Milwaukee man planned mass shooting at temple

[Sterben]

[Jackie]

NRA, Republicans block proposed law to stop suspected terrorists from buying guns in U.S.

Why should someone lose a right just because some governmental idiot has a suspicion? It's guilty before proven innocent.

If they really suspect someone, they should do investigation, make and arrest and indictment.

There is no rhyme or reason to why people get put on that no fly list. If you think someone is so fucked up that they can't fly, then why are these people walking around free to do anything.

Um no, I don't think the no fly list is based on no probable cause. I think a better argument might be is it applied equally and fairly to all. While we do not live in a perfect system, and yes innocent people can and do get wrongfully accused, the important part of our system is that a record is kept and can be reviewed. 

I think it is a bit much to say or imply our government can make you disappear without a trace. There is no political oath to serve in the CIA or FBI or Homeland security for that matter, and our law enforcement agencies are politically diverse individuals and number in the 100,000 of thousands which makes a conspiracy impossible. At best one can argue that a law is poorly written or individuals in an agency can have an agenda or a handful. But collectively a conspiracy is impossible.

I am not saying don't argue the law, I am merely saying if you are going to argue law, argue the way it is written, but don't turn it into a conspiracy. Too many politically diverse individuals involved for it to work with that many people.

[KUSA]

Um no, I don't think the no fly list is based on no probable cause.

And what evidence do you have to support this claim?

Tell me who gets to decide which individuals go on the list and what criteria do they use? Then tell me if they can remove a constitutionally protected right without due process.

[GrandizerII]

[Jackie]

Um no, I don't think the no fly list is based on no probable cause.

And what evidence do you have to support this claim?

Tell me who gets to decide which individuals go on the list and what criteria do they use? Then tell me if they can remove a constitutionally protected right without due process.

What evidence do you have to make the claim that it is a conspiracy? Now again, you are trying to accuse me of saying it is good law. NOT MY ARGUMENT. 

I am merely trying to point out the difference between a poorly written law, and a conspiracy. The tools are still in place that if a mistake is made, the accused has legal recourse, regardless of a poorly written law. Now can they always successfully fight this? No. But I do not buy that everyone is in on it all the time. Our government is way to big and way too full of politically diverse law enforcement all the way up to the CIA and Secret Service, for a conspiracy to exist.

Just argue that it is a poorly written law, but don't assume a conspiracy.

[Jackie]

This is the same bad logic that leads people to falsely believe 9/11 was an inside job or JFK was a plot involving more than Oswald. What caused both those conditions that lead to those outcomes was a flaw in data sharing and lax security.

So if someone is on a no fly list, it isn't a conspiracy, but a poorly written law. Argue the language, argue the constitutionality. But do not assume every single of the 100,000s of individuals in all our agencies are all in on it together.

[KUSA]

And what evidence do you have to support this claim?

Tell me who gets to decide which individuals go on the list and what criteria do they use? Then tell me if they can remove a constitutionally protected right without due process.

What evidence do you have to make the claim that it is a conspiracy? Now again, you are trying to accuse me of saying it is good law. NOT MY ARGUMENT. 

I am merely trying to point out the difference between a poorly written law, and a conspiracy. The tools are still in place that if a mistake is made, the accused has legal recourse, regardless of a poorly written law. Now can they always successfully fight this? No. But I do not buy that everyone is in on it all the time. Our government is way to big and way too full of politically diverse law enforcement all the way up to the CIA and Secret Service, for a conspiracy to exist.

Just argue that it is a poorly written law, but don't assume a conspiracy.

When the fuck did I ever say it was a conspiracy? Quit posting drunk or high.

[scoobysnack]

And what evidence do you have to support this claim?

Tell me who gets to decide which individuals go on the list and what criteria do they use? Then tell me if they can remove a constitutionally protected right without due process.

Our government is way to big and way too full of politically diverse law enforcement all the way up to the CIA and Secret Service, for a conspiracy to exist.

Have to say that is an incredibly naive assumption. I promise you that you are wrong, and need to research further.
"The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer." - Henry Kissinger

[Sterben]

Scoobsnack is spot on, there is far too much fowl play in our government. E.X: When they repealed the campaign finance laws. That action alone has done massive harm to the whole system.