quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

The difference is that flying isn't a right

quote:

ORIGINAL: OsideGirl

The difference is that flying isn't a right. Airlines aren't government owned entities. They're not denying someone the ability to travel freely between states (which is a right). So, it's an apples and oranges situation.

I will say, working in the travel industry - no fly list is very fucked up, how you find out you're on the list is very fucked up, the appeal process to get a redress is very fucked up.

Just last week, one of my clients was informed that his 3 year old son was on the list. Now, if you actually look at the press releases from TSA and DHS, they maintain that there are no children on the no fly list. They maintain that those are errors caused by lack of information and go on to blame the airlines for the fuck up.

"Airlines can and should automatically de-select any 8-year-olds out there that appear to be on a watch list. Whether you're eight or 80, the most common occurrence is name confusion and individuals are told they are on the no fly list when in fact, they are not. "

Here's the thing: I would have no problem using the no fly list as part of of the background check - if the list wasn't such a crappy system.

quote:

Let's punish people who actually commit crimes rather than attempt the impossibility of preventing any crime to begin with

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

quote:

Let's punish people who actually commit crimes rather than attempt the impossibility of preventing any crime to begin with

Sweet Jeebus you are bonkers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

So , the #1 objection I hear to "no fly, no buy" is that it denies due process.

I wondering, then, why the same people aren't apoplectic over not letting suspects fly. Clearly, that's also a violation of due process, if you want to frame things that way. So is "don't leave the state" for suspects being investigated.

Do folks here oppose these laws? Do you believe suspected terrorists should be allowed to board planes (after all, there's so much rhetoric about banning entire races and religions as automatically suspect--CLEARLY a violation of due process, as there's not even evidential reason for suspicion, and clearly profiling is a violation as well).

Are you champions of US liberty working to reverse these travesties of justice?

Or is it that, when it comes guns, there's a double standard? 2nd Amendment won't help you here--due process is enshrined in the 5th and 14th Amendments.

So do we stop no fly and profiling? Or do we acknowledge the greater good and pass no fly no buy?

Where are you on the contradiction?

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

This is a tough issue. Imagine ... because the vast majority of murders are committed by blacks in St. Louis then blacks be denied, for instance, access to the white suburbs. It is much the same as no fly profiling.

Why not rather than deny passage on no fly lists...have those on the list be required to pass more stringent pre-flight inspections? Still a bit iffy on rights but a reasonable compromise I believe.

When it comes to gun ownership for those on a watch list I believe it is reasonable to deny purchases until a thorough investigation is conducted and a court order issued. Otherwise there does need to be a way to review a persons status on the list to correct mistakes.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: mrevibo

I'm thoroughly against the no fly list myself, as it's a defective product of an arbitrary procedure which ignores due process to begin with, whether flying is a "right" or not. To then use it in order to deny citizens an inalienable right compounds this. Of course, I'm against malum prohibitum laws to begin with. Let's punish people who actually commit crimes rather than attempt the impossibility of preventing any crime to begin with. Now, what am I supposed to do about it? Stage a terrorist attack against DHS or congress? How will that help? It'll just prove to their tiny minds that they were right. I try to find people to vote for that will represent me, I whinge impotently in comment sections and fora, all of that.

As far as the terrorist watch list, if I thought there was any possibility it was being used responsibly to, you know, watch people that are truly under some legitimate suspicion of actually being terrorists, I would grant that law enforcement might use it as a tool. I have no such confidence that it was assembled with any greater care than the no fly list, nor that it's being used for anything but political nonsense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

Well no screaming yet over the ruling just given by SCOTUS 5-3 in Utah v. Strieff, No. 14-1373

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that evidence found by police officers after illegal stops may be used in court if the officers conducted their searches after learning that the defendants had outstanding arrest warrants. That's sufficient probable cause now for contraband ?

Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority in the 5-to-3 decision, said such searches do not violate the Fourth Amendment when the warrant is valid and unconnected to the conduct that prompted the stop. 'Even UNCONNECTED to plaintiffs conduct ?'

Yet a search warrant was to specify what the search was for, approximately where it would be found and the person or persons who possessed what was searched for and after swearing out probable cause to a judge that the police had convincing evidence to warrant the search in the first place.

NOT anymore kinkroids. the BOR is and has been dying a slow death so the 4th, 5th and 14th amend. protections...fuck 'em. HERE

Oh and don't know if it's true but I heard that only approx. 1000 people out 100,000 are on the no-fly list...are American citizens.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: mrevibo

I'm thoroughly against the no fly list myself, as it's a defective product of an arbitrary procedure which ignores due process to begin with, whether flying is a "right" or not. To then use it in order to deny citizens an inalienable right compounds this. Of course, I'm against malum prohibitum laws to begin with. Let's punish people who actually commit crimes rather than attempt the impossibility of preventing any crime to begin with. Now, what am I supposed to do about it? Stage a terrorist attack against DHS or congress? How will that help? It'll just prove to their tiny minds that they were right. I try to find people to vote for that will represent me, I whinge impotently in comment sections and fora, all of that.

As far as the terrorist watch list, if I thought there was any possibility it was being used responsibly to, you know, watch people that are truly under some legitimate suspicion of actually being terrorists, I would grant that law enforcement might use it as a tool. I have no such confidence that it was assembled with any greater care than the no fly list, nor that it's being used for anything but political nonsense.

They need to scrap the lists and start over with protections for peoples rights.
If the lists were worth anything they would be prosecuting people on it rather than trying to take away thier rights or make life difficult for them.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: mrevibo

I'm thoroughly against the no fly list myself, as it's a defective product of an arbitrary procedure which ignores due process to begin with, whether flying is a "right" or not. To then use it in order to deny citizens an inalienable right compounds this. Of course, I'm against malum prohibitum laws to begin with. Let's punish people who actually commit crimes rather than attempt the impossibility of preventing any crime to begin with. Now, what am I supposed to do about it? Stage a terrorist attack against DHS or congress? How will that help? It'll just prove to their tiny minds that they were right. I try to find people to vote for that will represent me, I whinge impotently in comment sections and fora, all of that.

As far as the terrorist watch list, if I thought there was any possibility it was being used responsibly to, you know, watch people that are truly under some legitimate suspicion of actually being terrorists, I would grant that law enforcement might use it as a tool. I have no such confidence that it was assembled with any greater care than the no fly list, nor that it's being used for anything but political nonsense.

They need to scrap the lists and start over with protections for peoples rights.
If the lists were worth anything they would be prosecuting people on it rather than trying to take away thier rights or make life difficult for them.

Well, it was the nutsuckers that took them away, and nutsuckers are in charge of both houses, and they aint doing nothing to give them back, in fact, they are gungrabbers and trying to take your guns away.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Bama... I do not see where it is strange logic... they would only be denied arms until a judge could review the risk. Tell me Bama... if you were to of reviewed the history of the Orlando killer would you have wanted to allow him to buy weapons? Are you so damn gun stupid that you would be against having an investigation of someone on a terrorist list?

As long as there is a prompt appeal process to anyone on such a list I do not see where a few extra weeks before they can buy an assault weapon as an unreasonable process to assure the safety of the general public.

Butch