General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: If Senate Democrats had accepted due process, we would have gun control [View all]Lee-Lee
(6,324 posts)There is already evidence of some sort in the system and documented that was used to justify adding them to the last.
The Democratic proposal, sadly, was to accept that level of evidence as absolute good enough proof to deny a sale without further investigation or review or appeal.
The GOP proposal that it kills me to admit they got right says take the same exact existing evidence that the Democratic bill accepted as Gospel truth enough to deny a sale and just adds a review by a judge to protect the system from abuse and allow due process.
Democratic bill and GOP version use the EXACT SAME evidence that existed already in whatever was used as justification to add them to the list.
But now you demand weeks more of investigations as an excuse to oppose adding more civil rights protections? But the same level of proof is good enough to deny the exercise of a person rights when it's done without protections the way Democrats proposed?
Can you see the disconnect?
If it's not enough evidence to compile and convince a judge with what you already have- then you are admitting that the Democrating version dents a persons rights without enough evidence. By saying they don't have enough proof to convince a judge with what is in hand you are essentially admitting that a blanket "no fly/no buy" rule denied people exercise of rights wo tour adequate cause.
And the excuse that it might sit on a lawyers desk 3 days is bullshit. First I've seen the fed system at play they will draft a warrant or arrest record in hours when they want to. Second icom owner civil servents or a broken system are not justification for infringing on right or citizens. That's like saying "well you might not get to vote this year your registration was in on time but it just sat on the desk and didn't get processed, sorry". Expect and demand better, don't accept mediocrity and then use it to justify a bad system.