ADVERTISEMENT

cons vote yes on selling guns to terrorists

I've explained to your retarded a$$ at least three times how a legitimate/logical argument can be made to differentiate between the two. And, again, to be clear, I am undecided in the matter and still researching the law/options. You are either too stubborn, our too ignorant, to acknowledge that there is a fundamental difference between being allowed to engage in a particular means of travel and the right to own/posses a firearm. Until you do so, it's hard to take anything you say seriously. Frankly, it comes across as someone merely towing the party line, i.e. being the "sheep" you accuse others of.

The only thing you've done is refuse to acknowledge that the no fly list is unconstitutional, when a federal judge has ruled that it is. Any thing that is unconstitutional is exactly that, whether "express", or any other way. Retard.
 
eg I know what you want. You want people to say the no fly list is stupid and we should get rid of it that way you can blame bush like you always do. I don't agree with no fly list only because of due process. If they are dangerous then charge them with a crime

If you disagree with people on the no fly list having their right to travel barred because of the absence of due process, then we agree about that.
 
If you disagree with people on the no fly list having their right to travel barred because of the absence of due process, then we agree about that.
THEN WHY ON GODS GREEN EARTH HAVE YOU BEEN ARGUING FOR A WEEK ABOUT IT?!?!?!??!?!?!
 
THEN WHY ON GODS GREEN EARTH HAVE YOU BEEN ARGUING FOR A WEEK ABOUT IT?!?!?!??!?!?!


I've been arguing that it you are on a no fly list and can't fly, then you shouldn't be able to purchase a gun if you're on the terrorist watch list. I posted my thoughts early in this thread........"But let's eliminate all prohibitions of the No Fly List and Terrorist Watch List altogether."
 
The only thing you've done is refuse to acknowledge that the no fly list is unconstitutional, when a federal judge has ruled that it is. Any thing that is unconstitutional is exactly that, whether "express", or any other way. Retard.

Just because a district court judge in one federal district - the 9th circuit no less, where ignorant decisions are made daily, and often reversed - doesn't make it so. You keep saying there is a due process villain, but you can't explain why they are entitled to due process. Again, due process isn't even triggered unless there is an underlying right implicated. What used the underlying Constitutional right? What amendment protects your right to a specific means off travel?
 
Freedom of movement
Privileges and Immunities Clause of the United States Constitution
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT