NRA Now Backing "No Fly, No Buy..."?

[steve4102]

First, being put on the no-fly list is more than merely having your name being placed on a piece of paper. It is called a no-fly list for a reason

The No-Fly list is not the same as the "Terrorist Watch" list, two different things and should not be confused.

Those on the watch list are under surveillance for suspected illegal activity by our Law Enforcement. Nothing illegal or earth shattering about that. LE does it every day, it's part of the "process".

 

[zukiphile]

So I get to face my accuser during those proceedings? Or know about them?

That's an excellent question, and one that would be addressed by any reasonable proposal.

Are you comfortable suspending individual rights without criminal prosecution? We change the name of it and that makes it ok?

I've done it with incompetent people. When I probate someone, they lose a bunch of their rights, but there is a judicial process involved.

The No-Fly list is not the same as the "Terrorist Watch" list, two different things and should not be confused.

The absence of any due process protection is the commonality. In that sense they are precisely the same.

Those on the watch list are under surveillance for suspected illegal activity by our Law Enforcement.

In fact, you and I don't know why the standard for putting people on that list. That's part of the problem with it.

 

[steve4102]

The difference in some of these proposals is that the government has the burden of putting the matter before a judge and posing the argument as to why your purchase should be blocked. The state would have to show a reasonable suspicion rather than just assert that you are on double secret probation.

Correct, but from what I gather from those opposed to this, it is the 72 hour waiting period that they are opposed to, and of course the ridiculous notion that our Law Enforcement should not be watching suspected Terrorist and placing their names on a list to share with other Law Enforcement agencies.

Is a 72 hour wait a violation of the Second Amendment? Some States require a waiting period for all firearms purchases, is this a violation, or just an inconvenience?

 

[Lohman446]

Is a 72 hour wait a violation of the Second Amendment? Some States require a waiting period for all firearms purchases, is this a violation, or just an inconvenience?

I assume that some waiting period has been at some point challenged and upheld by the Supreme Court (I don't know that). Under the current law of the land and those rulings I would accept (even if I do not necessarily like) that waiting periods are Constitutional and perhaps necessary in some instances.

 

[steve4102]

In fact, you and I don't know why the standard for putting people on that list. That's part of the problem with it.

Correct, we do not know what the standards are for being placed on the list, and that is a problem with the list, not this Proposed Legislation.

Once a person (from the list) is delayed, it will be up to the FBI or other Law Enforcement agency to present, to a Judge, the "Standards" used for putting that person on the list in the first place.

Law Enforcement will also have to present evidence to the Judge as to why this person should not be allowed to purchase a firearm and should be stripped of his/her Second Amendment rights.

IMO, this would be a pretty high bar to hurdle, much higher that granting a simple search warrant.

 

[steve4102]

I assume that some waiting period has been at some point challenged and upheld by the Supreme Court (I don't know that). Under the current law of the land and those rulings I would accept (even if I do not necessarily like) that waiting periods are Constitutional and perhaps necessary in some instances.

So, what then is your objection to the NRA's position on this?

 

[Lohman446]

So, what then is your objection to the NRA's position on this?

Unvetted (by due process) and secret lists among some things. Other than that those 72HRs where my accuser gets to meet with a judge presumably without allowing me to mount a defense.

Its not like a search warrant IMO. With a search warranty you must demonstrate probable cause BEFORE executing the search. You are not given 72HRs to do so after the search (and only then if the accused notices the search).

 

[zukiphile]

Correct, but from what I gather from those opposed to this, it is the 72 hour waiting period that they are opposed to,...

By itself, the 72 hour waiting period during which the government gets to sit on its hands and inconvenience you is likely the least of the sticking points.

...and of course the ridiculous notion that our Law Enforcement should not be watching suspected Terrorist and placing their names on a list to share with other Law Enforcement agencies.

Depends what "watching" means. Some levels of surveillance legitimately require a warrant. Please note that a "suspected terrorist" isn't a terrorist, an incipient terrorist or part of a terrorist network. At this point, it's just a person that caught someone's attention for an as yet unknown reason.

Is a 72 hour wait a violation of the Second Amendment? Some States require a waiting period for all firearms purchases, is this a violation, or just an inconvenience?

Since when is an inconvenience not a constitutional violation? If the government makes you wait 72 hours to speak about your misgivings about the no-fly list, wouldn't that be constitutionally problematic and inconvenient?

Why does the government need 72 hours to decide whether to let someone purchase a firearm? They aren't sending a clerk to the basement to check for any paper files. They could flag individuals for whom they can show reasonable suspicion before hand. What do they get out of another 72 hours?

In the absence of some reasonable basis for a 72 hour delay, yes, it is a violation.

