After the December shooting in San Bernardino, CA, President Obama stated in his weekly radio address that it was “insane” to allow suspected terrorists on the country’s no-fly list to purchase guns. Shortly after, Senate Democrats introduced a measure that would have restricted anyone on the federal terrorism watch list, also known as the no-fly list, from being able to purchase firearms in the U.S. The measure did not pass after Senate Republicans voted down the measure.
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
Yes
Until someone proves themself safe enough to be off the no fly list they shouldn’t be allowed to purchase a gun
@8VKDDMH5mos5MO
“Innocent until proven guilty”, is a key principle of our entire system of justice. It is not anyone's responsibility to prove that he is not a criminal, or not dangerous, in order to exercise any of his essential human rights; but rather the responsibility of anyone seeking to deny those rights to prove that the person in question is dangerous, and that there is just cause and need in that case to deny those rights.
The very existence of the “no fly list” is a blatant violation of this principle; as would be any expansion of its application to denying any other rights.
@9F4PHHYIndependent11mos11MO
Americans have a constitutional right to keep and bare arms. We are also protected and cannot have our liberties curtailed without due process another constitutionally protected right.
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
No, it is unconstitutional to deny someone’s rights without due process
@JonBSimConstitution2yrs2Y
If you're going to keep me off planes, I better get a really good reason from you.
@JonBSimConstitution2yrs2Y
The reason he's on the list may be bunk, so he shouldn't lose his rights unless proven.
@9GZXS758mos8MO
The requirement for due process is right in the constitution. Very clearly. If allowing the government to prosecute, convict, and penalize citizens, without due process is Okay with someone, there is a constitutional amendment process they can use to change it. Good luck with that.
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
Yes, if the government considers you too dangerous to board a plane you should not be able to buy a gun
@93ZRL6SLibertarian2yrs2Y
Too many innocent people have been placed on Do Not Fly lists because their name matches someone else that is a person of interest. The list is asinine.
@9GZXS758mos8MO
The No Fly list is a secret list that is being used to restricted constitutional rights. There is no way to redress the matter and no due process is used to put people on in the first place. People are on it because the government thinks they should be. Governmental incompetence can easily be a problem, just ask Cat Stevens (the singer). Just by virtue of the lack of due process, the list is unconstitutional. It should be made public and given a means to contend listings. Restricting someone's right to gun ownership based on such a list is unconstitutional.
@9FNGCWMProgressive10mos10MO
I don’t have a constitutional right to fly, I have a constitutional right to purchase and own a firearm. The standard of proof to deprive me of my constitutional right should greatly exceed the burden of proof to put me on the no-fly list.
The government has weaponized gun control against black Americans for decades and most likely has done the same with the no-fly list
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
Yes, and ban the sale of guns and ammunition to anyone
@9G9TFLSRepublican9mos9MO
Shouldn't ban this all cause someone is on a certain list. As long as they didn't do anything bad, they should be good.
@9FBJKXZ11mos11MO
The second amendment goes for anyone within reason, just because you aren't allowed to fly doesn't mean you should have your constitutional rights revoked.
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
No, this is a slippery slope that will eventually ban the sale of guns to anyone
@9FM3MHP10mos10MO
The "No, this is a slippery slope that will eventually ban the sale of guns to anyone" argument against using the No-Fly List for gun control raises concerns about potential overreach and erosion of Second Amendment rights. It's important to address these concerns by emphasizing the need for due process and accuracy in identifying potential threats on the list. Implementing gun restrictions solely based on the No-Fly List without ensuring transparency and accuracy could infringe on individuals' rights and set a precedent for government overreach.
@9FBJKXZ11mos11MO
The ATF has been unlawfully redefining what they consider illegal and many individuals are being penalized for something that was entirely legal. The people should not be punished for exercising their 2nd amendment right.
@9JXXLR95mos5MO
First, they will start with the no-fly list, then felons, then anyone with a criminal record, then everyone.
Good, I don’t believe you should own a gun if you can’t fly on the no fly list, there should be more ballots where the actual citizens vote on the issues and if it’s a slippery slope there should be safeguards built into the laws
@4XZ73KC4yrs4Y
These are two entirely different issues
@587QZFY4yrs4Y
The Constitution is for our protection..not for the protection of suspected terrorists. If someone is on the "no fly" list... they need to prove themselves innocent/safe. I agree this sounds like it is against "innocent until proven guilty" but do we want innocent until you kill 200 people ?
