Donald Trump Now Supports No Fly List Gun Ban

[4Freedom]

I beg the moderators not to remove this post, as this post is 100% associated with our gun rights and liberties and this is SERIOUSLY needs to be addressed. Yes, I know many support Trump, which is even more a reason why I would like to present a very serious issue about him that I think is contrary to our 2nd Amendment rights.


After the San Bernardino shooting, a majority of the Republican candidates strongly defended our Constitution and liberties against the treasonous call against Barack Hussein Obama to remove 2nd Amendment rights of any American citizen the government felt was "Untrustworthy" and added to the magical "No Fly List", which has no real basis in our legal system, no due process and is entirely up to the discretion of the federal government based on their own criteria. Basically, at a moment's notice a group of governing officials can decide who is a criminal and who is trustworthy. What we are seeing here is the beginning of the end of our freedoms, liberties and civil rights with the government using "National Security" as a means to override the laws and legal processes that were instated in this country for hundreds of years to protect you.


It is no mystery that I do not like DOnald Trump and never trusted the previously Democrat, anti-gun, big roller, close friend of the Clinton family. Ironically, everyone brushed away his support for an AWB after Sandy Hook, which he of course, revoked later, saying he was confused (or some other BS).

However, after the San Bernardino shooting, this tyrant and fraud has shown his true colors. I think, even the Trump Apologists who come here to attack me may be stumped on how to defend him with his last statements. Yes, I know Trump gets away with a lot of crap that no other Republican politician can get away with . However, does Trump get a free pass for supporting treason against the American people and the destruction of our civil rights?

So, after the San Bernardino shooting every Republican candidate was quizzed about their opinions of people on the No Fly List being able to purchase a gun. Whereas almost every Republican candidate said they are against the government trampling on civil liberties, Donald Trump came out in support of Obama's proposal, saying he would support a ban of "potential" terrorists on the No Fly List from purchasing guns. He said this is something he seriously would consider.. Basically, this fraud and business slickster has shown his true colors and agenda. Perhaps, he is not quite as slick as he portrays, since he just revealed that he has not respect for our Constitution and the rights of our citizens he is suppose to defend. Basically, Trump has supported OBama's call for fascism and has declared our constitutional rights are expendable if the government has suspicions that we are terrorists.. Please Define "Terrorist". Since when was it a crime to be a potential threat. If you have not committed a crime or there is no evidence you are going to commit one, you are not a criminal and cannot have your rights restricted. A government who can decide what constitutional laws apply to you is an authoritarian government.

Among the other Republican traitors are John R Kasich of Ohio and Chris Christie of New Jersey who say they could support a gun ban of people on the No Fly List, as well.

Please I encourage everyone to read the article completely..
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/08/u...republicans-on-the-spot.html?mwrsm=Email&_r=0

And Donald J. Trump, who has been leading the field in most national and state polls for months, said that he also would be open to preventing terrorism suspects from buying firearms.

"I would certainly take a look at it," Mr. Trump told CBS on Sunday. "I'm very strongly into the whole thing with Second Amendment. But if you can't fly, and if you have got some really bad — I would certainly look at that very hard."

Just so people know, a majority of the people on the Terrorist Watch List are not Muslims and a majority do not even have any terrorist connections. I am not quite sure the number, but I think it is like 1 out of 300 Americans or so are on the Terrorist watch lists.

Read More

 

[Juggernaut]

Not much of a Trump supporter, but I do have to admire how he managed to show the Republican party where to find their testicles.

This No Fly List is some straight up fascist crap, always has been. If you are too dangerous to fly, you should be the subject of immediate prosecution and not free to roam about until you manage to do something even worse. Either you are guilty of some crime or you are innocent, I seem to remember reading that someplace.

Being added to some secret 'No-No' list for reasons that are well... secret, demands far more faith in our .gov than I'm prepared to give. Sen. Ted Kennedy spent some time on that no fly list, and while I can appreciate the irony about the danger he posed to the citizenry, I think that if a sitting US Senator can mistakenly get placed on one of these lists then it could happen to anyone. I doubt many of us could bring the resources and connections to bear that Teddy was able to in order to get off that list. You or I would get placed on this list, or another much like it and would never even have a chance to state our objections let alone plead a case before a judge. I seem to remember reading something about Due Process of Law as well.

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

See, I knew all along he DOES in fact go along with public opinion.
Whoever is whispering in his ear is doing a good job.

The fact he cant see the harm in the no fly list no firearms action is that you can attach that to ANYONE! And without due process. Its just as dangerous as the patriot act.

Ted Cruz has been the only person to stick to the constitution, aside from Rand.

