Back in February, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) introduced the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2015, along with co-sponsors Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Ed Markey (D-Mass.). All Democrats? Why ever would that be? As our good friends at pjmedia.com pointed out . . .
The bill would give the attorney general discretion to “deny the transfer of a firearm” if he or she “determines that the transferee is known (or appropriately suspected) to be or have been engaged in conduct constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to terrorism, or providing material support or resources for terrorism” and “has a reasonable belief that the prospective transferee may use a firearm in connection with terrorism.”
In other words, the bill would have given the [Democratic] Attorney General of the United States the power to define terrorism, and then deny anyone who falls under his or her definition their natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. Based on the AG’s “reasonable belief.”
Statism baby! That’s how the Dems roll. Speaking of which, theguardian.com reports that . . .
The Obama administration’s no-fly lists and broader watchlisting system is based on predicting crimes rather than relying on records of demonstrated offenses, the government has been forced to admit in court.
In a little-noticed filing before an Oregon federal judge, the US Justice Department and the FBI conceded that stopping US and other citizens from travelling on airplanes is a matter of “predictive assessments about potential threats”, the government asserted in May . . .
The declaration comes in a longstanding case, brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), arguing that the government does not provide significant steps for someone caught in the “predictive assessments” to get off the blacklists.
On Friday, the ACLU asked Judge Anna Brown to conduct her own review of the error rate in the government’s predictions modeling – a process the ACLU likens to the “pre-crime” of Philip K Dick’s science fiction.
Note that the above-named Senators (not to mention our NY RINO pal Peter King in the House and his Democratic pals) want to duplicate the No-Fly List to create a No-Gun List. It would involve the same secret determination according to secret criteria, without prior judicial oversight.
While the No-Fly List appeals process is ultimately adjudicated by . . . wait for it . . . the Transportation Safety Administration, someone on the No-Gun List would have to take Uncle Sam to court, where they would NOT be able to see the evidence against them (ex parte all the way baby!).
While we await the return of the No-Gun list proposal, the civilian disarmament industrial complex continues its clarion call for federal laws to prohibit people on the No-Fly list from purchasing firearms. This recent revelation about the No-Fly list’s unproven, unconstitutional “predictive” process should completely undermine that effort. But won’t.
Question: does anyone think that a law prohibiting terrorists from legally purchasing a firearm would stop them from committing acts of terror? The 9/11 attackers used box cutters, for God’s sake.
More to the point, does anyone not think that the government’s No-Fly list is mistakenly infringing – whether intentionally or through sheer incompetence – on Americans’ civil rights? Why would a No-Gun List be any different? Come to think of it, how’s that whole FBI NICS background check thing workin’ out for ya?
Ted Kennedy was on the no fly list. I would so love a hacker finding a way to add Shannon and her whole family. Hell, I have $5,000 for the effort
Yeah, I remember when Sen. Kennedy ended up on that list (created during the Bush Administration, I might add, after 9/11). It took him something like five weeks, with his level of government access, to get off the list. Five weeks for a Big and Powerful Senator to get off the list–a guy who can walk into the Atty. General’s office any time he wants…five weeks for *him*.
Imagine what it’d be like for *us* who don’t have that access!
While I wouldn’t pay a hacker to do this to Ms. Watts or Mr. Bloomberg, I sure would be horse-laughing if they did end up, like Sen. Kennedy did, on such a list.
– T
My grandfather had a hard time boarding his flight to come to my basic training graduation as we have a very generic and common surname and his first name is “John”, thus his name was on the list as it “could be” used as an alias.
AGAIN, AND STILL. . .
More evil liberal house of blue (D) cr_p.
These guys are somebody’s neighbors. I blame all of you.
that rhymes
Just to remind, the no-fly list was a brainchild of the Bush administration. Dems have adopted it once in power, but give credit where it’s due.
Yes, the G W Bush administration created the no-fly list and the B H Obama administration continues to use the no-fly list. It is irrelevant if the no-fly list was created out of good intentions or not, remember that former president G W Bush was a Democrat, this list are anti-American because it limits liberty without due process of law. … This is a problem with JEB, would he do similar anti-American things? Already he supports illegal aliens and has a ad in Spanish which does not help unite the nation in one language. … I believe our ideals should unite us, life, liberty, property rights, due process of law, right to keep and bear arms, freedom of speech, religion, and belief, etc. and that people lose these rights when they violate the rights of others. Marxism is clearly anti-American because of its forced belief of atheism from the government, likewise muslims which force their religion are anti-American, likewise Marxism and socialism are anti-American because the people in the government control the means of production and control people’s property. … Unfortunately so much socialism and Marxism has been incorporated into law in the USA it is difficult to get it out and to impeach offending elected officials, appointed officials, and hired personnel who are socialists, Marxists, communists, etc. I continue to write and hope people will understand the problems with socialism and Marxism. … The right to keep and bear arms is an aspect of democracy in that all people who have not violated other’s rights have the right to defense.
