Slippery slope my friend, slippery slope…
Edit: Not the islamic radicals part, that I totally agree with.
1 Like
From the SWAT commander on the scene:
How do you get on the no fly list or the terror watch list? What are the governing rules?
We can’t start punishing pre-crime and become the thought police.
4 Likes
I totally agree with you. I don’t trust an arbitrary list made by some bureaucrat.
2 Likes
I recall a trip I took with my then girlfriend to Puerto Rico, we had a stop in Miami. The moron TSA agents were talking among each other while the line just crawled along at a snail’s pace. Finally we reach the machine you walk through, and she mouthed off about how they were being lazy. One TSA agent responded with, “do you enjoy flying ? Do you want to know what it’s like to not fly ?” I shushed her and continued on.
Many of these people are flunkies with power they do not deserve and shouldn’t have.
1 Like
Attorney General Loretta Lynch is getting a tongue-lashing from Republicans for her claim that “love” the best tool to fight terrorism.
“Our most effective response to terror and hatred is compassion, unity and love,” Lynch said after meeting with officials in Orlando, Fla., on Tuesday — a week after a gunman at a gay nightclub killed 49 in the deadliest mass shooting in modern American history.
She should be deported from the planet for saying this.
And that has always been the problem with the left wing. They are not logical. They preach this crap from strictly an emotional part of their brain.
1–It be wonderful if there were no guns in the world.
2–Every country should destroy their nuclear arsenal. (back in the 80’s before Reagan showed them up)
3–Government needs to be give more to the poor.
Bla bla bla an endless stream of meaningless emotionally driven nonsense.
Throw in the PC crap and an unnatural avoidance of ridding the world of Muslim terrorists and we have a royal mess.
She must be hanging out with Bono too much…
Both usmccds and you make good points. Because any sort of law would be imposed on everybody and affect most, those who are of least concern.
The only way it would work, really, is if we were to be actually honest. We know who the terrorists are, nobody in any government capacity would have the courage to support rational law that actually keeps the guns out of their hands legally. And in the end it would matter little anyway because a terrorist will find a way to carry out their murderous deeds. They are not concerned with the law since they are not likely to live through their act.
So in the end there is no legal way to keep terrorists from committing terrorist actions. And unless you are willing to profile, you are not going to keep these assholes from buying a weapon legally.
Further, had the FBI not missteped in sharing their information with local law enforcement, this guy would not have bought guns without setting off some alarms.
They should slap a hajib on her head and drop her off in Raqqa with her fucking friends.
Maybe when they sodomize her with the blunt end of an AK-47, she’ll get what these dicks know about love and compassion.
I am not surprised by terrorists or the radical islamic ideology they follow. I am surprised by the defense of these goons by the left, whose every idea is hated by islam and yet somehow attached by heart strings.
“But, Omar at the 7-11 is so nice!”… Yeah lady, Omar would rather drag you to the top of a building by your arm pit hair, set you on fire and throw you off, then have you ever dare speak to him as an equal.
I read an article recently about the Yazidi genocide. They said the reason they stayed in the areas in Iraq as ISIS approached was because they were assured by their neighbors that they would be protected from ISIS. Once ISIS rolled into town, the Yazidis survivors said that their friends & relatives were slaughtered by their own neighbors. Tales from the Armenian genocide in Turkey have the same moral.
So what you say Pat is possibly correct. Omar just bides his time selling infidels alcohol & tobacco products until some radicals persuade him to do what you have said. And he probably would with no qualms.
This part I 1000% agree with.
Apparently, there are a few different lists. One is for people they follow around. Another is for targets they actively send under-covers or informants or something after.
Every so often, they evaluate the status of people on the lists. The least suspicious people come off the list.
Orlando traitor must have possessed a certain low cunning, he was able to go from “on” to “off.”
Remember Ruby Ridge, where the authorities camped out around that guy’s house, heavily armed, then killed his dog and his wife?
If we know some dude is going to be a problem, can we just have the SWAT team knock on his door, and see what he does? Don’t go in, don’t violate his Fourth Amendment Rights, just say Hi, and see what he does.
Wow man. Jesus.
Police state much?
Yes, we should encourage SWAT to just “hang out” around people rather than gather evidence, take people to court and convict them of the crimes they have committed.
Oh they haven’t committed any crimes? Well then I guess they are free people then.
I am not sure what your point is here. Of course we need the help of muslims, particularly the growing minority of reformist muslims to help us and they do. Law enforcement gets a lot of tips from the muslim community in various areas about nefarious activities with in their community. We also know that the biggest victims of terrorism are muslims themselves.
We need to be able to have these conversations without the politically correct interruption that ‘not all muslims are bad’. We know that already.
I don’t have all the answers, I was just thinking out loud. I realize we cannot stop terrorism with gun laws, but I would like it not to have a terrorist legally obtain his weapons, but alas their may be nothing we can do if the terrorist is also a citizen.
I understand your process perfectly which is why I was just mentioning my thoughts on the subject. I dislike it too, and really wish there was an easier solution. Unfortunately I do not advocate restricting Constitutional rights of any kind–speech, press, or guns–based on suspicion. They were enumerated because they were the most important to keep sacred and intact.
It does suck, but I would rather live in a world with some nutcases and all my rights than live in a world where they get guns anyway and I don’t have my rights…or worse I have the government surveilling me when I exercise my rights.
3 Likes
Who here actually thinks that denying one of these guys purchasing rights would prevent them from getting arms to kill people? Steal it. Buy one under the table. Have a friend buy it. Even if you did have the prefect terrorist list and did make it illegal for them to buy weapons without trouncing constitutional rights, I seriously doubt that would do any good
whatsoever.
3 Likes
Not with a porous border due south of us.