General Discussion

Lee-Lee

(6,324 posts)

37. No we need checks and balances because we don't get it right 100%

Mon Jun 20, 2016, 03:47 PM

Jun 2016

Making a system you know is flawed absolute with no checks or appeals or balances to protect the rights of those wrongfully put on the list is totalitarian and totally not progressive. Even when it's with guns.

Your admission that it's a flawed system that isn't 100% is EXACTLY why there needs to be safeguards and due process.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

60 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

A look at the 4 gun bills up for vote in Senate [View all] yallerdawg Jun 2016 OP

On the "no fly, no buy" will people be notified of being on the list and being able to appeal? aikoaiko Jun 2016 #1

Will "people" be notified? yallerdawg Jun 2016 #4

There have been people on the no fly list with no ties to terrorism at all. aikoaiko Jun 2016 #6

You know Senator Kennedy ended up on the list right? Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #13

Senator Kennedy was never on a terrorist list. yallerdawg Jun 2016 #26

He was on the no-fly list and hassled every time he flew for several weeks Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #29

We have to get it right 100% of the time. yallerdawg Jun 2016 #32

No we need checks and balances because we don't get it right 100% Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #37

People need lancer78 Jun 2016 #16

The Orlando shooter (I refuse to add to his notoriety by using his name) had a weapon permit Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2016 #27

Regarding the Orlando shooter. yallerdawg Jun 2016 #33

Or hold sensitive jobs? Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2016 #36

Not every name on the list is investigated like he is Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #39

Hey, that's what John Cornyn is saying in the Senate right now! yallerdawg Jun 2016 #40

Due process is always important. Travis_0004 Jun 2016 #34

'Due process' is to protect us from arbitrary application of government authority. yallerdawg Jun 2016 #38

Like putting your name on a secret list? NutmegYankee Jun 2016 #45

You mean like the Bush secret lists Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #54

The terrorist watchlist is a "rightwing conservative Republican" creation! Dr. Strange Jun 2016 #56

Letting them know, defeats the purpose! scscholar Jun 2016 #52

Wow the one from John Cornyn makes sense! Initech Jun 2016 #2

Democrats don't like Cornyn's proposal... yallerdawg Jun 2016 #5

Oh so it's really doing nothing then. Initech Jun 2016 #8

There are usually amendments and 'poison pill' proposals... yallerdawg Jun 2016 #11

Not true Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #14

I explained one reason why Democrats oppose this proposal. yallerdawg Jun 2016 #21

Not really. Look at the standard for a restraining or vs arrest Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #22

You are supporting the NRA/Republican argument. yallerdawg Jun 2016 #28

I'm supporting protecting due process Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #31

A warrant for a search can be gotten in as little as an hour. NutmegYankee Jun 2016 #25

You can't do a comprehensive investigation in 3 days. n/t Chan790 Jun 2016 #42

It's just a decision to block the sale. It isn't a criminal trial. NutmegYankee Jun 2016 #44

That's a bit hyperbolic. Chan790 Jun 2016 #46

If you want to change the background check laws, shreadding our 5th Amendment isn't the way to do it NutmegYankee Jun 2016 #47

I'd much rather extend the term-of-time to conduct the check to 30 days. Chan790 Jun 2016 #49

Changing the max time to 30 days is reasonable in non-clear cut cases. NutmegYankee Jun 2016 #50

They shou don't have to investigate they have all the evidence they used to put them on the list Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #53

That's what I was going to say... Chan790 Jun 2016 #41

that's the point of it Skittles Jun 2016 #60

At least they're talking about it for a change Johonny Jun 2016 #3

If we can't ban military type weapons/equipment kacekwl Jun 2016 #7

By all means, let's take Bush's sarisataka Jun 2016 #9

Can we make common sense proposals... yallerdawg Jun 2016 #10

I am completely in favor sarisataka Jun 2016 #12

'Due process' ls what added them to the watch list! yallerdawg Jun 2016 #15

That's simply not true Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #17

How did "due process" lancer78 Jun 2016 #18

There is no due process sarisataka Jun 2016 #23

"Due Process" couldn't determine WHICH Edward Kennedy. Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #30

Again, Edward Kennedy was never on a watch list yallerdawg Jun 2016 #35

Did I mention "watch list?" Those making lists aren't very good at it... Eleanors38 Jun 2016 #43

He was on the no fly list Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #55

Considering 99% lancer78 Jun 2016 #19

I credit that to the insufficiently-short window to perform the check. Chan790 Jun 2016 #48

It's illegal to do a subjective background check for a purchase. NutmegYankee Jun 2016 #51

I can get a 10 second credit report n/t lancer78 Jun 2016 #57

How I'd vote if I were a Senator davidn3600 Jun 2016 #20

Just a reminder! yallerdawg Jun 2016 #24

This message was self-deleted by its author Matt_R Jun 2016 #58

Welp there goes the rest of the bill of rights. Matt_R Jun 2016 #59