 

[ATN082268]

The No-Fly list is not the same as the "Terrorist Watch" list, two different things and should not be confused.

My apologies. If you are on the "Terrorist Watch" list, can you fly, are there transparent and objective standards for getting put on/off that list? If it is basically the same results with different names, it is largely semantics.

 

[steve4102]

Since when is an inconvenience not a constitutional violation?

What have the courts ruled concerning Waiting Periods? Constitutional or no?

 

[A pause for the COZ]

Do you all really know who you are chatting with online? Or how close to being on that watch list you may be? 100% comfortable with your browser history because the NSA probably has it?

Oh yes. Just as the Civil War gutted states rights. The war on Terror will put the final nail in our personal freedom. They already have all the tools in place. All thats needed is the pretext.

 

[zukiphile]

What have the courts ruled concerning Waiting Periods? Constitutional or no?

It depends on the waiting period and the reason for the waiting period.

Casey upheld a 24 hour waiting period because the government asserted an interest to protect. A CA 10 day waiting period fell because it served no public safety interest.

What public safety interest is served by making someone wait 72 hours?

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

There are 3 different databases used to screen for terrorists. The "TIDES" database, which has around 1.1 million people on it and is the one the Dems want to use. Then the FBI maintains it's own separate list of people it suspects of terrorist activities (the "Terrorist watchlist") which has about 800,000 people. This is what the NRA and Trump propose using. The "no-fly" list is a subset of the FBI terrorist watch list and has about 64,000 names (figures per various news reports).

So greater than 90% of the people on any of the "terrorist watchlists" can, in fact, board an aircraft and fly.

 

[steve4102]

It depends on the waiting period and the reason for the waiting period.

Casey upheld a 24 hour waiting period because the government asserted an interest to protect. A CA 10 day waiting period fell because it served no public safety interest.

What public safety interest is served by making someone wait 72 hours?

Just someone? Prolly none.

Someone that is a suspected Terrorist and is under surveillance for potential terrorist attacks and terrorist activity? "because the government asserted an interest to protect".

 

[zukiphile]

What public safety interest is served by making someone wait 72 hours?

Just someone? Prolly none.

Then that delay would be a constitutional violation.

Absent adjudication, everyone on the lists is just someone.

Someone that is a suspected Terrorist and is under surveillance for potential terrorist attacks and terrorist activity? "because the government asserted an interest to protect"

In Casey, the asserted interest was the health of the mother and the life of the fetus.

How does it serve a safety interest to delay a transfer for 72 hours? What plausible interest would the government assert?

 

[Aguila Blanca]

FWIW, I found a message on my telephone answering device from 11:00 this morning, from the NRA, asking me to contact my two U.S. senators and ask them to oppose ANY new gun control laws.

 

[carguychris]

FWIW, I found a message on my telephone answering device from 11:00 this morning, from the NRA, asking me to contact my two U.S. senators and ask them to oppose ANY new gun control laws.

Perhaps to keep the current administration from immediately enacting the Cornyn proposal and thus yanking the rug out from under "their" candidate?

To change the topic slightly, is anyone familiar enough with the Cornyn proposal to know whether the ATF can retrieve the gun if the gov't can't convince the judge to enact a block during the 72-hour period? Similar to what is supposed to happen after wrongful sales under current law.

 

[44 AMP]

How does it serve a safety interest to delay a transfer for 72 hours? What plausible interest would the government assert?

Back in the stone age, before computers, back when waiting periods first came into laws (varying by state) the idea was "simple" and sadly, accepted.

The thought was, that someone (who didn't have a gun) would become upset about something, go out and buy a pistol, right then, and then use it to commit a crime, in the heat of anger.

A waiting period (3 days, 5 in some places) gave those "angry" people time to "cool off" and supposedly recognize that their anger and desire to do harm was misplaced, so that when they did take delivery of the handgun, they wouldn't be likely to commit violence with it.

And, yes, people actuallybelieved this....

LATER the argument justifying the waiting period was changed. It became "time needed for a background check".

 

[gyvel]

A waiting period (3 days, 5 in some places) gave those "angry" people time to "cool off" and supposedly recognize that their anger and desire to do harm was misplaced, so that when they did take delivery of the handgun, they wouldn't be likely to commit violence with it.

And Dade County, FL was one of them.

 

[zukiphile]

Ah, yes. The "cooling off" period.

LATER the argument justifying the waiting period was changed. It became "time needed for a background check".

Which is now an anachronism.

I know that I am old because I remember ordering a gun part this way:

I obtained the order form from the back of a catalogue.

I filled it out with my info.

I wrote in a description of what I wanted from them.

I put it and a check into an envelope with their address.

I put a stamp on the envelope and took it to the PO.

About a month later, I received my part.


Hilarious in retrospect, but now it lives only in history.