@JonBSimConstitution2yrs2Y
We shouldn't go "Minority Report".
@8YDCCSQ3yrs3Y
Depends on what they were put on the No-fly list for and I believe the nofly list should be improved for accuracy and includes due process.
@morphoenix2yrs2Y
No, but there should be a more rigorous process to purchase a gun and ammunition.
@93FQRFK2yrs2Y
@9GZDTYYIndependent8mos8MO
Yes, I believe that suspected terrorists on the federal terrorism watch list should be banned from purchasing guns and ammunition but only after investigation(s) and judicial review of the suspected terrorist have substantial enough evidence to imply the individual may engage in terrorist activities, because at that point the individual has essentially surrendered their right to bear arms by interfering with the rights of others.
@8YWD8TW2yrs2Y
No, and drastically reduce the reasons one can be put on the no fly list.
@8WX2B453yrs3Y
There should be no such thing as a "No fly" list. Private transportation entities should be responsible for ensuring the security of their passengers.
@8GQYS3S4yrs4Y
there are people on the no-fly list for reasons that would not preclude them from being reasonable gun owners. yes a lot of the reasons are certainly good reasons for keeping an individual from owning a gun but you can't throw individuals out for the collective. what is the reason they were put on the No-fly list is that reason to not let them have a gun. don't let them have a gun then. if it isn't though they should still be allowed to have a gun .
@8GDJ4CY4yrs4Y
Depends on why they’re on the no fly list.
@97GLQX32yrs2Y
Yes and ensure that list is accurate and fair. Gun ownership is not a right, its a terrible privilege. America has a serious addiction to power, coersion, and violence.
@97N7LGG2yrs2Y
What does "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" mean? America has a serious stupidity issue. Why isn't anyone concerned about the fact that 36 million adults in the U.S. don’t have basic reading, writing, and math skills above a third-grade level & the number of functionally illiterate adults is increasing by approximately two and one quarter million persons each year? 27% of eighth grade students are below basic reading level, 39% are below the proficient reading level. They're letting students graduate from high school not… Read more
@9RB74MN5 days5D
1: Depends on the reason they are on the No Fly List 2: Only once the No Fly List is 100% accurate, and there is a way to differentiate people with the same name who aren't on it
@jadenstr11wk1W
Yes, but only if they do not pass the screening that one should need to go through to purchase a firearm, not just because they are a suspected terrorist.
@9QZN98Z2wks2W
No, the no-fly list should remain as it is because we need to quickly be able to recognize threats, but there should be a similar list with due process that would keep terrorists and extremely dangerous people from purchasing guns.
@9QW96TN2wks2W
Yes, but allow citizens (or undocumented residents) to request that their status be reviewed and appealed.
@9QQH2W93wks3W
It's all jolly and good until they use it against us citizens they seem terrorists. I remain undecided.
@9QMCN7B3wks3W
No, the no-fly list is purely at the discretion of unelected officials and should have no functional effect on anyone’s life
@CurvyletterConstitution 4wks4W
No, as it infringes on Second Amendment rights without due process and potentially punishes innocent people
@9Q4W6R64wks4W
No, considering the fact that people were placed on the no fly list for things as simple as refusing to wear a mask. Refusing to wear a mask shouldn't forbid someone from owning a firearm.
@9PKKFQ7 1mo1MO
Yes, if you are a suspected terrorist or even have a background being so you should not be able to purchase and gun or any weapon of that matter.
@9NQVP7L2mos2MO
There must be burden of proof on the part of any government entity to bar individuals from transportation. A free citizen must be treated as a free citizen with regard to weapons and transportation. Anyone not trusted to fly or own weapons should probably remain incarcerated.
@9N9QMZL2mos2MO
Once the “no fly list” is fixed so it doesn’t include people who shouldn’t be on the list, I would answer the question as “yes”.
@9N9KYR22mos2MO
I believe that it depends on the circumstances. In general, it is infact unconstitutional to deny someone's rights without due process. However, if the person is clearly shown to be dangerous, or are on the "no-fly list" BECAUSE of an issue involving guns and ammunition, I believe that the government has every right to prevent them from purchasing guns and/or ammunition.
@9N5PWJL2mos2MO
If the entire concept is that they would turn the plant into a weapon, then, by extension, and by merit, they should not have access to other weapons. Same as felons.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
