Trump: No guns for people on the terrorist watch list
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:25:01 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Trump: No guns for people on the terrorist watch list
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Author Topic: Trump: No guns for people on the terrorist watch list  (Read 2451 times)
SillyAmerican
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,052
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: June 15, 2016, 02:51:57 PM »

It's amazing that there are people who actually think people on terrorist watch lists should be allowed to buy guns

Yup. As I've said elsewhere, if it's proper for the government to say that a person who has psychological problems can't purchase a gun (and I don't think anyone argues against this), why wouldn't it be proper for the government to say that a person who has been placed on a terror watch list can't purchase a gun?

A sensible position, but it's unclear who Trump is attempting to appeal to. This will piss off more conservatives than liberals/moderates it will impress.

The one thing I find most intriguing about Trump is that he'll take a stand on what he believes to be a common sense position, regardless of who it will piss off or impress. Voters will continue to agree or disagree with him, naturally, but I honestly don't feel as though he's out to pander, like most politicians do. The lady running on the other side? She's a completely different story...
Logged
LLR
LongLiveRock
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,956


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: June 15, 2016, 03:06:54 PM »

It's amazing that there are people who actually think people on terrorist watch lists should be allowed to buy guns

Yup. As I've said elsewhere, if it's proper for the government to say that a person who has psychological problems can't purchase a gun (and I don't think anyone argues against this), why wouldn't it be proper for the government to say that a person who has been placed on a terror watch list can't purchase a gun?

A sensible position, but it's unclear who Trump is attempting to appeal to. This will piss off more conservatives than liberals/moderates it will impress.

The one thing I find most intriguing about Trump is that he'll take a stand on what he believes to be a common sense position, regardless of who it will piss off or impress. Voters will continue to agree or disagree with him, naturally, but I honestly don't feel as though he's out to pander, like most politicians do. The lady running on the other side? She's a completely different story...

You seem to have forgotten about that time he changed his position on abortion 6 times in 2 days or whatever
Logged
Xing
xingkerui
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,303
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: -3.91

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: June 15, 2016, 03:11:03 PM »

I guess even a broken clock is still right twice a day.
Logged
MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!
Kalwejt
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,380


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: June 15, 2016, 03:13:39 PM »

I wish I could actually trust he really meant that.

It's amazing that there are people who actually think people on terrorist watch lists should be allowed to buy guns

^^^
Logged
Adam Griffin
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,090
Greece


Political Matrix
E: -7.35, S: -6.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: June 15, 2016, 03:14:35 PM »

I guess even a broken clock is still right twice a day.

Think of it more as a perfectly functioning clock, which has hands that stop at a given point once every second.
Logged
Xing
xingkerui
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,303
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: -3.91

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: June 15, 2016, 03:21:42 PM »

I guess even a broken clock is still right twice a day.

Think of it more as a perfectly functioning clock, which has hands that stop at a given point once every second.

Must be a tough clock to tell time with, considering that both hands are small.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,665
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: June 15, 2016, 05:12:44 PM »
« Edited: June 15, 2016, 05:14:50 PM by shua »

It's amazing that there are people who actually think people on terrorist watch lists should be allowed to buy guns

Yup. As I've said elsewhere, if it's proper for the government to say that a person who has psychological problems can't purchase a gun (and I don't think anyone argues against this), why wouldn't it be proper for the government to say that a person who has been placed on a terror watch list can't purchase a gun?

Plenty of people, including myself, believe that psychological problems should not of themselves be enough to keep someone from legally purchasing a gun.  We shouldn't be depriving people of things merely based on a diagnosis.   

I don't think being on a terror watch list should keep someone from being able to buy a gun, first because that means depriving someone of something considered a right without due process. If there were more of a limited process of putting people on this list, then perhaps, but there's also the problem that it would alert the person  that they are on the watchlist and - if they are of that tiny percentage of people on the watchlist who are actual terrorists - they would find another way to kill people instead.  If they are on a watchlist, you want to watch what they do. 