 

[albin25]

The BEST way to effect a grassroots end the no-fly list option would be to load it with people that shouldn't be on it, and will get big national air-time when they get turned down boarding a plane.
Anyone here know would we go about putting people on the no-fly list???
Is there a number to call..?...

And who should be on it?...
...Nominees need to be Hi-visability, anti-2nd types that actually fly commercial, have huge egos, and big mouths....people like Chris Matthews.


Hey, somebody must have put Ted Kennedy on it..

 

[etrain16]

I have not supported Trump to this point and that just gives me one more reason not to support him. I stand by my prediction that he will be gone by the time the 'serious' part of the election kicks into gear next year.

Our biggest threat is if he goes 3rd party. That could potentially hurt a chance to put an R in the White House. And with Hillary out there, we need to be absolutely certain that doesn't happen.

 

[RicInOR]

I keep waiting for a good challenge of the watch list.
There does not seem to be any mechanism to find out who is on it, other than one at a time.
There does not seem to be anyway to appeal and get off the list.


I know a guy in Portland whose first and last names match someone on the list, he has hassles every single time he flies.

 

[Charliehorse]

QUOTE="4Freedom, post: 1361295, member: 1983"
[However, after the San Bernardino shooting, this tyrant and fraud has shown his true colors. However, does Trump get a free pass for supporting treason against the American people and the destruction of our civil rights?]



As usual, the demagogue haters spew outright bs. You're thread is entitled "Donald Trump Now Supports No Fly List Gun Ban". Yet BOTH the Face the Nation interview on CBS and the NYSlimes (which accurately quoted FtN) clearly show Trumps words were : "I would certainly take a look at it" (8.17mins).
<broken link removed>

Where do you get off twisting "take a look at it" into "Now Supports" and expect anyone to believe anything you write?
And how many times has DTrump stated (UCC, Paris, SanBernadino) that if these weren't Gun Free zones and if at least some people had CCW, the results would have been different? Why did you leave that out of your diatribe?
>>>

[So, after the San Bernardino shooting .... OBama's call for fascism and has declared our constitutional rights are expendable if the government has suspicions that we are terrorists.. Please Define "Terrorist". Since when was it a crime to be a potential threat. If you have not committed a crime or there is no evidence you are going to commit one, you are not a criminal and cannot have your rights restricted. A government who can decide what constitutional laws apply to you is an authoritarian government.]

I don't disagree the No Fly List is far too arbitrary. But so was NSA leveraging "if a call to or from a US citizen to a foreign country" into collecting every Americans calls, etc without a Warrant. Yet many call Snowden a 'traitor'.

Many aspects of Patriot Act were overboard and knee jerk. But a) the SOB's just attacked & murdered Citizens - not soldiers - on US soil; and b) it is not unlike what occurred 74 yrs ago post Dec 7, 1941; and c) it was NOT an Exec Order but passed with an overwhelming Bi-Partisan vote.
Yet somehow you are laying the flaws of the Patriot Act on D Trump who is just a private citizen (at that time) and had no part in that vote.

So what is your solution to try to prevent events like UCC & San Bernadino? Or do you just want to let murderers/terrorists flood on in and kill your family and your neighbors?
Or do you just want to attack candidates you don't like with hyperbole bs?
>>>

If you don't like Trump, fine. But please don't piss down people's backs and tell them its raining. Tell the truth and strive to be accurate.

 

[thorborg]

I know three upstanding multigenerational persons that either cant fly or are subjected to extreme delays with body and cavity searches, due to having generic names (Smith) or the way their name was spelled Victovia instead of Victoria. Since our administration (which doesn't like to profile but it's OK for old white conservatives) believes I'm more a threat than ISIS, how long would you think it would take to put me on the no fly list? That would be a conservative flytrap made in heaven (if they believed in heaven) for liberals.

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

Ted Kennedy, Cat Stevens and Stephen Hayes, a senior writer at The Weekly Standard and a regular Fox News contributor have all been on one of these lists.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/07/politics/no-fly-mistakes-cat-stevens-ted-kennedy-john-lewis/

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiep...-list-could-easily-contain-your-name-n2090088

I'm not totally against a terrorist watch list if timely circumstantial evidence is building against you but you have yet to commit a crime but....

#1. Any Foreign National on the list should be detained or deported immediately, unless it makes more sense to closely/secretly monitor them hoping to uncover a bigger plot.
If they are innocent make them go through a detailed vetting process if they want to re-enter the Country.

It sucks for them but they are not Citizens of the U.S. yet. They have less rights.


#2. Any American on these lists should be prioritized for vetting and then either arrested if guilty of something or have all their Rights immediately restored.

I'm sure certain unexplainable out of character purchases or activities gets the attention of the Alphabet Agencies and that's O.K. to a certain extent.

