyone watching this drama unfold, from this point forward i will only state reputable sources that say why this guy's opinion is horrible and ill-based.


    this is why the terror watch list sucks FROM A SOURCE RIGHT-WINGERS CALL LIBERAL

    https://www.aclu.org/blog/numbers-tell-story-our-governments-watchlisting-binge

    this is a description of the Fifth Amendment https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fifth_amendment

    if you want to argue this point like the above ill-informed drone by going "omg you argued for guns... right winger with no valuable opinion i am a champion of freedom by denying other people freedoms because im the pinnacle of law and logic and my farts smell awesome..."

    ... then i will ignore you. this a discussion of constitutional law, not left/right BS that is our political discourse. and if any of you get suckered into that... i hate to say it but you're the problem with politics in America.

    there's actual data that shows how much better the two sides got along in the 20th century and voters actually treated each other with respect; unlike the anonymous dude im quoting on the internet.

    as for the christian terrorist claim thats been posted 2 or 3 times. you guys realize you're basing this opinion on a tweet right? you may of read it somewhere else but it was started because of a tweet.

    read. reputable. sources. there is some validity to the claim, but only because there is no data collected on the subject of militia or white power groups and people they have killed since 9/11.

    Kohn: Since 9/11, right-wing extremists killed more Americans than Islamic extremists | PunditFact

    so yeah if people want to debate this intellectually i have my tabs in Oyez open.
     
  11. Edika

    Edika SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    3,391
    Likes Received:
    389
    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2010
    Location:
    Londonderry, N.Ireland, UK
    I'm always unpleasantly surprised by the way people mistreat language to force their biased beliefs.

    If by "known terrorists" Schumer means "alleged terrorists", "suspected terrorists", more accurately as you describe "someone that made a google search on terrorism" or in this case "people who are fleeing a war torn country run by a dictator and being from a general region that some insane terrorist groups come from" then this guy should go back to school or stop being a chitty human being.
     
  12. Ibanezsam4

    Ibanezsam4 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    1,304
    Likes Received:
    213
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Location:
    Providence, RI
    *Note the use of only left-leaning sources*

    7 Ways That You (Yes, You) Could End Up On A Terrorist Watch List

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/05/nelson-mandela-terrorist_n_4394392.html

    Ford Motor Co., 2-Year-Old, Innocent Man Have Records In Terror Database

    This link describes why it is unconstitutional to be denied basic freedoms over suspicion

    http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/06/25/the-no-fly-list-is-unconstitutional/

    i will reiterate, there are no convicted terrorists on the watch list. only people flagged on databases. if someone is a real threat a case should be built and the individuals arrested. there is a process for protection and it works. case and point:

    Massachusetts man charged in ISIS-inspired terror plot - CNN.com

    since the watch list is a non-legally binding tool, it won't flag people who bought guns and bump back to the shop and deny the purchase.

    thats not because of republicans, its because the court system can't sign off on it because of how the legal system works ad how the constitution is constructed to protect individuals from trumped up charges and unlawful search and seizure.

    on the topic of the DHS

    the Department of Homeland Security (they control the watch list) is not an ironclad agency immune to the environment in Washington DC.

    all appointments are political. meaning, different people get put on the list depending on the political affiliation of the President. fun fact, the current president has expanded the list substantially since he took office, which is why the ACLU keeps writing about it.

    also this story is a rehash. the Huffpost first wrote about this in 2010. its a political play that gets used every few years, and it doesn't go anywhere because it would never make it out of the court system.


    UPDATE:

    just read all of this:

    https://theintercept.com/2014/07/23/blacklisted/
     
  13. MetalGravy

    MetalGravy Making a meat suit

    Messages:
    1,206
    Likes Received:
    73
    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Location:
    Urbandale, IA
  14. Explorer

    Explorer He seldomly knows...

    Messages:
    6,394
    Likes Received:
    971
    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Location:
    Formerly from Cucaramacatacatirimilcote...
    It's not my own understanding which was addressed in my first post, but instead the understanding of the legislators who have made statements which run counter to the points brought up in this topic.

    If there are restrictions on non-citizen firearm purchases, then he is full of chit.

    If there are no restrictions in his state on non-citizen firearm purchases, then he fought to have those loopholes in the laws, and he is again full of chit.

    What's going on is that there is a dichotomy between those two positions, and now the situation is requiring either one or the other to be abandoned.

    Again, I'm not arguing that the watch list is good or bad, or that no restrictions on handgun purchases are good or bad. I'm pointing out that you can't argue that it bad to allow terrorists to buy guns, while fighting to ensure they can buy guns.

    Hey... another likely datapoint on the homegrown Christian terrorist with that Planned Parenthood shooting, incidentally.
     
  15. Ibanezsam4

    Ibanezsam4 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    1,304
    Likes Received:
    213
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Location:
    Providence, RI
    well its not a data point because the investigation isn't concluded. while it was reported that he shouted something about "no baby body parts" it should be mentioned that outrage over the selling of fetal material crossed party lines. PP wouldn't have ceased the practice if it was only the small minority of Americans who actually practice Christianity or joined militias who complained.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...494c86-987b-11e5-8917-653b65c809eb_story.html

    i know several christians would argue this man was not devout, and that he used the belief system to justify his prejudice and violence (basically the not all Muslims argument).

    but i should just recap that there is no data on this topic and that anything we present as evidence is p1ss in the wind. also its easy to say christian violence is greater in america because when people are incarcerated they check off the religion of their family. im sure you will find Hindu's are more prone to violence in India for example.


