According to CNN, House Democrats are planning to oppose the “No Fly, No Buy” legislation now being proposed by Republicans and projected for a vote following the Independence Day recess.
Following the shooting in Orlando there has been a flurry of Congressional activity to try and enact a proposal entitled “No Fly, No Buy” which would prohibit citizens on a “terrorist watch list” from purchasing firearms.
The idea gained traction because the perpetrator of the shooting in Orlando had previously been on the watch list, investigated by the FBI, cleared, and removed from the list five years prior to the purchase of the firearms he used in the terror attack.
Democrats in the House and Senate have put forth multiple proposals which would formalize the process already in place in which the FBI is alerted when someone on the watch list attempts to purchase a firearm. They then have the ability to interdict and stop that sale.
The proposal by Democrats they would have all such sales stopped by default, requiring the citizen to appeal that decision through the court system.
Many Republicans have pointed out that this places an enormous financial burden on the individual (who would have to finance their own legal challenge with no guarantee that it would be reimbursed), and is the exact opposite of the way the legal system is supposed to work — namely the concept of “innocent until proven guilty.”
The burden of proof would be on the individual to prove that they aren’t a terrorist instead of on the state to prove that the individual is an actual danger to society.
Republicans have produced their own version of the legislation which places the burden of proof on the government. According to their legislation the Attorney General would have three days following the interdicted firearms transaction to file an action with the court to make that purchase denial permanent.
Democrats have voiced their opposition to this proposal because they claim it will make the process too difficult. cnn.com:
House Democrats said Friday they will oppose a Republican bill aimed at preventing people suspected of being terrorists from buying guns because they don’t believe the proposal will be effective in stopping the purchases.
The legislation, which will be voted on next week, is similar to a bill authored by Sen. John Cornyn of Texas that Senate Democrats rejected a week ago. It would give the Justice Department three days after a suspected terrorist tries to buy a gun to show that the person should not be allowed to have it. Democrats complain it is onerous and unworkable.
The Democrats went on to complain that they also don’t want to vote on the Republicans’ proposal because it has the backing of the NRA. It’s worth noting that the NRA did indeed endorse this same proposal in the Senate, advocating for new gun laws and tighter restrictions contrary to the narrative that Democrats use against the organization.
Outrageous all around! My dead veteran relatives–all the way back to WW1…Are rolling in their graves!
This is an election year. It is becoming increasingly obvious that neither the Dems or Repubs really want this legislation, they just want the political capital that will come from claiming they are trying to do something about the problem but the “other guys” just keep getting in the way.
This seems like a poor strategy to me, but what do I know. I think the Dems are overestimating the percentage of low-information voters who think gun control is a good thing so they are pushing it HARD.
I think the Repubs are over-estimating the ability of their voters to understand that they are not REALLY trying to pass unconstitutional gun-control laws that fly in the face of due process and the Constitution.
Either way, we need to be smart enough to see this all as the political theater that it is and remember that no candidate in history has been more openly anti-Constitution and anti Second Amendment than Hillary. Keep Congress Republican, even if there are too many RINOs, and keep SCOTUS at least nominally weighted towards Constitutionalists.
It’s the best we can do until we can do better.
The real question is why are “we” letting the conversation even be about guns, gun control and all that.
This political theater is being tied to the Orlando shooting, which was a firefight in a war. It was not “gun violence” in the sense they usually throw that nonsensical term out. It was an ATTACK.
Why is THAT not the conversation?
Why is the conversation about:
(1) What happened during the FBI investigations (plural) that led to them NOT watching this guy harder?
(2) Why is no action being taken against any and all cohorts he’s had (his Dad, his wife, etc)? Okay, so his wife MIGHT be facing some charges, but why is it a question? They either have evidence that she was an accomplice or they don’t.
(3) Why is there not more discussion about the open border and / or tracking ‘terrorists’ already in the country? (Yes, I know he was born here, but his action opens the larger questions).
(4) Since the attack, there have been at least several hundred additional non-vetted “immigrants” allowed into the US. Why is it SO strongly opposed by our government to even ask if this is a good idea RIGHT NOW?
(5) Since the Orlando attack, there have been numerous attacks in the world that have not involved ‘guns’ or just guns. How actually does this political theater do ANYTHING to protect US citizens from attacks?
