NRA To Oppose Law Prohibiting Terror Suspects From Gun Purchases

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by mactastic, May 4, 2007.

  1. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #1
    So it's not OK to deny terror suspects their 2nd Amendment right, but perfectly fine to deny them their right to Habeus Corpus, violate their right to privacy in the phone conversations, emails, letters, etc., on mere 'suspicions" of a terrorist threat? WTF is wrong with these people? You can't fly on a plane, but you can buy all the guns you want? If you're going to have watch lists, then let's USE them.

    This, among other reasons, is why, as a gun owner, I'll never support the NRA.

    News flash to Chris Cox: Fredo doesn't give a flying fig what rights you think you have. Arbitrary denial of rights is what the Bush Justice Department is all about. In fact, considering Fredo's logic in denying Habeus Corpus, I doubt he feels the Second Amendment grants you the right to own a gun in the first place. Sure, you have the right not to have it taken from you, but that doesn't mean you have a right to it in the first place...
     
  2. Thomas Veil macrumors 68020

    Thomas Veil

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2004
    Location:
    OBJECTIVE reality
    #2
    Thank you, mactastic, for proving my point.
     
  3. pilotError macrumors 68020

    pilotError

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2006
    Location:
    Long Island
    #3
    They are a necessary evil. A balancing force if you will.

    I kind of equate them to greenpeace. I don't necessarily like their policies, but you need someone there to keep an eye on things.

    The politicians have eroded the constitution in the name of "terrorism", unfortunately, they seem to use those laws against everyone but the terrorists.

    That's coming from a Republican...

    I'm pretty tired of everyone making up laws that make the US a police state. National ID's, Gun Law Bans, the right to search without a warrant, blatant disregard for privacy laws, illegal phone tapping, etc... When does it end?
     
  4. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #4
    Apparently the only freedoms or privacies the current administration cares about concern firearms. Which is probably the least important and fundamental of the rights under (potential, in the case of guns) attack.
     
  5. 2jaded2care macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2003
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #5
    At risk of sounding like I've drunk the NRA Kool-Aid (actually, I hate that phrase)...

    I checked out the NRA site to get their explanation. Their fear is that citizens might be denied what NRA considers to be their constitutional rights without due process. IOW, that bureaucrats might abuse such "terror suspect" lists, and put people on it without any explanation or justification. (Don't know why they might think that...)

    Also, as some of the ultra-right groups point out, there has been at least one attempt by a state legislator to classify groups such as the Minutemen as "domestic terror groups".

    The proposed legislation does make provision for appeal should a person be denied a gun purchase, but it also does not appear to obligate the government to provide any reason why a person might have been on that list.

    Plus, the NRA's position generally has been, if someone's a danger to society, they should be investigated, prosecuted, locked up and/or shipped out, rationale being that if they're intent on doing bad things with weapons, they're going to do it one way or another.

    Enough explanation already. Proceed with the potshots.
     
  6. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #6
    The NRA has lost its marbles, let's hope its membership takes a sudden drop, maybe then they'll realize they've become irrelevent.
     
  7. NavyIntel007 macrumors 65816

    NavyIntel007

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2002
    Location:
    Tampa, FL
    #7
    The NRA is nuts. After the VT shooting, the NRA should have crawled in a hole for a long time. I swear this crowd would argue the need for a 12 year old to own a bazooka.

    As per the Stephanie Miller show...

    "And Thanks for playing You're Completely Wrong!"
     
  8. mactastic thread starter macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #8
    First they came for the gun owners, eh?

    It's the rank hipocrasy that gets me. I'd guess that if you polled the membership of the NRA you would find that a majority of them were quite supportive of the Bush administration trampling all over OTHER American's rights -- just as long as they stayed away from theirs. Warrantless wiretapping? Sure, no problem. Stripping Habeus Corpus from Americans designated by the President to be a "terrorist threat"? Cool with us! Torturing people deemed a "terrorist threat"? Have at it! Writing National Security Letters like they're spam emails? Denying people with scary-sounding surnames airline flights? Knock yourselves out.

