turtlespeed 221 #1 June 17, 2016 [url http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/16/joe-manchin-laments-fifth-amendment-due-process-is/] You just have to sit back and wonder what would happen if they got their way. [url]I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #2 June 17, 2016 If a 'watch' list results in denying travel, not letting people buy stuff, etc, how is that 'watching' however, the Donald is also (has been quite a bit) making noises about denying due process also - so if he's the new face of the Reps, then we have a much simpler way to choose political parties just decide which rights and which demographics you want to deny due process to other people - then pick the party that matches your desire - at least it's now simple ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 2,205 #3 June 17, 2016 I said in another thread that an amendment is needed to deny gun rights to Muslims, but the left would object. It seems maybe the left would support such a thing now. Oy vey, I can't get it straight or keep up. It's so confusing. Just to be clear here, the comment about denying guns to Muslims was tongue-in-cheek. No need to flame me for discrimination, save it for the Trumpeteers.Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 221 #4 June 17, 2016 gowlerkI said in another thread that an amendment is needed to deny gun rights to Muslims, but the left would object. It seems maybe the left would support such a thing now. Oy vey, I can't get it straight or keep up. It's so confusing. Just to be clear here, the comment about denying guns to Muslims was tongue-in-cheek. No need to flame me for discrimination, save it for the Trumpeteers. LOL - I was thinking about that comment when I posted this. And they call Trump a fascist. the hypocrisy is solid.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,499 #5 June 17, 2016 turtlespeed You just have to sit back and wonder what would happen if they got their way. Who knows, maybe it could even lead to indefinite detention without trial. Oh wait, you already did that, courtesy of the last Republican administration. Face, meet palmDo you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,998 #6 June 17, 2016 >You just have to sit back and wonder what would happen if they got their way. That would be horrible! Let's all pray that the republicans get their way, so we can just ban Muslims completely, punish women who get abortions and be done with it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 221 #7 June 17, 2016 billvon>You just have to sit back and wonder what would happen if they got their way. That would be horrible! Let's all pray that the republicans get their way, so we can just ban Muslims completely, punish women who get abortions and be done with it. Your sarcasm leads us to believe you are FOR what the illustrious lawmaker had to say about due process. Not that it is all that surprising. Just stating the obvious.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,499 #8 June 17, 2016 turtlespeed Your sarcasm leads us to believe you are FOR what the illustrious lawmaker had to say about due process. Not that it is all that surprising. Just stating the obvious. Your lack of comment leads us to believe you are FOR what the illustrious republican lawmakers DID about due process.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,998 #9 June 17, 2016 >Your sarcasm leads us to believe you are FOR what the illustrious lawmaker had to >say about due process. You know what they say about assumptions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #10 June 17, 2016 Would this be much the same as the Republican administration that instituted phone tapping without due process?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,366 #11 June 17, 2016 Hi turtle, Quoteleads us to believe Maybe you, but not me. I would hope that you would quit using that type of inclusive terminology because it almost never includes me. Just sayin, Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #12 June 18, 2016 I love the fake debate about due process. What do you think due process is? Do you think the FBI is simply pulling names out of a hat for any sort of watch list? The list was created FROM due process, not by evading it. What it really means to most Americans that oppose it is "As long as it that 'other guy' and not me, I am fine with it". An certainly we cannot have any restrictions for white people that own guns. But brown people that want to vote/drive/register/buy guns/pray/exist, yep let's make sure we have a 'list' for them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe 1,523 #13 June 18, 2016 tkhayesI love the fake debate about due process. What do you think due process is? Do you think the FBI is simply pulling names out of a hat for any sort of watch list? The list was created FROM due process, not by evading it. What is the process for being put on the list? Who is on the list? What is the process for appealing being put on the list? "Due Process" is a: Quote fundamental, constitutional guarantee that all legal proceedings will be fair and that one will be given notice of the proceedings and an opportunity to be heard before the government acts to take away one's life, liberty, or property. Also, a constitutional guarantee that a law shall not be unreasonable, Arbitrary, or capricious. Source The "No Fly" list is in no way an example of due process. It's the exact opposite."There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,499 #14 June 18, 2016 QuoteThe "No Fly" list is in no way an example of due process. It's the exact opposite. Yep. Having _A_ process is not the same as having _Due_ process The Stasi are a shining example of having a process for putting people under surveillance but we wouldn't want our governments to emulate them.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #15 June 18, 2016 QuoteWhat is the process for being put on the list? Who is on the list? What is the process for appealing being put on the list? "Due Process" is a: I get that - but the assumption from the gun lobby seems to indicate (and certainly drives the hype) that there is 'no' process or very little process. And I restate that to get on the terrorist watch list that the FBI maintains, there IS a process. And the assumption that the process is not, could not, or would not be modified to be in line with the Constitution is simply ludicrous. We trust the FBI to do 10's of thousands of tasks every single day, every right winger is certainly rooting for them to indict Hillary - no violation of due process there......why is suddenly it seems that the FBI could not manage a list of people that should not have guns because we (they) have credible reason to think they might commit an act of terrorism? You can get taken of an airplane for showing up accidentally with