“What happened during the FBI investigations (plural) that led to them NOT watching this guy harder?”
It was Islam. We all know the real answer to this question but this will only continue and get worse.
It is no mistake that this all comes from the leadership of Obama, but no one in the media dare even mention this. It’s like living in Stalinist USSR. There is no there there, all focus is on LGBT military.
These evil mfrs are laughing their asses off at us.
As I stated below the Coryn Bill embodies do process. It requires the government to prove its case. If you don’t understand that then due process doesn’t mean what you think it means.
Cornyn’s bill STILL isn’t due process. Due process has to happen before rights are violated. By denying the sale they’ve just violated due process, full stop.
The phrase that’s been going around a lot lately: if they have enough to violate someone’s rights they have enough for an arrest.
Due process has to happen before rights are violated.
piersonb, my brother, I fear that tdiinva is correct and that you don’t know the meaning of due process.
The heart of due process is notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard. That’s it.
NICS has three days to clear a sale. During that period of time (under the Cornyn proposal), the AG would be required to go to court and then obtain what is in effect a permanent injunction against the sale. The burden of proof would be on the AG.
The 5th and 14th Amendments are satisfied with this process.
In a criminal case, due process occurs after an arrest, not before. Why is this so hard to understand?
Ralph, IANAL, but there is another constitutional process at play, as well, and that is probable cause. You cannot be arrested without probable cause, not deprived of your rights, and that probable cause is to be decided by a judge, not a faceless, nameless, unelected bureaucrat with no skin in the game. If you are on the prohibited list for NICS, that is supposed to mean that you have been *convicted*, not suspected, of a crime. You can appeal that listing, and that all fits under the Constitution, but to be denied a specified right because Barry *suspects* you since you are an NRA member, without any conviction even implied, is certainly NOT constitutional, no matter what Barry or SCOTUS say. And do not kid yourself that won’t happen.
IOW, probable cause must be decided before any of your rights are denied, as a preliminary part of due process.
It seems that piersonb and I both have a pretty good understanding of due process, and probable cause. What I don’t understand is why so many people have trouble understanding: “…the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
The NICS system is an unconstitutional infringement on our Constitutionally protected rights. Any bill or law riding on, modifying, or adding secret lists to the NICS system, especially if they can arbitrarily deny your exercise of your Second Amendment protected rights, even for 72 hours, is blatantly unconstitutional.
All the rest is distraction and bullshit.
Right, due process? The denial of a basic right, based on a secret list, based on secret standards, when no declaration of war, nor declaration of martial law has been made which would allow for the abrogation of basic civil rights.
You don’t of know of what you speak tdiinva.
That, and if I’m arrested they tell me why. I won’t know I’m on a super special watch list until I’m denied a sale.
And then, while I’m admittedly bad at interpreting some of the legalese written into laws, I don’t see a guarantee that if the government fails to provide the burden of proof I wouldn’t remain on the list and be denied another sale, over and over.
When in July of an election year the demtards find it necessary to try and shore up their support with their extremist Marxist base it tells all one needs to know of where they see their election prospects. In July their “conventional” wisdom is that should be abandoning the wacko BS advocated during the primary season and to “move to the center” (IE by lying about themselves) for the general election.
I read this as the demtards (Hellery and WAY down ticket) see themselves to be in BIG trouble in November.
If that is the game the Republicans are playing, then this is why Trump has buried all of those other “professional politicians” ie , Liars of the right.
Gun owners are some of the most educated, some of the highest income bracket, and some of the most dedicated activists in defending our essential rights, which includes the second amendment.
This is why we have had the explosion of Shall Issue CC laws in almost all states and the passing of Constitutional Carry in so many other state. . I believe this is the same demographic that gave the Republicans the majority in the house and the senate.
If these public whores of the right would just stand on principle and just say no to this continued attack on our rights, the swell of support from that same demographic would ensure their positions of authority that gave them dominance in the house and the Senate in the first place.
But no, they play the same game of appeasement, of compromise with the tyrants of the left, because those tyrants enablers and defenders in the main stream media call them racists, call them bigots, call them xenophobes if they don’t practice the doctrine of political correctness, otherwise known as the doctrine of enslavement of the productive to the tyranny of those in “need”.
