My point in mentioning I hold those items is that I would be easy to find once a red flag popped up. What does it take to make that flag pop? Does my internet searches on b o m b building do it? Does my searches on weapons do it? Does me expressing my dislike for this Gov do it? What does it take? That is all I want to know and until I know those answers I could never blindly get behind any law the law makers try and ram down our throats. For the good of the people, think of the kids, oh the horror when will it stop? I don't give a harry rats ass about that if they cant answer my questions.
Yeah, F.U., making YOU feel comfortable by publishing how the government detects and deters suspected terrorists (thereby giving would-be terrorists the information they need to circumvent such detection/deterrence) should absolutely be a priority.
I mean, satisfying F.U.'s curiosity and getting F.U.'s thumbs-up on a bill is surely more important than the security of the nation. Why can't Big Brother/NSA see that?!
Anyway, both the Democratic and Republican No Fly / No Buy bills spell out a remedy process if someone is denied a gun purchase on the sole basis of being on 'The List'.
If you were denied legal gun purchase even though you knew you passed all the other eligibility requirements, you'd know you were on 'The List' and could appeal if you felt it was a mistake. If you were detained/prevented from boarding a plane even though you purchased a ticket, passed security, and weren't behaving suspiciously, you'd also know you were on the 'The List'.
Ok, in reading about the no fly list I learned, The No Fly List is different from the Terrorist Watch List, a much longer list of people said to be suspected of some involvement with terrorism. As of June 2016 the Terrorist Watch List is estimated to contain over 2,484,442 records, consisting of 1,877,133 individual identities. SOoooo if we are trying to keep the guns out of the terrorists hands wouldn't the TERRORIST watch list be a better list to pay attention to?
No, the Government doesn't want the suspected terrorists red flagged and prevented from buying guns because then the terrorist will know that the Government is on to them.
You think I'm kiddin'.
Hey HotD, we ALL should feel comfortable about the laws we enact. Everyone has a stake in this game and ALL of our rights are equal. So you not worrying about it is no more or less important than my concerns.
(06-23-2016, 03:26 PM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ]
No, the Government doesn't want the suspected terrorists red flagged and prevented from buying guns because then the terrorist will know that the Government is on to them.
You think I'm kiddin'.
No I don't think you are kidding. It sounds just stupid enough to be something our government would do. Don't let them know we are watching them, sell them the gun and we will catch them after the do the killing.
So if its not about keeping guns out of terrorists hands exactly who are they trying to keep the guns from?
Ok Fox [yes I know Faux news] news says there are 8 was to end up on that list. I am sure there are more. Several of these 8 concern me. [ 3,4,5,6,7,8 ]
http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2015/09/09...-list.html
1. Being suspected of direct terrorist activity
2. Travel to certain countries
3. Something you said in the past
4. Have a similar name to someone on the no-fly list
5. Not becoming an informant
6. Clerical error
7. Law enforcement issues
8. Controversial Tweets
(06-23-2016, 03:29 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ]So if its not about keeping guns out of terrorists hands exactly who are they trying to keep the guns from?
That is the Republican's stance, not the peoples. The Republicans don't care who gets guns, that's why there are the laws we have. Hahaha! Only citizens care.
Other than in Mock, I don't know a single person who takes issue with these common sense laws.
The ACLU says this about that no fly list.
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/wh...o-fly-list
the criteria for inclusion are so broad and vague that they inevitably ensnare innocent people engaged in First Amendment-protected speech, activity, or association. The process the government has established for people on the No Fly List to challenge their blacklisting is grossly insufficient and violates the U.S. Constitution's due process guarantee.
(06-23-2016, 03:35 PM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ] (06-23-2016, 03:29 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ]So if its not about keeping guns out of terrorists hands exactly who are they trying to keep the guns from?
That is the Republican's stance, not the peoples. The Republicans don't care who gets guns, that's why there are the laws we have. Hahaha! Only citizens care.
Other than in Mock, I don't know a single person who takes issue with these common sense laws.
That's funny because everyone that I know IRL and have talked to about this apposes the law. Mock/internet is the only place that I find people blindly pushing for it without knowing EXACTLY how the law will work.
(06-23-2016, 03:34 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ]Several of these 8 concern me. [ 3,4,5,6,7,8 ]
http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2015/09/09...-list.html
1. Being suspected of direct terrorist activity
2. Travel to certain countries
3. Something you said in the past
4. Have a similar name to someone on the no-fly list
5. Not becoming an informant
6. Clerical error
7. Law enforcement issues
8. Controversial Tweets
Meh. I can only seeing that being an issue if someone is an extremist, you are, but not extreme enough to warrant the attention of the Feds. You're no different than so many other people who don't trust the government and like guns. You're a good ol' boy.
I've spent time creepin' on terrorists and I don't think the Feds have got their eye on me. I talk shit about our Government and I never worry about showing my displeasure towards anything nor anyone. I'm not important or worth watching and I doubt you are either.
Wow, they are really sneaky about this list and hide it well. Glad the terrorists don't have the internet. Glad my name isn't on it though.
http://www.no-fly-list.com/
(06-23-2016, 03:43 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ]Glad my name isn't on it though.
http://www.no-fly-list.com/
Weren't you worried to type your name in there? Now the Government knows you were checking.
(06-23-2016, 03:46 PM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ] (06-23-2016, 03:43 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ]Glad my name isn't on it though.
http://www.no-fly-list.com/
Weren't you worried to type your name in there? Now the Government knows you were checking.
Actually, yes I was.
(06-23-2016, 03:50 PM)Duchess Wrote: [ -> ]
Thank Bajebus the name is common and there are actually two of us that live in this little city. I also checked my friend in Pakistan and he is clear, so that made me feel better also.
Well this has ben fun, but its time that I take my Neurotic self into the bathroom and check for bugs and cameras before I get showered and ready for work.
(06-23-2016, 03:59 PM)F.U. Wrote: [ -> ]Well this has ben fun, but its time that I take my Neurotic self into the bathroom and check for bugs and cameras before I get showered and ready for work.
Yes, it has been. You made me laugh out loud when you called me an asshat. 
Well glad we can make each other laugh here Duch. Its a great spice in life, laughter.
Oh, by the way, one of the new names added to the list today is a Jimbo. Hmmmmmmmmm Vede-intoresting !
The database you searched isn't the actual No Fly list used by the TSA, F.U.
That site you accessed was set up in 2003 to capture the names of people who have good reason to worry that they might be suspected of terrorist activity.
The NSA then incorporates those names into the Terror Watch List. If the NSA investigation of the name entered and the I.P. address associated with the search turns up anything concerning, the person is also added to the real No Fly list accessible only to those with government and airport (DHS) clearance.
If you haven't done anything but enter your name into the fake TSA database, you probably won't be added to the real No Fly list. Hopefully, the fact that your friend is located in Pakistan won't cause him problems.