This guy who shot up people in Orlando was not even any longer on a terror watch list when this happened.  But if it's true as been reported that he had been guilty of domestic violence and threatening people in the past few years, I think that should have been enough to keep him from getting a gun.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: June 15, 2016, 05:44:41 PM »

It's amazing that there are people who actually think people on terrorist watch lists should be allowed to buy guns

Yup. As I've said elsewhere, if it's proper for the government to say that a person who has psychological problems can't purchase a gun (and I don't think anyone argues against this), why wouldn't it be proper for the government to say that a person who has been placed on a terror watch list can't purchase a gun?

A sensible position, but it's unclear who Trump is attempting to appeal to. This will piss off more conservatives than liberals/moderates it will impress.

The one thing I find most intriguing about Trump is that he'll take a stand on what he believes to be a common sense position, regardless of who it will piss off or impress. Voters will continue to agree or disagree with him, naturally, but I honestly don't feel as though he's out to pander, like most politicians do. The lady running on the other side? She's a completely different story...

If that were true, why does he constantly change his position on every issue that pops up?
Logged
jimrtex
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,828
Marshall Islands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: June 15, 2016, 05:49:29 PM »

NRA Statement on Terror Watchlists

[quote author=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.[/url]



Logged
Meclazine for Israel
Meclazine
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,660
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: June 15, 2016, 06:15:49 PM »

Logged
Queen Mum Inks.LWC
Inks.LWC
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 35,028
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.65, S: -2.78

P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: June 15, 2016, 06:16:10 PM »

He'll get Republicans to support this by turning it into an anti-terrorism/anti-Muslim policy that will rile up his staunchest supporters, and most of the rest of the GOP will follow his lead. He'll appease the NRA by throwing in a provision to ensure people are guaranteed due process.

The policy is admirable, but this will just turn into another way to paint Muslims as dangerous against American interests.
Logged
Wisconsin+17
Ben Kenobi
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,127
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: June 15, 2016, 06:45:25 PM »

Trump is a moron. He's really going to campaign against the NRA?
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: June 15, 2016, 09:00:50 PM »

Trump is a moron. He's really going to campaign against the NRA?

Sounds like the NRA agrees with him, unless I am misreading something.
Logged
Wisconsin+17
Ben Kenobi
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,127
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: June 15, 2016, 10:08:56 PM »

The NRA doesn't support this, because the no fly list has some serious issues, including lack of oversight. There would be nothing preventing Obama from putting people on it for political reasons.
Logged
Fuzzy Stands With His Friend, Chairman Sanchez
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,502
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: June 15, 2016, 10:14:11 PM »

A sensible position, but it's unclear who Trump is attempting to appeal to. This will piss off more conservatives than liberals/moderates it will impress.

Trump is unique in several positive ways:

1.  He answers the question asked, even if he's over the top.

2.  He's taking positions that he really thinks are right, even though it doesn't seem that way at times.

3.  He's willing to convince his supporters and potential supporters that he's right about something they disagree on, instead of just shift his position to fit theirs.

This part of Trump is actually refreshing.  I can't imagine Hillary going to the bathroom without running it past a focus group or pollster.
Logged
HAnnA MArin County
semocrat08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,037
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: June 16, 2016, 12:13:58 AM »
« Edited: June 16, 2016, 12:28:37 AM by Bitch is the New Birkenstock »

It's amazing that there are people who actually think people on terrorist watch lists should be allowed to buy guns

Yup. As I've said elsewhere, if it's proper for the government to say that a person who has psychological problems can't purchase a gun (and I don't think anyone argues against this), why wouldn't it be proper for the government to say that a person who has been placed on a terror watch list can't purchase a gun?

Plenty of people, including myself, believe that psychological problems should not of themselves be enough to keep someone from legally purchasing a gun.  We shouldn't be depriving people of things merely based on a diagnosis.  

I don't think being on a terror watch list should keep someone from being able to buy a gun, first because that means depriving someone of something considered a right without due process. If there were more of a limited process of putting people on this list, then perhaps, but there's also the problem that it would alert the person  that they are on the watchlist and - if they are of that tiny percentage of people on the watchlist who are actual terrorists - they would find another way to kill people instead.  If they are on a watchlist, you want to watch what they do.  