    but to the point of background checks, there are added screening procedures for immigrated residents of the US. no loopholes or holes in the law. here are the steps https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/n...t-for-non-u.s.-citizens-purchasing-firearms-1

    these are effective screening measures, however they don't work if a radicalized person with no criminal background comes into the country.

    let's for a second say the California shooter was an immigrant. he had no criminal history and his family said they suspected nothing. he would not be flagged in a more intensive background check because there's nothing to flag. that is the scary thing when it comes to insurgency tactics. the point is to use people who don't stand out.

    the letter you posted is a dime a dozen. i can find that at the hyper local level of any state in the union and find Democrats who support it. not just legislators, but appointed positions too. its not trying to cover up for what you are wrongly labeling as loopholes and backing up with a sketchy database (as did the president who says he wants more enforcement of the no-fly list and terror watchlist... civil liberties my a$$).

    this is just the climate in the US post France, especially when ISIS says it has sent people over in the diaspora; which i actually believe.

    i could get into how we can effectively bring Syrians over but thats another thread.

    the point here is this: there is no amount of preventative measures (other than discriminatory prison camps) that effectively deter insurgency. hence the fear of many state and local lawmakers when it comes to Syrian refugees... not the NRA. not gun law. insurgency.
     
  16. kmanick

    kmanick Contributor

    Messages:
    5,822
    Likes Received:
    1,120
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Location:
    BOSTON
    Senator Ted Kennedy was on this "terror List" LOL!
    "Sketchy" is putting it mildly, you do anything the administration doesn't like, you can end up on this list .....and you won't even know it.
    Man the anti Christian sentiment on this web site is appalling.
     
  17. asher

    asher So Did We

    Messages:
    9,033
    Likes Received:
    686
    Joined:
    May 24, 2010
    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    ....huh? The only way that's relevant to this thread is not anti-Christian, even, but factual documentation of domestic attacks.
     
  18. Ibanezsam4

    Ibanezsam4 SS.org Regular

    Messages:
    1,304
    Likes Received:
    213
    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    Location:
    Providence, RI
    while this site is very areligious (lots of metal fans and trends left politically... like most metal fans) its not anti-christian on a whole. take each members comments individually, there's ignorance on both sides of the spectrum.

    in the context of this thread i see where you're coming from, one or two posts were a little more hyperbolic than necessary when referring white power groups and militias.

    but if you look at people who comprise militias and white power groups *note being in a militia does not make you a white power advocate or evil or racist* a majority are from heavily christian areas so you're going to have crossover on that Venn diagram.

    its a sad fact but one i wouldn't take personally. if you are christian the path of righteousness is supposed to be super personal and not as organized as it is today anyways.
     
  19. Explorer

    Explorer He seldomly knows...

    Messages:
    6,394
    Likes Received:
    971
    Joined:
    May 23, 2009
    Location:
    Formerly from Cucaramacatacatirimilcote...
    The thing is, there are many who are *very* visible and *very* vocal about their own form of christianity being the correct one.

    Personally, I'm shocked that three presidential candidates, to demonstrate their christian faith, were willing to attend a public event hosted by a man who has publicly called for all LGBTQ individuals to be killed.

    What's even more shocking for me is that it doesn't get the same reaction as such candidates would evoke if they were to attend a public event hosted by a man who publicly called for racial minorities to be killed.

    Now, the question would be, for most people who are against such bigotry: why aren't these candidates being questioned about this willingness to treat such dangerous bigots as friends in public?

    The fact that many of the people who call for muslims to repudiate terrorism don't demand the same repudiation from christians. When Trump meets with a pastor who has decried Starbucks as flavoring their coffees with the seed of sodomites (gays, in case you missed the slur), it's just subject to a handwave and ignored.

    So, kmanick... would you see these public displays of bigotry and calls to christianity-based violence as something to be noted and opposed, or are you instead against people noting such bigotry, therefore protecting such bigots from consequences?

    I am genuinely interested in hearing whether you truly believe calling out dangerous bigotry, and even calls to violence, as being antichristian, as opposed to anti-potential-terrorism.

    Incidentally, are you saying the terror list should now be disbanded as ineffective? How many potential terror attacks have been thwarted, if any? I'm interested in hearing the pros and cons of the list.
     
  20. ElRay

    ElRay Mostly Harmless

    Messages:
    3,173
    Likes Received:
    437
    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Location:
    NoIL
    Why, because people point-out where people that happen to be christian are ignorant bigots and the ignorant bigots that happen to be christian assume that ALL christians are exactly themselves? Because people point out when some hypocrites, that happen to be christian, want special privilege for themselves, and these hypocrites assume that all christians are exactly like themselves? Because people point out that christian domionist demands are unconstitutional.

    NONE of this is anti-christian. It's anti ignorant, hypocritical bigots who want special privilege, or to force their mythology on others.

    Or do you feel this way because people point out when christian mythology makes no sense? Or because people point out when christian mythology contradicts itself? Or because people point-out that christian mythology contradicts reality? Or because people point out that the poster is cherry-picking potions of christian mythology to support their point of view?

    None of this is anti-christian. It's just pro-reality, logic and consistency.

    And actually, if you paid attention, you'd see that these "anti-christian" folks are truly "anti-mythology as a justification for social wrongs" and really don't care if your mythology is christian, muslim, jewish, hindu, buddhist, jain, shinto, zoroastrian, traditional-hellenic, traditional-Norse, pagan, etc. etc., it's all the same mythological nonsense and has no place in political decisions.,
     

Share This Page