Big City American girl buys two pallets of ammonium nitrate fertilizer after visiting a Muslim Country? Yeah she should be watched for a little while IMO.
But put her on a No-fly list or a list that doesn't allow her to buy a gun? That's asinine. When she get's stopped then she'll know she's being watched and she'll cancel the plot.
FBI will not be able to root out the whole Terror cell.

Turns out She's just started a Marijuana Farm and needed Fertilizer?, No harm no foul. She never knew she was being watched and never lost her Right to Bare Arms or the freedom to fly.

 

[ZA_Survivalist]

QUOTE="4Freedom, post: 1361295, member: 1983"
[However, after the San Bernardino shooting, this tyrant and fraud has shown his true colors. However, does Trump get a free pass for supporting treason against the American people and the destruction of our civil rights?]

View attachment 266978

As usual, the demagogue haters spew outright bs. You're thread is entitled "Donald Trump Now Supports No Fly List Gun Ban". Yet BOTH the Face the Nation interview on CBS and the NYSlimes (which accurately quoted FtN) clearly show Trumps words were : "I would certainly take a look at it" (8.17mins).
<broken link removed>

Where do you get off twisting "take a look at it" into "Now Supports" and expect anyone to believe anything you write?
And how many times has DTrump stated (UCC, Paris, SanBernadino) that if these weren't Gun Free zones and if at least some people had CCW, the results would have been different? Why did you leave that out of your diatribe?
>>>

[So, after the San Bernardino shooting .... OBama's call for fascism and has declared our constitutional rights are expendable if the government has suspicions that we are terrorists.. Please Define "Terrorist". Since when was it a crime to be a potential threat. If you have not committed a crime or there is no evidence you are going to commit one, you are not a criminal and cannot have your rights restricted. A government who can decide what constitutional laws apply to you is an authoritarian government.]

I don't disagree the No Fly List is far too arbitrary. But so was NSA leveraging "if a call to or from a US citizen to a foreign country" into collecting every Americans calls, etc without a Warrant. Yet many call Snowden a 'traitor'.

Many aspects of Patriot Act were overboard and knee jerk. But a) the SOB's just attacked & murdered Citizens - not soldiers - on US soil; and b) it is not unlike what occurred 74 yrs ago post Dec 7, 1941; and c) it was NOT an Exec Order but passed with an overwhelming Bi-Partisan vote.
Yet somehow you are laying the flaws of the Patriot Act on D Trump who is just a private citizen (at that time) and had no part in that vote. View attachment 266979

So what is your solution to try to prevent events like UCC & San Bernadino? Or do you just want to let murderers/terrorists flood on in and kill your family and your neighbors?
Or do you just want to attack candidates you don't like with hyperbole bs?
>>>

If you don't like Trump, fine. But please don't piss down people's backs and tell them its raining. Tell the truth and strive to be accurate.

No, Im blaming the patriot act for unconstitutional, intrusive action.
Did it ever effect me? No, duh.
BUT we have a thing called due process here, warrants, proper channels...etc.
Granted all of them are corrupt as hell now..

What IM saying is, a person foolish enough to entrust the security of America to three letter orginizations that answer to no one & that even have radicals and operatives working in them not to mention, have targeted law abiding citizens without any reason other than the fact they were enemies of the regime is the issue.

He's a business man, more power means more money. For him, his buddies, what and who ever else..etc.

While Id like for my government to be powerful & secure, I don't want to lose my Constitutional and civil rights as a result of it. If he cant see the dangers in granting our government even more power, which by the way over the last 8 years we've all seen perverted to the point of insanity THATS the issue I and many others have.

Him being in favor of the No Fly No Firearms idea is just as dangerous as the restraining order ordeal. Without a shred of evidence they can come in, strip you of your arms and ban you from owning them again until you waste your time and money to "earn" them back. Thats not the America I know and love. Its bullbubblegum is what it is.

 

[freestoneangler]

This No Fly List is some straight up fascist crap, always has been. If you are too dangerous to fly, you should be the subject of immediate prosecution and not free to roam about until you manage to do something even worse. Either you are guilty of some crime or you are innocent, I seem to remember reading that someplace.

I think this sums it up quite well. Secret lists of US citizens, depriving them of rights and not controlled by due process, is what happened in Germany... and should have Americans from all sides of the political spectrum very concerned. This type of capricious, Orwellian over-reach is dangerous to the Republic and cannot be allowed to continue.

I sure hope the younger generation of voters spend some time learning history and doing some critical thinking and questioning of the one line or paragraph Wikipedia world they have been raised on.

 

[OLDNEWBIE]

Trump's tepid remark is being blown out of proportion. Jeb Bush was more firm when asked about it but talked about a better, narrowed down watch list being used.