I call those appeasers on the right, and the appeasers in the NRA, pure and out right cowards.
trump supports the feinstein version of the no fly no buy. So yeah, vote for the hillary donor who has a LONG history of gun control support.
The question is which side will do a better job of marketing it. They certainly seem to be trying to flank one another.
“This seems like a poor strategy to me, but what do I know”
Especially considering the resolve shown in the face of the Newtown attack. We cracked our rock-hard defenses at the mere cry of “national security” just like some stupid dems at the mention of “gun control,” for no gain whatsoever.
>> I think the Repubs are over-estimating the ability of their voters to understand that they are not REALLY trying to pass unconstitutional gun-control laws that fly in the face of due process and the Constitution.
A party that created the PATRIOT Act, NSA wireless wiretapping, extraordinary rendition and “enhanced interrogation” techniques is not really trying to piss all over due process? You don’t say?
My opinion, We have politicians, we need Leaders.
Thank you! There is not a nickles worth of difference in career politicians. We need a one and done policy for office holders and a 5yr cap on GS positons.
Oh joy. The NRA and our Republican “defenders” of all that is constitutional, are falling over themselves to enact a bill a little less onerous than our Democrat bretheren want to enact , that continue infringing our rights based on a secret list, based on secret standards, that only come to light when wanting to practice our second amendment rights.
Don’t worry, those last arbiters of all that is constitutional, those average human beings in black robes, will keep us safe from an obvious infringement of our second amendment rights..
Do you understand “Due Process”
I think he was being sarcastic… extremely sarcastic.
Yep. Very sarcastic.
I think Ryan is going forward with this bill to expose both the Democrats lack of seriousness and their disdain for the entire Bill of Rights. But what I find interesting is the the reaction of the usual RINO shouting suspects who can’t recognize that Ryan is doing exactly what they have complained about the leadership not doing — forcing the Democrats to eat their own words. While I don’t think the Coryn approach will do much because the FBI won’t compromise an ongoing investigation by blocking a sale or go to court without probable cause this bill meets the Fifth Amendment’s due process requirement. I support the Constitution even when it produces outcome I don’t like.
Off topic: Nick, did you shoot at Blue Ridge Arsenal when you lived in Northern Virginia?
I hope you are right that this is political gamesmanship by the GOP. The danger is that once it goes up for a vote, anything can happen.
Due process. You mean the due process that you are innocent until proven guilty, and that you are required to have your accusers face you in a court of law BEFORE you are denied your basic rights.
So how does this bill meet “due process”?
“So how does this bill meet “due process”?”
Did you read the bill and the NRA recommendations? They can delay the sale for three days in which time they have to prove there was a viable reason to deny the sale altogether or it goes through. the democrats want the bill to be an absolute and secret decision to deny the right to purchase the firearm. Period. No hearing. no proof. No recourse.
Now, can you see the difference?
Due process is not the same as “innocent until proven guilty”.
For example, a cop doesn’t need to prove that you’re guilty to arrest you (and arrest inherently limits your rights – freedom of movement, for example, and RKBA). All they need is probable cause. But then they have to charge you with something, or release you, after a certain period of time (usually 48 hours). That’s an example of due process.
I did indeed. Been a while, though.
But it’s common sense! Gov has the burden of proof against the accused! LOL.
I do like the turn about and dose of medicine. Even if the whole thing completely stinks.
The dems don’t like it because it makes the government work.
I’m glad it will get opposition and probably fail.
We don’t need more laws.
Exactly as I’ve predicted. These Dems aren’t interested in fighting terrorism, they are interested in banning guns and protecting their votes. If the 1st, 4th and 5th Amendments have to be wrecked to achieve that, then it just helps their cause all the more.
The real question is whether the Republicans have the man-parts to actually use this. They can take back the discussion and butcher the Dems with this. Truth is a powerful weapon when wielded without mercy.
“House Democrats said Friday they will oppose a Republican bill aimed at preventing people suspected of being terrorists from buying guns because they don’t believe the proposal will be effective in stopping the purchases.”
Horseshit. Manchin let this slip when he said “Due process is killing us”. This isn’t about guns any more. The Democrats have figured out that if they can destroy due process protections with a “list” then nothing else matters and they aim to do just that. Sure you have every right in the Bill of Rights right up until you’re not the list, now you can go bankrupt trying to get them back.
