Trump Supports Gun Ban for Fly/Terror List

[parabelum]

I would be the last person to support this.
The scenario I tossed there was an effort to be cerebral and pragmatic about this.

There is no way I'm on board for this or any fascist government to yank rights from persons who have not had due process. Period.

Having said that, I'm also not on board with thousands of ISIS sympathizing pigs having uninhibited access to whatever arsenal they wish to acquire. It's a conundrum that's not as black and white as pro 2A/constitution or against.

.....

There's no pragmatism in suggesting that any gun law is going to inhibit a terrorist's access to weapons.

Did I say "any"? Are you onboard with unrestricted gun access to ISIS sympathizers? Can you propose a solution as I did in my prevous post, as flawed as it may be in many people's eyes?

[suthdj]

I will be meeting with the NRA, who has endorsed me, about not allowing people on the terrorist watch list, or the no fly list, to buy guns.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 15, 2016

Above is what Trump allegedly said. Yet the Libertarian Republic (whatever the heck that is) titled the article "Donald Trump Just Flipped on Gun Control. Garbage, you lying Libertarian rag! Unfortunately, the OP here on the Forum titled this thread "Trump Supports Gun Ban for Fly/Terror List. That too is garbage! It's disgusting how "our" people will blast anti-gunners for using the same tactics used here. Do you smell that? That's the smell of credibility going up in smoke.

Anyone who believes the NRA is going to support this crap is in need of constant supervision. If Trump meets with the NRA, learns what the No Fly and/or Terrorist Watch List is, do you really think he's going to support it in direct opposition to the NRA? Get real people. He was asked a question in light of the slaughter in Orlando by a man the FBI has investigated twice. What do you think he's going to say! The Trump-haters are always looking for something to attack and you aren't going to use the Forum to do it. You're going to have to engage in your backdoor support of Hillary Clinton elsewhere.

Chas.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/nra-d ... le/2593977

The Washington Examiner paraphrased Chris Cox statement to twist it trying to show the NRA supported total blocking of people on the list. The actual statment should be read vs the article in the liberal rag that tried to say they want the purchases totally denied https://www.nraila.org/articles/2016061 ... watchlists

I read statement and still disagree with the NRA is position. Until they come up with a method to manage that list so we know how we get on how we get off and a way to get off without going in debt I will never support any kind of a list.

[philip964]

It would seem to me if your being investigated by the FBI as a potential terrorist and you apply to buy a gun. The gun sale could go through but the sale could be highlighted and sent to the FBI for further action on their part.

I'll let the constitutional lawyers tell me if this violates someone's rights.

They could decide depending on the purchase to pay a polite visit, put a tail on the individual or maybe reopen a closed investigation and see what the person is posting on line.

BTW our terrorist in Orlando was not on the no fly list.

[ScottDLS]

I would have thought this was already being done. If you're being investigated by FBI or any other law enforcement entity wouldn't it show up when purchasing a gun or getting a LTC? I think most people are under the impression this is already in play. That's why they are questioning how this Orlando terrorist was able to easily purchase guns. I heard the FBI took him off of the watch list after their investigation.

Because it would take Federal legislation to invoke this. You are "under investigation" by any law enforcement agency? So what? It doesn't make you a prohibited person. I don't want the Feds getting a new excuse to take away people's rights. Maybe DHS shouldn't hire you as a contractor though...

I was just basically making an inquiry, and I'm not a contractor.

Sorry I didn't mean you... It was the Orlando shooter that was a DHS contractor... I was suggesting that if you're on a watchlist, you shouldn't be denied your rights, but maybe the government shouldn't have to hire you...

[warnmar10]

[K.Mooneyham]

I will be meeting with the NRA, who has endorsed me, about not allowing people on the terrorist watch list, or the no fly list, to buy guns.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 15, 2016

Above is what Trump allegedly said. Yet the Libertarian Republic (whatever the heck that is) titled the article "Donald Trump Just Flipped on Gun Control. Garbage, you lying Libertarian rag! Unfortunately, the OP here on the Forum titled this thread "Trump Supports Gun Ban for Fly/Terror List. That too is garbage! It's disgusting how "our" people will blast anti-gunners for using the same tactics used here. Do you smell that? That's the smell of credibility going up in smoke.

Anyone who believes the NRA is going to support this crap is in need of constant supervision. If Trump meets with the NRA, learns what the No Fly and/or Terrorist Watch List is, do you really think he's going to support it in direct opposition to the NRA? Get real people. He was asked a question in light of the slaughter in Orlando by a man the FBI has investigated twice. What do you think he's going to say! The Trump-haters are always looking for something to attack and you aren't going to use the Forum to do it. You're going to have to engage in your backdoor support of Hillary Clinton elsewhere.

Chas.

I'm with you 100% on this, Mr. Cotton. The whole thing smacks of selective quoting to take down Mr. Trump among a group where he likely has a large number of supporters. Looks like the Democrat propaganda machine grinds on...