This is all a red herring attempt anyway from Obama to frighten the low info Voters into thinking the Republicans and the dastardly NRA, are willing to help suspected Terrorists purchase so called "assault weapons"! The kind that have bullet buttons!!

For god sake is there any indication a real Terror Suspect on a list tried to purchase a gun from a gun shop and then used it in an attack?

If a listed suspect bought a gun with a BG check and the Feds were monitoring him, that would be the time to really, really step up the monitoring obviously!

How many plots do we hear about being foiled every year? Dozens! If a watched Terrorist tried to buy a gun it would only help the Feds nab him.

A terror list that the Terrorist knows he/she's on is asinine!

This is just a transparent attempt to not let this crisis go to waste by Obama and the anti-gun Progs.

Anybody who thinks logically won't buy it.

 

[nammac]

Just remember we are
Living in Orwell's 1984... He just missed it by a few years...

Rubio or Cruz.... The only
logical choices. Trump
Is the catalyst, sparking the difficult conversations and getting the unpopular topics on the table for discussion.

 

[JRuby]

So Trump in the polls is at 57% and no one in the GOP us close. Is it going to come down to Hillary or Trump for the election?

 

[Oregonhunter5]

Think of all the people that would lose there jobs over being on the no fly list.
I'd love not to fly.

 

[etrain16]

So Trump in the polls is at 57% and no one in the GOP us close. Is it going to come down to Hillary or Trump for the election?

The primaries haven't even begun. I won't begin to be concerned about Trump unless he starts to make a huge showing in the primaries next year. I really think that won't happen as his current ranking is based not on votes, but popularity in polls and views/hits for the media outlets. I think a more 'serious' candidate will trump Trump by next spring. My best bet at the moment is that it will be Cruz, but we'll have to wait and see.

 

[JRuby]

Hopefully the republicans can provide a good candidate because if its between Hillary and someone else it will be someone else I vote fot even if it is Wiley Coyote.

 

[DuneHopper]

It actually wont matter what Republican is running when it comes to Washington, Oregon and California the Electoral college will go Democrat even if there is a majority. The system is 100% broken at this point.

 

[mkwerx]

Pollsters are saying that Iowa caucus would-be voters now favor Ted Cruz over Trump, and Dr. Carson has slipped to #4.

But the primaries are months away.

 

[Charliehorse]

Pollsters are saying that Iowa caucus would-be voters now favor Ted Cruz over Trump, and Dr. Carson has slipped to #4.

But the primaries are months away.

That was a narrower selection and a few days shorter. CNN's poll has DT heading higher.

>>>
Updated 6:28 PM ET, Mon December 7, 2015

Donald Trump has 33% support is Iowa, followed by Ted Cruz at 20% with Ben Carson at 16%, poll says...

The poll finds a markedly different landscape among potential GOP caucusgoers than another Iowa poll released Monday by Monmouth University. The difference between the two seems to stem primarily from sampling.
The Monmouth poll interviewed a sample drawn from registered voter lists that primarily comprised those who had voted in state-level Republican primary elections in previous election years. Among those voters, Monmouth found Cruz and Rubio ahead of Trump and Carson. Among voters who were not regular GOP primary voters, however, the poll found Trump ahead, similar to the CNN/ORC poll's finding.

The CNN/ORC Poll drew its sample from Iowa adults, asking those reached about their intention to participate in their caucus, interest in news about the caucuses, and past participation patterns to determine who would be a likely voter.
But still, Trump's lead holds even among only those voters who express the most interest in attending the caucus or the most regular past participation in presidential caucuses. Among those in the CNN/ORC poll who say they definitely plan to attend the caucuses and are more interested in news about them than any other news story -- a group which represents approximately 8% of Iowa adults -- Trump's lead grows to a 42% to 23% advantage over Cruz, with Rubio at 11% and Carson at 9%.
And among those who say they have participated in almost all of the caucuses for which they have been eligible -- about 10% of Iowa adults -- Trump leads 38% to 21% for Cruz, with Carson at 12% and Rubio at 11%.
One group that remains a challenge for Trump and which makes up a large share of Iowa's usual set of Republican caucusgoers is white evangelicals. Among that group, 26% back Cruz, 24% Trump, 20% Carson and 12% Rubio. In last month's poll, Trump trailed Carson 31% to 20% among white evangelicals, with Cruz at 15% and Rubio at 11%.
Trump is increasingly seen by likely GOP caucusgoers as the Republican with the best chance to win the 2016 general election: 42% say Trump has the best shot, followed by 17% for Cruz and 11% each for Carson and Rubio. Last month, 33% thought Trump had the best chance to win followed by Carson at 25% and Rubio at 17%. Cruz is up 9 points on this question.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/07/politics/donald-trump-ted-cruz-iowa-poll/index.html