This guy who shot up people in Orlando was not even any longer on a terror watch list when this happened.  But if it's true as been reported that he had been guilty of domestic violence and threatening people in the past few years, I think that should have been enough to keep him from getting a gun.

The person who sold him a gun (legally), though, had no way of knowing about his alleged history of domestic disputes and being a menace to society because he wasn't required to run a background check. Thanks NRA. I don't own a gun so I don't know the gun laws, but as for the person who sold him the gun, could the owner have legally run a background check on his own, or is that, too, an "infriiiingement?" 

Having said that, isn't being labeled with domestic battery and having a history of threatening people, a diagnosis? Surely there's some psychological term for these criminal behaviors.

Also, medical/psychological diagnoses prevent people from exercising other "constitutional rights" all the time: should blind/deaf/handicapped people be allowed to drive a car? Should pedophiles and those on the sex offender registry be allowed to teach in schools? Should employers not be allowed to test their employees for drugs by requiring them to pass a drug test since some applicants may be diagnosed as having an alcohol or drug problem/addiction?
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,770


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: June 16, 2016, 03:48:20 AM »

A sensible position, but it's unclear who Trump is attempting to appeal to. This will piss off more conservatives than liberals/moderates it will impress.

Trump is unique in several positive ways:

1.  He answers the question asked, even if he's over the top.

2.  He's taking positions that he really thinks are right, even though it doesn't seem that way at times.

3.  He's willing to convince his supporters and potential supporters that he's right about something they disagree on, instead of just shift his position to fit theirs.

This part of Trump is actually refreshing.  I can't imagine Hillary going to the bathroom without running it past a focus group or pollster.

Then why does he flip-flop so much?

Just because the guy is pandering to the worst opinions doesn't mean he's not pandering.
Logged
Meclazine for Israel
Meclazine
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,660
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: June 16, 2016, 04:12:12 AM »

A sensible position, but it's unclear who Trump is attempting to appeal to. This will piss off more conservatives than liberals/moderates it will impress.

Trump is unique in several positive ways:

1.  He answers the question asked, even if he's over the top.

2.  He's taking positions that he really thinks are right, even though it doesn't seem that way at times.

3.  He's willing to convince his supporters and potential supporters that he's right about something they disagree on, instead of just shift his position to fit theirs.

This part of Trump is actually refreshing.  I can't imagine Hillary going to the bathroom without running it past a focus group or pollster.

He is like a rich uncle Fuzzy who just does not care anymore.

That is his charm. County USA people love straight talkers.

Fun to be with, but just ridiculously biased in his opinions and not afraid to share them.

Logged
skoods
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 537
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: June 16, 2016, 09:02:04 AM »

A sensible position, but it's unclear who Trump is attempting to appeal to. This will piss off more conservatives than liberals/moderates it will impress.

Trump is unique in several positive ways:

1.  He answers the question asked, even if he's over the top.

2.  He's taking positions that he really thinks are right, even though it doesn't seem that way at times.

3.  He's willing to convince his supporters and potential supporters that he's right about something they disagree on, instead of just shift his position to fit theirs.

This part of Trump is actually refreshing.  I can't imagine Hillary going to the bathroom without running it past a focus group or pollster.

He is like a rich uncle Fuzzy who just does not care anymore.

That is his charm. County USA people love straight talkers.

Fun to be with, but just ridiculously biased in his opinions and not afraid to share them.



Except he's not a straight talker and he doesn't tell it like it is. His opinions change every other day and he just says what his backwoods, racist, sexist, homophobic, instigating supporters want to hear.
Logged
Fuzzy Stands With His Friend, Chairman Sanchez
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,502
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: June 16, 2016, 09:17:35 AM »

A sensible position, but it's unclear who Trump is attempting to appeal to. This will piss off more conservatives than liberals/moderates it will impress.

