In The Wake Of An Islamic Terror Attack On US Soil, Democrats Plot To Disarm Americans Because of course they do. Senate Democrats are renewing their push to keep people on terrorist watch lists from buying firearms. Sen. Charles E. Schumer of New York led a conference call Monday along with several Democratic colleagues, including Sen. Bill Nelson, a Florida Democrat who is in Orlando where a mass shooting at a gay nightclub early Sunday morning killed 50 people including the gunman.

...

"That�s one possible place to add this bill," he said. "But one way or another, we�re going to push to get the terror gap bill passed." "The terror gap" is also known as, "due process". "The terror gap" is also known as, "due process". In case you've forgotten the Democrats tried this before In case you've forgotten the Democrats tried this before back in December after the San Bernardino, CA attack. The first gun control measure proposed by Democrats was legislation from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) that would deny people on a federal terrorism watch list the ability to purchase guns. The measure failed, 45-54. Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) voted with Republicans to reject the measure, and Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) crossed over to vote in favor of the gun restrictions. Make no mistake about what the Democrats are doing here. They want the government to be able to limit your rights simply because an agent of the executive branch has placed your name on a list. Make no mistake about what the Democrats are doing here. They want the government to be able to limit your rights simply because an agent of the executive branch has placed your name on a list. Democrats tend to play fast and lose with Democrats tend to play fast and lose with which list they are talking about (not that either is acceptable). The "watch list" is over one million people. The "no-fly" list is a subset of that list and covers about 47,000 people. Let's just assume they mean the "no-fly" list (they don't but just for purposes of argument assume that). Let's just assume they mean the "no-fly" list (they don't but just for purposes of argument assume that). Here's the problem The deprivation of a fundamental right is a deprivation of liberty. And the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right. McDonald v. City of Chicago, Ill., 561 U.S. 742 (2010). Therefore, the right to keep and bear arms cannot be deprived without due process. The core of due process is fundamental fairness, which requires that an individual be provided with notice of any proceedings against him and an opportunity to be heard at those proceedings. Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976). The No-Fly List provides neither. �For-cause� public employees are entitled to pre-termination notice and an opportunity to be heard, Cleveland Bd. of Educ. v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532 (1985), as are recipients of disability benefits, Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976). And an evidentiary hearing must be held before welfare benefits are terminated. Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970). Certainly then, due process must require notice and an opportunity to be heard before Second Amendment rights can be terminated.

...

The No-Fly List firearms prohibition would undermine many principles fundamental to our nation�s scheme of ordered liberty, including the right to keep and bear arms, the presumption of innocence, and the right to due process. Regardless of the result of the ongoing political dispute over the ban, it is in conflict with the protections set out in the Constitution. There's nothing to stop Obama or Clinton from simply putting everyone on the "watch list" and eviscerating the 2nd Amendment by royal degree. There's nothing to stop Obama or Clinton from simply putting everyone on the "watch list" and eviscerating the 2nd Amendment by royal degree. Posted by: DrewM. at 02:05 PM











MuNuvians MeeNuvians Polls! Polls! Polls! Frequently Asked Questions The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick Top Top Tens Greatest Hitjobs News/Chat