Until that list keeps track of truly evil people then we need to be careful. Ted would not have been able to buy a gun. Crazy list and procedure.

Ted would have been very embarrassed to hear, sorry sir but you are not responsible enough to own a gun. Thankfully cooler heads are in charge.

You support Ryan, I get it.

threat to human life.

So there!

Why should innocent people have to go through an appeals process when the program is screwed up? The burden should be on the government not the individual.

I think the fact that ted was a senator made it quite easy for him

I guess if you are too poor to afford a lawer, you dont get some rights.

It was a different Ted Kennedy.
After Senator Kennedy produced ID showing he was not the listed person, he got his boarding pass and continued on his way.

Looking forward to his demotion.

Its gun related? Oh, I see.


Never mind.

There is something wrong here. An erroneous listing on the no fly list can be changed. A terrorist on the no fly list purchasing a weapon and killing people cannot be reversed. Tell me, do I have a constitutionally protected right to life? This is so wrong headed. We can find a solution if we wanted to. Smarter heads must prevail. Paul Ryan is not the sharpest nail in the box.

instead he wants everyone on the list to be able to purchase weapons.

Hmm.

Take a look at it.

before he was potty trained .

People who purchase firearms from gun stores, whether brick and mortar or online, have to pass a National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) check.

Just like any other system, it is not perfect. It might not catch everyone with a criminal background. It obviously won't list people who are mentally ill but haven't been ruled mentally deficient by a court. Likewise, it might list people who've done nothing wrong but are listed by mistake.

If we applied the same Paul Ryan logic to this NICS system, we might as well do away with background checks altogether.

Watchlist (and its 'no-fly' subset). In the former, entry into the dataset follows after hearings, courts, convictions, is based on a transparent process, and uses a clearly-defined set of criteria. For the latter, entry is secret, based on non-transparent criteria, with no judicial process, and the appeal process (to the extent that it's possible) is likewise murky.

I've given my opinion in previous threads, but overall I would oppose any expansion or use of the Terrorist Watchlist or other secret lists beyond the investigatory realm, and I'd encourage our representatives to cast a very skeptical eye on the lists in general...

.. so the argument goes.

Frankly, both lists restrict travel or deny rights Not based on convictions and behavior through due process. The ACLU seems to agree.

for being put on it. And if you're still on it, no gun purchases.

Ergo, being put on a list cannot rob you of your constitutional rights.

People on the list can also vote, speak, protect themselves from government intrusion into their personal effects, and get a jury trial.