    But deny someone the right to purchase a gun because they're on the same list that you use to deny them a seat on an airline? Now THAT cannot stand! That's where we draw the line!

    It's just stupid. It's what happens when you base your views on political expidency rather than principles.
     
  9. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #9
    my thought exactly.
     
  10. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #10
    So, we can deny suspect terrorists the right to habeus corpus, no cruel and unusual punishment and a fair trial, but god forbid we stop them from buying a damn assault rifle.
     
  11. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #11
    Interesting.

    While the tag line indicates something different, after visiting the NRA site, I see that they have a point.
     
  12. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #12
    And that point would be? (BTW- I'm for gun ownership rights)
     
  13. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #13
    Probably easier to visit the site and read what they say.

    Others have tried to cover it, but I think that the NRA does it better.
     
  14. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #14
    Can you give me a link to the article?
     
  15. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #15
    Go to here

    Click on Browse Archives.

    Select "Ludicrous Lautenberg List."

    Nothing Earth shattering but I think a good point is made.
     
  16. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #16
    Can't find "Ludicrous Lautenberg List." Where is it on the page? Sorry for being a pest.
     
  17. mactastic thread starter macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #17
    It wouldn't happen to be the same point the ACLU raised regarding loss of rights under the Bushistas, would it?
     
  18. j26 macrumors 65832

    j26

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Location:
    Paddyland
  19. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #19
    Being from Paddyland, for a start, I'd imagine. ;)
     
  20. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #20
    Look for the BROWSE ARCHIVES button on the right side about halfway down.

    It's blue.

    Then scroll and select the "Ludicrous Lautenberg List."
     
  21. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #21
    Got it. And it's correct. If someone is "suspected" of terrorism they can be denied the right to bear arms. Sorry guys, everyone should be against this- for the very same reason many people should not be imprisoned in Guantanamo. The NRA has this one right.
     
  22. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #22
    Terrorist suspect? Ok. Terrorist, convicted criminal, nut job, etc? No gun for you. I support the 2nd Amendment, don't like the NRA for the same reason I don't like GP even though I support basic environmentalism, but in principle I agree with them for once. I still think it should be harder to get a gun, but if you've done nothing wrong, I guess you have a right to one. They definitely had the wrong response after VA Tech though. Didn't help their cause. I look at other countries versions of the NRA, and wish ours was more like they are.

    Dunno though, I prefer swords and my tazer. :D
     
  23. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #23
    mac, how do you take the NRA position on this one particular bill and add to it that the NRA ALSO believes

    "(It's)...perfectly fine to deny them their right to Habeus Corpus, violate their right to privacy in the phone conversations, emails, letters, etc., on mere 'suspicions" of a terrorist threat?"

    How? The NRA hasn't said boo-diddly about Habeus Corpus, etc., wrt this bill for the simple reason that it's focussing on this one bill. In the past it HAS spoken against invasions of privacy and other facets of our burgeoning police state. Editorials in its magazines, mostly, educating some four million people about what's happening to their civil rights.

    Overall, the NRA has repeatedly derided such things as "no fly" lists, where nobody knows why they're on them. And derided the absence of due process in many other aspects of the Patriot Act and the associated garbage.

    You're attacking the NRA; in the context of "public interest", you'd be more accurate to attack the Sierra Club or AARP. I've not seen them speak out against these things to which you object, but the NRA has indeed done so.

    And this isn't just a tirade at mac; several others have jumped on the wrong bandwagon as well.

    Hell's bells, you've read enough of my gripes against such as Echelon, the TSA, the Patriot Act and all that garbage. And I've been NRA for over forty years.

    Find a barber shop or gunstore with some back issues of The American Rifleman lying around. Read what's actually the NRA views, not what some third party says who's never read our views either.

    'Rat
     
  24. Peterkro macrumors 68020

    Peterkro

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2004
    Location:
    Communard de Londres
    #24
    Having a tendency towards Anarchy will have you on it already even if they missed your Irishness.
     
  25. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #25
    Some of us are probably on it several times over... ;)
     

Share This Page