It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
anyone who is “appropriately suspected” of being a terrorist
7 Days of Food: The Department of Justice and FBI considers you a terrorist threat if you have more than 7 days of food stored, as explained by Rand Paul on the Senate floor:
originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: cavtrooper7
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Here is the one from 2009, same song and track and it went no where.
I must ask those for those against a regulation like this.
Do you really have no issues with some one that is on the FBI watch list getting a fire arm?
Or is it only bad if they are not christian, former military or conservative
originally posted by: Tusks
Before buying a gun from a licensed dealer, the dealers must first contact the FBI for a criminal background check of the buyer on the National Instant Criminal Background System (NICS). Why would a suspected terrorist not be on the computer?
originally posted by: cavtrooper7
Here is a new gun grab.
This time naming "SUSPECTED" terrorists as people the Attorney General can bar from purchasing firearms,without clearly defining the legality of the term and giving the choice to a politically manipulatable office.
Don't these morons EVER get it?
www.theblaze.com...
originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: cavtrooper7
So anyone that wants to point out that it is not a gun grab is now an idiot?
Do you want a civil discussion or just berate those that don't agree?
Also, this is not just Feinstine's bill.
The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act was introduced this week by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.).
originally posted by: Sremmos80
I must ask those for those against a regulation like this.
Do you really have no issues with some one that is on the FBI watch list getting a fire arm?
Or is it only bad if they are not christian, former military or conservative
originally posted by: Sremmos80
Guess it doesn't matter that this isn't only finestiens bill.
It won't pass anyway so don't worry
originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: xuenchen
Where are the idiots who are going to say "IT'S ONLY THE ONES ON THE LIST..." to deflect I wonder?
Gettin LAZY aren't they?
originally posted by: Beach Bum
Feinstine is like herpes and never goes away, just into hiding, much like astroturf Pelosi, and every other politician on the planet. They do more to endanger innocent people everyday than Isis/Isl/Is could ever do.
originally posted by: Bone75
What part of "innocent until proven guilty" do these people not understand? That is supposed to be the guiding principle of our judicial system.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: cavtrooper7
Well after a quick search my suggestion is that this isn't even new.
www.huffingtonpost.com...
I see the pro's and con's of this but do find it frightening that some one on a FBI watchlist would not prevent them from obtaining a firearm.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
That the warrant now in question is legal process is not denied. It was issued in conformity with an act of Congress. But is it "due process of law?" The Constitution contains no description of those processes which it was intended to allow or forbid. It does not even declare what principles are to be applied to ascertain whether it be due process. It is manifest that it was not left to the legislative power to enact any process which might be devised. The article is a restraint on the legislative, as well as on the executive and judicial, powers of the government, and cannot be so construed as to leave Congress free to make any process "due process of law," by its mere will.