That’s the game. It really is that simple.
And all it will take to get it done is for the Dems to hold the house, senate, and Whitehouse at the same time. If they can ram through Obamacare, they can ram through just about anything.
If they truly suspended due process for a wide swath of people, I honestly suspect they’d find themselves rapidly suspended… by rope around their neck.
Without due process, just as they advocated.
BAN ASSAULT LEGISLATION!!
The way I see it, as soon as the Government can put someone on a list and summarily take away their Constitutionally protected liberties with no due process, this whole thing that started almost 240 years ago to the day is quickly on it’s way downhill.
Happy Independence Day. I just drove by the Statue of General Anthony Wayne and the National Memorial Arch in Valley Forge National Park, and I can’t help but be disgusted to think that anyone who calls themselves an American would just piss away all that so many have fought and died for over all these years for the ‘promise’ of a little more ‘safety’ from the Government.
They should all be shamed as traitors to the Republic
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
I just drove by the Statue of General Anthony Wayne.
I actually had ancestors who served under Wayne both in the Revolutionary War and the battles for Ohio and Indiana.
Hey very cool, small world man. That’s pretty fascinating. They were the original patriots that we owe everything to. I’ve studied up a little bit on the 4th Pennsylvania Regiment (Wayne’s first command). I actually live about one mile as the crow flies from that statue, and in the direction he is looking (towards his home town of Paoli) I grew up here. Know the history of this area pretty well. Hence my tag (which stands for Valley Forge, 1777). Anyway, heck of a beautiful day for a ride through the park.
Polly ticks, a parasite on a parrot
I don’t understand why you people don’t get that the Cornyn proposal weakens government and enhances due process. The proposal:
1. Shifts the burden of proof to the Government, where it belongs.
2. Requires rapid court review. The AG is required to file a case within 72 hours and the case is expedited with the highest priority.
3. Mandates that the Government inform the denied applicant the reason for the denial. There would be no more secret charges now.
This is due process to the Nth degree. Many of you use the phrase “due process” without any knowledge whatsoever of what it means. If the Founders wanted to say that “no person shall be deprived of . . . property without a trial,” that’s what they would have said.
Well, if directed at me…. I was speaking about what the Dems are pushing for (and not seeming to want to accept anything less than) – not Cornyn’s bill.
You make some good points.
I think the Repubs need to do a better job of controlling the message and smashing this in the Media and the Dems faces – showing them for the farces that they are.
Really Ralph? Due process? What due process? A citizen is placed on a secret list that they don’t know exists, that denies them a basic right they won’t know is there until they decide to exercise that right.
So what if the government has three days to decide if they can stop the gun sale, or not. Those three days could be life or death for that person.
If the government wants to deny a person such a basic right, they should come to that person with evidence showing why they should be on such a list, and give them the ability to face their accusers, at that time, not after the fact.
That would be “due process”.
To call this bill “due process” is an abomination.
Then we have the 4th amendment that says what “due process” is for writing a warrant to arrest a person or seize property, papers and effects which depend on sworn testimony of witnesses and specifying the specific property to be seized; EXCEPT, having made a special classification for the keeping and bearing of arms, specifically limiting the ability of the federal government, as in “shall not be Infringed” , from seizing the armaments of the citizenry.
So, if you are concerned about the letter of the law, until that “shall not be infringed” is changed, this particular bill is null and void.
But we know how the letter of the law is followed, or not , now adays.
By my understanding people are being turned down in a NICS check today (and for the past 10+ years) because their name is on the wrong list and not given any reason. This new legislation would now require the Fed to state why they are denying.
People are under the false belief that people aren’t being denied currently. On the contrary, previous posts have explained that in fact the Fed is denying anybody they want.
To me this law is better than the status quo that is in operation today.
Ralph, you are/were a lawyer, IIRC. To you a day in court is just another day. To the rest of us it is a PITA that disrupts our lives. How do you explain to your family or your employer that you will be gone for awhile because you tried to buy a gun and now you need to go to court and fight with the justice system in order to get it? And what if you are still denied and you need to appeal the process, or appeal being on the list in the first place? This is not normal activity for your average person, especially when they are only trying to exercise a natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right.