Trump is unique in several positive ways:

1.  He answers the question asked, even if he's over the top.

2.  He's taking positions that he really thinks are right, even though it doesn't seem that way at times.

3.  He's willing to convince his supporters and potential supporters that he's right about something they disagree on, instead of just shift his position to fit theirs.

This part of Trump is actually refreshing.  I can't imagine Hillary going to the bathroom without running it past a focus group or pollster.

He is like a rich uncle Fuzzy who just does not care anymore.

That is his charm. County USA people love straight talkers.

Fun to be with, but just ridiculously biased in his opinions and not afraid to share them.



Except he's not a straight talker and he doesn't tell it like it is. His opinions change every other day and he just says what his backwoods, racist, sexist, homophobic, instigating supporters want to hear.

He's the least ideological Presidential candidate since Jimmy Carter.

I think people find this attractive.  Rigid ideologues haven't been the best thing for our politics.
Logged
RINO Tom
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,999
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: June 16, 2016, 09:39:30 AM »

Have yet to disagree with a single comment made by trump

"Libertarian," my ass then.
Logged
HAnnA MArin County
semocrat08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,037
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: June 16, 2016, 10:33:19 AM »

Have yet to disagree with a single comment made by trump

"Libertarian," my ass then.

I'm finding most of the yellow avatars on here are the farthest things from libertarians, kinda like that yellow avatar from Indiana who goes all Fred Phelps anytime a gay issue is mentioned.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,665
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: June 16, 2016, 11:22:51 AM »

It's amazing that there are people who actually think people on terrorist watch lists should be allowed to buy guns

Yup. As I've said elsewhere, if it's proper for the government to say that a person who has psychological problems can't purchase a gun (and I don't think anyone argues against this), why wouldn't it be proper for the government to say that a person who has been placed on a terror watch list can't purchase a gun?

Plenty of people, including myself, believe that psychological problems should not of themselves be enough to keep someone from legally purchasing a gun.  We shouldn't be depriving people of things merely based on a diagnosis.  

I don't think being on a terror watch list should keep someone from being able to buy a gun, first because that means depriving someone of something considered a right without due process. If there were more of a limited process of putting people on this list, then perhaps, but there's also the problem that it would alert the person  that they are on the watchlist and - if they are of that tiny percentage of people on the watchlist who are actual terrorists - they would find another way to kill people instead.  If they are on a watchlist, you want to watch what they do.  

This guy who shot up people in Orlando was not even any longer on a terror watch list when this happened.  But if it's true as been reported that he had been guilty of domestic violence and threatening people in the past few years, I think that should have been enough to keep him from getting a gun.

The person who sold him a gun (legally), though, had no way of knowing about his alleged history of domestic disputes and being a menace to society because he wasn't required to run a background check. Thanks NRA. I don't own a gun so I don't know the gun laws, but as for the person who sold him the gun, could the owner have legally run a background check on his own, or is that, too, an "infriiiingement?" 

Having said that, isn't being labeled with domestic battery and having a history of threatening people, a diagnosis? Surely there's some psychological term for these criminal behaviors.

Also, medical/psychological diagnoses prevent people from exercising other "constitutional rights" all the time: should blind/deaf/handicapped people be allowed to drive a car? Should pedophiles and those on the sex offender registry be allowed to teach in schools? Should employers not be allowed to test their employees for drugs by requiring them to pass a drug test since some applicants may be diagnosed as having an alcohol or drug problem/addiction?

Those things you mention aren't constitutional rights.  Driving certainly is not.  And in any case, if we had a test before someone can legally buy a gun to make sure they were able to do it safely, that I think would be appropriate and not run afoul of the idea that people have to right to responsible use of firearms.
There are arguments against the constitutionality of sex offender registries, but prohibiting people from certain positions based on past actions is surely fine.  Actions are different from psychological conditions though, and it is vitally important that this distinction is maintained.  Without that, both personal responsibility and any robust sense of individual rights is dead.  We should not be locking up people for things they might do based on some personality profile.

Is it true that this person was able to legally sell him a gun without a background check?  Why would this be?  Was he not a dealer and it was his personal weapon?
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.064 seconds with 13 queries.