“It is impossible to determine in advance everyone who might become a terrorist, therefore everyone must be suspect, and we therefore deny firearms to EVERYONE, punishable by 10 billion dollar fine and summary execution, no trial necessary.” I figure it would take about two weeks after such a stupid and unconstitutional law was passed.
The anit-gunners want to use anything that allows them to put people on NICS or any other list that will deny them their rights without due process. This has the advantage of being done in secret and without recourse to the victim. I would like to see everyone who comes out in support of this added to the no fly list, including all of the Bloomberg Misfits. They need to learn what big government can do to them and just how powerless they are to get it undone.
It should be fine…. what could possibly go wrong?
They want to add a poorly maintained list that has no due process to a black list of gun buyers? This is dumb. Let me tell you a story.
My wife has this friend, she’s not exactly the best when it comes to navigation. Well they’re in the boonies of Illinois when she accidentally goes down the wrong road. As it turns out, this is a side entrance to a nuclear power plant. The nice security guards pay her a visit at the muzzle of some “Tactical Carbines” take her license, make a copy and escort her off the property. By this I mean they make her back up at gun point and vacate.
Embarrassingly enough the next time she went to fly she got turned away at the gate. I don’t really think the need of a Garmin is criteria to disqualify one from a firearms purchase.
The other thing worth noting is that the no fly list has hit a ton of people, even US Senators falsely. If you’re a senator it’s a heck of a lot easier to make a call than say you or I.
I have a friend who happens to have the same name as a notorious drug lord in South America. My friend can’t fly anywhere, and he can’t leave the country by any means, even though he has proven repeatedly that he & the drug lord are two entirely separate entities. Hell, they’re not even close to the same age or physical description, but that doesn’t matter.
By the way, was your friend’s unfortunate event near the Byron plant? I’m not terribly far from there, and I’ve heard some similar tales.
Braidwood actually. There’s a lot of plants down that way.
They’ve already declared conservatives, Christians, people who’ve read the constitution, gun owners, and people who can hold down a steady job “possible terrorists”.
Our government is absolutely infringing on our right to free travel with their “no-fly” list. Furthermore, our government is infringing on our Constitutionally enumerated right to due process in concocting and enforcing the “no-fly” list.
If someone is a “terrorist”, why hasn’t the government presented evidence at trial, secured a legitimate guilty verdict, and imprisoned them? Otherwise they are a free human being and have every right to travel any way they want without any interference from any government. Sheesh.
But don’t you see? They’re afraid of you because you might be armed. Fear leads to terror. And terrorists create fear. Therefore, you are a terrorist. Because somewhere, someone is afraid.
pjmedia.com stated
Does this same standard apply to U.S. Senators, Representatives, and agents of the various agencies of the Department of Justice et. al. ??? If it does, just about all of them should be on the disarmed and no-fly list as well … at least the ones who define and enforce blatantly unconstitutional laws to disarms us for the benefit of violent criminals, spree killers, and terrorists.
(I cannot think of a better definition of “give material aid to terrorists” than a government politician or agent who threatens to imprison and/or kill us for wanting to be armed when facing a violent attack from criminals, spree killers, or terrorists.)
If you don’t have a criminal record the government doesn’t know your preferred crime of choice or when you will commit a crime, therefore you will be moved to the top of the restricted list. It only makes sense, look at the news these days. Since we can’t control crazies we have to control everyone. If you have a criminal record you are on the restricted list already. It’s the perfect scenario for the government. Also maintaining secrecy is great for the government. They wouldn’t want people to feel like a person with rights or anything.
Anybody who believes in the constitution and god given rights trumping government authority will be on that list in a new York minute. eww new york
In reporting over the last 15 years, the estimates I have read for individuals on Federal WATCH LISTS goes upwards of 4 MILLION. And as the good Senator Kennedy found out, you can’t hardly get off of such a list….
Guilty until (an exhaustive quest to clear your name to be) proven innocent! You’d have to show me that in the US Constitution.
Soon we will all be crooks confined to our houses and be forced to surrender anything that resembles a weapon. I think I’m going to mass market sporks!
Because the government is so benevolent that we don’t need a 2nd Amendment anymore. (Or the rest of the Bill of Rights.)
