And there’s the rub, because NRA has promoted “kinder, gentler” Republican versions of watch lists, and endorsed the politicians offering them. While words like “due process” are thrown around as some kind of reassurance, the fact remains that a fundamental right is being denied to citizens who have not even been charged with a crime, let alone convicted. And what real terrorist, assuming he went to an FFL in the first place, wouldn’t view a NICS denial as a good indication that he’s been made? [More]
The man's advisers aren't doing him any favors.
Agreed. Trump is hardly a ron Paul type when it comes to guns, but he is still much better than hillary. He may betray us, as you pointed out, but we know hillary has called for Australian style gun confiscation and the Supreme Court reversing helper.
ReplyDeleteOne positive on trumps side is that while we may have to watch him closely on gun laws, his immigration plans - if implemented - will help save gun rights for decades to comenter, even if that is not necessarily his intent. Just stopping the flow of millions of anti gun voters will be a huge boost to our side.
But I definitely agree - we will have to watch trump like a hawk on the gun issue, but that is still a lot better option than letting in the Parkinsons Queen.
Noticed that, too. It was among many other "gotcha" questions Lester Holt (the "third debater") directed at Trump.
ReplyDeleteStill, using the "terror watch list" -- or even the smaller "No-Fly List" -- to deny firearm purchases will strip due process protections from countless innocent and unknowing American citizens. That is an unacceptable concession. If someone is "too dangerous to have a gun", then they are too dangerous to be out in public, but suspicions aren't enough; the government has to prove it in court before they can deny fundamental rights.