[locke_n_load]

From thetruthaboutguns.com:

From the NRA:
We are happy to meet with Donald Trump. The NRA’s position on this issue has not changed. The NRA believes that terrorists should not be allowed to purchase or possess firearms, period. Anyone on a terror watchlist who tries to buy a gun should be thoroughly investigated by the FBI and the sale delayed while the investigation is ongoing. If an investigation uncovers evidence of terrorist activity or involvement, the government should be allowed to immediately go to court, block the sale, and arrest the terrorist. At the same time, due process protections should be put in place that allow law-abiding Americans who are wrongly put on a watchlist to be removed. That has been the position of Sen. John Cornyn (R.-Tex.) and a majority of the U.S. Senate. Sadly, President Obama and his allies would prefer to play politics with this issue.

And the author makes some interesting questions:

How long would the “temporary ban” for Americans on the government’s secret, unaccountable Terrorist Watch List last? What would be the process for appealing and “un-suspending” the “temporary” ban? Does the “temporary ban” extend to firearms already in a suspect’s possession?

If you cannot buy a gun while the gov't investigates it's case, how long can that be? A month? A year? Is that not impending on one's rights?
Just a lot of questions about this list.

Full article, not endorsing all of it (just that it has some good questions):
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/0 ... les-delay/

[Adt123]

MarketWatch article below is a different approach. Suggest certain well-endowed companies buy gun manufacturers and then shut them down entirely, control what is manufactured, etc. I think board of directors of purchasing company would be held accountable for paying a premium price for ownership of a company they are planning to close down. That plan builds in a loss. What a crazy idea. Major factor is how many shareholders are supportive of the 2nd amendment beyond their desire for a profit.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-i ... 1826640165

[parabelum]

Reading some of the posts over the last few day makes me wonder if we have liberal plants in our ranks, aimed at bashing Trump and NRA in particular.
I'm getting really fed up with it frankly. You want to hand it to Hildebeast then just be upfront. Don't pretend to be pro 2A and post more about Trump or NRA this or that rather then how Hillary started the Arab Spring that brought about mass chaos, her corruption, criminality of her dealings as Sec. of State, Clinton Foundation ties to Saudi Wahabbi fanatics etc.

Go to Salon and post junk about Trump, NRA etc.

[ScottDLS]

MarketWatch article below is a different approach. Suggest certain well-endowed companies buy gun manufacturers and then shut them down entirely, control what is manufactured, etc. I think board of directors of purchasing company would be held accountable for paying a premium price for ownership of a company they are planning to close down. That plan builds in a loss. What a crazy idea. Major factor is how many shareholders are supportive of the 2nd amendment beyond their desire for a profit.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-i ... 1826640165

Great I will start a private company to serve the civilian market for modern sporting rifles, ammunition, and magazines.

Then I can profit from the idiot corporatists getting out of the business. Truth is, there are already tons of these out there... Mom and Pop with a CNC machine and a small commercial location can churn out AR-15 lowers by the thousands. With a little more effort you can do it for uppers, barrels, magazines, etc.

[The Annoyed Man]

The opportunity for abusing such a list.... To be denied a Natural and Enumerated Constitutional Right without due process.

Why in the world would you think that gov't would abuse data like that? [cough]IRS[/cough], [cough]NSA[/cough], [cough]asset forfeiture[/cough]........

[Papa_Tiger]

The opportunity for abusing such a list.... To be denied a Natural and Enumerated Constitutional Right without due process.

Why in the world would you think that gov't would abuse data like that? [cough]IRS[/cough], [cough]NSA[/cough], [cough]asset forfeiture[/cough]........

Get this man some water stat!

[mojo84]

One of the problems I see in this and other threads, if someone isn't 100% in lockstep with what is considered conservative, libertarian or pro-2nd "correct" thinking, people conclude that person is a left-wing nut planted to perpetuate a grand conspiracy to infiltrate the "correct" thinkers and throw the the election to the commie criminal. It is impossible to get 100% buy in on all nuances of an issue buy all folks that support an issue such as liberty, 2nd Amendment, economics, religion etc.

Being so dogmatic that everything is either black or white is shortsighted. For those that want to jump to accusing me of being a "liberal plant", you couldn't be further from the truth. While I base my opinions and decisions on principles, I understand not everything is a,ways black or white and if someone doesn't agree with me 100% they are automatically my enemy. I also don't believe it is best to always be looking for an argument or spoiling for a fight whether it is on a forum or potential civil war.

We need to focus on what unites us and less on finding the things that divide us. If not, we will eventually be referring to one another as "comrade".

[RoyGBiv]

Just to be clear, while I despise the idea of subjective membership on a list that causes my rights to be denied without due process, I think the NRA is pursuing the issue in the correct manner. The folks in charge over at NRA have proven themselves wily and worthy of my trust, especially so over the last few years. The media is looking for anything they can use to beat and vilify the NRA (and all gun owners) and one of the components of any good strategy is to deny that opportunity to your enemies. It's important to separate the bad policy itself from the strategy being pursued to block or mitigate that policy.

If Chris or Wayne or Jim are reading this, please know you have the firm support of this Benefactor member.