Even if it were implemented, I don’t see this scheme surviving judicial review for the forseeable future. The Supreme Court in Heller determined that the 2nd Amdt was an individual right, and any law that deprived someone of such must survive increased scrutiny. They refused to say if this meant Intermediate or Strict Scrutiny. But definitely more than the usual deferential level of scrutiny known as Rational Basis. By being an individual right, any sort of predictive algorithm is probably not acceptable, because it would prevent innocent, law abiding citizens and legal residents from acquiring guns. And increased scrutiny means that the burden is on the govt to show that this scheme adequately advances an important, or even compelled, govt interest. The big weakness here that I see is that the predictive algorithm is based on models that are based on statistics, which in turn are based on large numbers of people. But the scheme might disarm individuals who are not, themselves, dangerous, and the 2nd Amdt is an individual right, not a collective one. (And, yes, a lot of their attempts to disarm the public have this exact problem of attempting to put their version of the collective good over the individual right to keep and bear arms).
I don’t know what to tell you guys. Democrats from New England states and California, aren’t into justice or freedom. They’re into statistical Borg like economics applied law – and Marxism. They are also into delegating authority to particular individuals with no checks and balances from the people’s side over those individuals.
This is the new McCarthyism. Senator Joe McCarthy would be proud of Bush for starting this list.
They may have been correct in their initial assessment, but terrible in their final execution.
If you’re too dangerous to fly on an airplane, you’re too dangerous to own a gun, but please wander about in public, raise children, stand behind me in line at the grocery store, and buy some fuel oil and fertilizer or machetes at the local knife mart.
Either you have evidence or you don’t; both the R’s and D’s are guilty of this.
Of course, playing this game I can think of entire sections of Chiraq where I’m pretty sure most of the residents could be placed on a “pre crime” list.
LIke Ko-Ko in “The Mikado,” the government has a little list of people who will not be missed. In fact, the G has a lot of lists, and they’re not so little. Nobody knows the criteria for being listed. Nobody knows that they are on a list until they are denied the right to fly or to purchase or own a gun. Nobody knows how to get off a list either. Yes, Heinrich Müller would be proud.
As some day it may happen that a victim must be found,
I’ve got a little list — I’ve got a little list
Of society offenders who might well be underground,
And who never would be missed — who never would be missed.
I’m on the no-fly list. And, I embody, loudly, every trait that Obama considers a terrorist.
Good thing I’d rather drive than be raped by the TSA…
Land of the fee, Home of the Slave.
Wow.
The Dept. of Pre-Crime.
Imagine a time when a group is in power that recognizes that internally inflicted Marxist, Communist, Socialist, etc. policies are the greatest threat to our country. This administration then decides that all Democrats (and more than a few Republicans) have participated in enacting such damaging policies and are now defined to be worthy of membership on the dreaded “no fly list”.
Do you think these people would think it’s a good idea to pass this law in light of this future?
All laws should be passed only after answering the question, “If my worst enemy were in power would I be ok with what they could do with this law?”
At this point, if anyone here is NOT on a government ‘watch list’, what is your excuse? Why have you been slacking?
Here’s a simple rule of thumb for you. If government wants to enact a new law that bans or restricts something, and they use the words “national security” and “terrorism”, it’s almost certainly a bad law that will infringe on at least one of your constitutional rights. This is regardless of what exactly the law bans, which party is supporting it etc.
In this case, of course, it’s the no-fly list itself that is unconstitutional and plainly a bad idea. Tackling other stuff onto it just makes it slightly more bad.
The first inmate at Guantanamo Bay shared my name. Even though they had him in prison and I didn’t match his description in any way, my name was on the No-Fly list. If you have the bad guy in jail, why not take his name off the list so the rest of us don’t have to get TSA Redress Letters just to board an airplane? With this level of incompetence, expanding the concept to firearms would just harm innocent folks. You can’t trust the bureaucracy with your freedom!
I believe the actions of the Hildebeast in Libya, the whole sending weapons to the Syrian rebels who turn out to be ISIS thing, would place her at the top of the list.
The very reason that the government puts you on any list with no due process and no way to defend your rights is the very reason why you should be able to purchase arms.
This is a Bill of Attainder, which is specificlly prohibited by the Constitution.
Any government, and supporter thereof, who maintains a “no fly list”, are explicit supporters and practitioners of the worst form of terrorism. Nothing any non government actor could conceivably do, remotely even compares.
Compare the intent of the no fly list & domestic protection orders, note the myriad ways said intent has been distorted to allow almost limitless abuse w/ little if any corrective recourse, ponder about such being applied to acts ‘feminists’ consider to be ‘sexual assault’, then tremble at the prospect of what would eventually happen in response.
And people thought Heinlein’s Crazy Years laughable & Phil Dick’s ‘predictions’ flat out impossible.
Comments are closed.