Sunday, June 19, 2016

Suspicion is all it will take:

First, of course, they want to ban anyone on the no fly list. A list wherein you are added just because some bureaucrat says you belong on the list...based on unknown criteria.

With, effectively, no way off....and you won't know you are on until you are told that you can't fly. Might be a similar name. Maybe because you are a member of a club that someone else on the No Fly list belongs to....Maybe because you pissed off some TSA flunky one day. (No one really knows how you get on the list....)...AND THERE IS NO METHOD TO APPEAL YOUR BEING ON THE LIST unless you can get a senator to intervene.....

Then they want the Terror Watch list. Same thing, really. No one knows how you get on the list, and really no one knows they ARE on the list. And if you did discover that you were on the list, there is no way to appeal or have your listing reviewed.

Seems to me,. that if your right to fly is to be restricted, then you are too dangerous to be walking the streets. Same with the Terror Watch list. After the Paris Attacks, the authorities KNEW who to detain, question, and subsequently arrest. Those folks were already on the watch list....they just rounded 'em up.  How many died, how many lives were destroyed or forever altered because those folks on the French Watch list were allowed to run around and do their dastardly deeds (or aid those who DID do the deeds)?

If you are truly a danger, enough that you are on the Watch list, or the No Fly list, you should be under arrest and detained by the Feds while they investigate to make their case.....Or you should be investigated and released. The criteria are either too lax or the criteria aren't being properly implemented in either case.

Here is the thing: If due to suspicion you are deemed dangerous enough to be denied a Constitutional right, then you should be JAILED for the goosd of socienty and your fellow citizens. If you aren't that dangerous, then no denial of rights should happen.

Now they want to restrict a Constitutional right based upon a list that is poorly vetted (if indeed, it is vetted at all).

And now, Senator Bob Casey wants to restrict your Constitutionally guaranteed Second Amendment rights because of "Hate Speech"? Not of conviction of Hate Speech, but SUSPICION of hate speech. (Sidebar here: How does "Hate Speech" laws reconcile with Free Speech? . When did an opinion or statement of belief become against the law? How do the two reconcile? And why aren't anti gunners who post those terrible tweets and missives (and wish me dead and such) in comments on HuffPo articles arrested and charged with Hate Speech? How about those muslims (and Presidential Preachers) who say "death to America!" (Is it because some hate speech is ok and other kinds are not? Who decides?)



Again though: Senator Casey wants to restrict your rights based on SUSPICION....not conviction....SUSPICION. What is next? At what point will we stop?

Much of what I write here could be, under some criteria, used as evidence of suspicion of hate speech/WrongThink....By someone who wants to point me out to suspend my rights.....and in their perfect world, I will never get my "Speedy Trial" either.....

And after me? You. Yep, you. You returned here many times, therefore you must agree with me.....Turn over your guns and other rights, Citizen.


2 comments:

J Bogan said...

If they ever achieve those goals, it will not be "citizen", it will be "slave"

B said...

And I will be dead. But I will pay the Ferryman's fee first. I'll not be a slave.