Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-17-2015, 02:22 AM
 
41,815 posts, read 50,795,636 times
Reputation: 17862

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by rorqual View Post
Are you implying terror suspects should be allowed to buy guns?
The key word here being suspected. Should we deny the freedom of speech to US citizens who are suspected terrorists?

It's all irrelevant, wouldn't pass the sniff test for SCOTUS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-17-2015, 02:37 AM
 
991 posts, read 625,855 times
Reputation: 749
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
And your point is what...that people who are on that list should be able to buy guns?
Just asking, if a list was made and had actual terrorists on it, would that mean that those terrorists would be unable to get a gun?

Could they put dynamite, nails and ball bearings on that banned list?
Sharp knives?

Heck, maybe we could make a list that would ban felons and gang members from buying weapons too?

I have an idea!
Put everyone on the suspected terrorist list and no one will be able to purchase a gun!
Wait! What?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2015, 04:41 AM
 
Location: The Woods
18,336 posts, read 26,368,533 times
Reputation: 11328
There's something called due process in this country before a citizen can lose their civil rights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2015, 04:41 AM
 
5,717 posts, read 3,123,414 times
Reputation: 7374
Quote:
Originally Posted by epliny View Post
I have an idea!
Put everyone on the suspected terrorist list and no one will be able to purchase a gun!
Sorry, but Obama already beat you to that idea.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2015, 05:01 AM
 
Location: Salisbury,NC
16,752 posts, read 8,113,940 times
Reputation: 8510
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
The key word here being suspected. Should we deny the freedom of speech to US citizens who are suspected terrorists?

It's all irrelevant, wouldn't pass the sniff test for SCOTUS.
The Patriot act is still around, do not put anything past these Conservative on the court
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2015, 05:48 AM
 
79,902 posts, read 43,887,871 times
Reputation: 17184
Lol.....there is no way one could take a bill named that seriously.

"I'm planting soybeans this year, could you tell me the best fertilizer to use"?

Store owner:...." Just a minute....I will need three forms of identification first".

"No, sorry, no fertilizer for you, you are a terrorist".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2015, 06:07 AM
 
4,983 posts, read 3,272,480 times
Reputation: 2739
Quote:
Originally Posted by nunswithguns View Post
Funny, Obama doesn't want you to own a gun, but if your a muslim, he will fight for you to own one!

BREAKING: Obama Takes Revenge on Gun Store Owner Who Dared to Ban Muslims | Top Right News
Priorities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2015, 06:16 AM
 
Location: Native of Any Beach/FL
35,347 posts, read 20,714,667 times
Reputation: 14119
NRA is already profiting form all those guns-- you think sales are only local??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2015, 06:27 AM
 
Location: NJ
23,318 posts, read 17,001,523 times
Reputation: 17355
Quote:
Originally Posted by neko_mimi View Post
"Suspected terrorists"? That's just the kind of ambiguous law the government wants to be able to arbitrarily deny whoever they want.
That is right on the money!!!!

Remember when the head of the DOJ, Eric Holder, lied on a warrant and judge shopped until the 3rd judge gave him permission to spy on reporter/journalist James Rosen. The head of the DOJ lied to get the warrant. Said he was a flight risk, etc.

THE HEAD FOR THE DOJ LIED TO GET A WARRANT ON JAMES ROSEN.

HARRY REID FAlSELY ACCUSED MITT OF NOT PAYING TAXES TO SWING AN ELECTION.

THESE TWO GUYS WERE NOT SOME LOW LEVEL BUREAUCRATS.

Lois Lerner chose to delay approvals on organizations she politically opposed placing them in limbo so as to just miss the 2012 election. The activism in federal agencies is condoned and a result of the unethical administrion's behavior. So pass an ambiguous law and get in another unethical administration we suffer the consequences.


Obama slices and dices the language, moves a comma and adds a preposition to mean something other than what the normal person would think the words mean.

Allowing ambiguity in the law is to lay a feast of words before obama to arrange a meal that would kill a Beefeater and make Lucretia Borgia smile.

holder, the liar, said domestic terrorists were the greatest danger and he wasn't talking islamic terrorists.

Labeling is used by obama tocreate and solve problems. Fort Hood shooting was workplace violence to avoid having a terrorist attack on obama's watch.

Ifyou were happy being told 'we have to pass it to see what is in it, then you'd be happy with with the phrase, 'suspected terrorist'. By those standards your fathers and uncles yelling at the tv news would be considered terrorists. The kid who chewed a pop tart into the shape of a gun would be considered a terrorist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-17-2015, 06:34 AM
 
Location: Long Island
56,860 posts, read 25,799,606 times
Reputation: 15433
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88 View Post
When someone can be added to the "terror suspect list" based on arbitrary criteria and discretion, without even knowing it, and when there is no due process afforded BEFOREhand, yep, that's exactly what I'm saying.
It's not necessarily arbitrary, the FBI places these people on a list based on some intelligence, seems prudent to lean towards tighter restrictions and they can challenge their designation.

I don't see it being that effective in any event unless they close the other loopholes in the gun laws, they can always get a gun online or at a gun show or just head to Georgia.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top