Due process may or may not be technically present in this bill, however; the NICS system and secret lists of people the government doesn’t like or trust and wants to deprive of their Constitutionally protected rights is prima facie unconstitutional, so what are we really arguing about here? You cannot make an action Constitutional by adding more unconstitutional laws on top of it.
Agreeing that the government can create such lists and put your name on them and use them to deprive you of your rights without satisfying probable cause or charging you with a crime opens up every single Constitutionally protected right to the same abuse we see of the Second Amendment even now.
Duplicate entry for some reason – deleted
You forgot to add that they also intend to blame the Republicans and the NRA. Meanwhile, the Mother Jones crowd will continue to wash their feet with tears.
Actually, I hope the whole thing dies in gridlock. Pure BS and theater.
Imagine if the Republicans would have done that.
The 4 drive by media sites would be running that until Christmas.
Best comment yet TOM…I’ll start worrying when California style laws come to Illinois(a distinct possibility). Ralph yer on a role too…
Political posturing. The Democrat Party will not vote for the bill unless the GOP removes the constitutionally required due-process clause. The GOP is not going to remove that clause. The GOP wants more uninformed voters to get wind that the Democrat Party wants to ignore the Constitution. When the Senate submitted their bill, the Democrat Party voted against it and buried the news about it by staging their childish sit-in. The GOP is submitting the bill in the House so that it may get air time where they show that the Democrat Party wouldn’t vote for it because it had constitutional protections in it. Personally, I think the GOP is out maneuvering the Democrat Party on this. Every time the Democrat Party does something like this and enough people see it, another batch of people permanently leave their clutches.
I think you’re optimistic. I have talked with more than one lib where the discussion ended at the point where they said the Constitution is old and we don’t need to pay any attention to it any more. What more is there to say? Go home and load your guns.
Niety-eight percent (98%) of the names proposed for the “No fly List) are automatically added. Those on the list, and those with similar names don’t discover this until they are refused at the gate. Congressmen (Kenedy, Lewis) have been trapped and it took weeks or months for them to get off. Think what would happen if you or I were in the same mess.
Then there are the numbers. While “700,000” is tossed around, a liberal fact checking site claims it’s just “6,400 citizens and permanent residents.” http://www.factcheck.org/2015/12/rubio-on-terrorist-watchlist/
How many of these 6,400 are going to buy a gun? Would 10% be reasonable? Can the FBI, Homeland Security, and the rest of the government not deal with 640 people? After all, the 6,400 names have to be added to the NICS database. There’s no way to link the reason they are on the list?
As with most gun control attempts, conviction and punishment of lawbreakers take a backseat to public relations.
Leave it to the Liberals to object to anything that gives people due process. Typical Democrap BS.
They’re not interested in safety, or even the law they demanded. They want the issue. So, they’ll scuttle this law. If more people get shot because of that it’s not a bug, it’s a feature.
Okay, there is so much bad information in this thread this needs to be said.
An arrest is a process of the law. Either evidence is collected, analyzed, and a warrant is issued by a judge or court, or alternatively, judgments are made by officers on the scene for an arrest. An arrest represents a loss of liberty. Therefore, due process must be followed. Evidence is collected PRIOR to a deprivation of life, liberty, or property. Rights are being restricted, and an order MUST be followed.
With regards to firearms, the same rules apply. Even in the current form, lip service is being made to this idea. The No-Fly list is a made up of people who are “suspected”, which gives the superficial impression that the process is being respected. A NICS denial must have an accompanying reason, such as a prior felony conviction or class A misdemeanor conviction. Under the new bill, being on the No-Fly list would restrict a purchase of a firearm. Even with a remedial action, the components of procedural due process are not being followed. Remedial due process is not due process.
The heart of due process is NOT the opportunity to be heard. It is having evidence presented PRIOR to sanction as well as having an avenue to remedy the situation (West Covina v. Perkins). If this order is not followed, procedural due process is being denied.
In the context of firearms, think about this: Is it moral for a constitutionally guaranteed right to be suspended merely for being a suspect, with no charges filed or arrests being made? More to the point, this flies in the face of every test used in the criminal law realm.
I hope this is all just political theater. I may be optimistic though.