a pocket knife in your bag and then yelling at the security guard for taking it away from you...... Were you a threat? Probably not. Did they get to take your knife and eject you? yes they did. Were your Constitutional rights violated by taking you off that flight? arguably either way. Does anyone give a shit? Only you. It goes right back to the penis size argument. People's guns are more precious than the lives of fellow americans because people have small dicks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #16 June 18, 2016 wolfriverjoe***I love the fake debate about due process. What do you think due process is? Do you think the FBI is simply pulling names out of a hat for any sort of watch list? The list was created FROM due process, not by evading it. What is the process for being put on the list? Who is on the list? What is the process for appealing being put on the list? "Due Process" is a: Quote fundamental, constitutional guarantee that all legal proceedings will be fair and that one will be given notice of the proceedings and an opportunity to be heard before the government acts to take away one's life, liberty, or property. Also, a constitutional guarantee that a law shall not be unreasonable, Arbitrary, or capricious. Source The "No Fly" list is in no way an example of due process. It's the exact opposite. Why? Being on a no-fly list doesn't remove anyone's life, liberty (in context) or property. It might impinge on your pursuit of happiness, but these days no-one is too happy with airline travel.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 221 #17 June 18, 2016 tkhayesQuoteWhat is the process for being put on the list? Who is on the list? What is the process for appealing being put on the list? "Due Process" is a: I get that - but the assumption from the gun lobby seems to indicate (and certainly drives the hype) that there is 'no' process or very little process. And I restate that to get on the terrorist watch list that the FBI maintains, there IS a process. And the assumption that the process is not, could not, or would not be modified to be in line with the Constitution is simply ludicrous. We trust the FBI to do 10's of thousands of tasks every single day, every right winger is certainly rooting for them to indict Hillary - no violation of due process there......why is suddenly it seems that the FBI could not manage a list of people that should not have guns because we (they) have credible reason to think they might commit an act of terrorism? You can get taken of an airplane for showing up accidentally with a pocket knife in your bag and then yelling at the security guard for taking it away from you...... Were you a threat? Probably not. Did they get to take your knife and eject you? yes they did. Were your Constitutional rights violated by taking you off that flight? arguably either way. Does anyone give a shit? Only you. It goes right back to the penis size argument. People's guns are more precious than the lives of fellow americans because people have small dicks. Yes, yes, a process, like using the information that Snowden released, illegal wire tapping, and the like. That sure is constitutional. The funny thing is, if Paul Ryan or McCain had said those words you wouldn't be defending the, now would you?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 221 #18 June 18, 2016 kallend******I love the fake debate about due process. What do you think due process is? Do you think the FBI is simply pulling names out of a hat for any sort of watch list? The list was created FROM due process, not by evading it. What is the process for being put on the list? Who is on the list? What is the process for appealing being put on the list? "Due Process" is a: Quote fundamental, constitutional guarantee that all legal proceedings will be fair and that one will be given notice of the proceedings and an opportunity to be heard before the government acts to take away one's life, liberty, or property. Also, a constitutional guarantee that a law shall not be unreasonable, Arbitrary, or capricious. Source The "No Fly" list is in no way an example of due process. It's the exact opposite. Why? Being on a no-fly list doesn't remove anyone's life, liberty (in context) or property. It might impinge on your pursuit of happiness, but these days no-one is too happy with airline travel. How does one go about actually being "too happy"?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #19 June 18, 2016 ?? - did you miss your meds this morning? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #20 June 18, 2016 turtlespeed*********I love the fake debate about due process. What do you think due process is? Do you think the FBI is simply pulling names out of a hat for any sort of watch list? The list was created FROM due process, not by evading it. What is the process for being put on the list? Who is on the list? What is the process for appealing being put on the list? "Due Process" is a: Quote fundamental, constitutional guarantee that all legal proceedings will be fair and that one will be given notice of the proceedings and an opportunity to be heard before the government acts to take away one's life, liberty, or property. Also, a constitutional guarantee that a law shall not be unreasonable, Arbitrary, or capricious. Source The "No Fly" list is in no way an example of due process. It's the exact opposite. Why? Being on a no-fly list doesn't remove anyone's life, liberty (in context) or property. It might impinge on your pursuit of happiness, but these days no-one is too happy with airline travel. How does one go about actually being "too happy"? `I don't know what to do!'' cried Scrooge, laughing and crying in the same breath; and making a perfect Laocoön of himself with his stockings. ``I am as light as a feather, I am as happy as an angel, I am as merry as a school-boy. I am as giddy as a drunken man. A merry Christmas to every-body! A happy New Year to all the world! Hallo here! Whoop! Hallo!'' He had frisked into the sitting-room, and was now standing there: perfectly winded. ``I don't know what day of the month it is!'' said Scrooge. ``I don't know how long I've been among the Spirits. I don't know anything. I'm quite a baby. Never mind. I don't care. I'd rather be a baby. Hallo! Whoop! Hallo here!'' He was checked in his transports by the churches ringing out the lustiest peals he had ever heard. Clash, clang, hammer, ding, dong, bell. Bell, dong, ding, hammer, clang, clash! Oh, glorious, glorious! Running to the window, he opened it, and put out his stirring, cold cold, piping for the blood to dance to; Golden sunlight; Heavenly sky; sweet fresh air; merry bells. Oh, glorious. Glorious! The hand in which he wrote the address was not a steady one, but write it he did, somehow, and went down stairs to open the street door, ready for the coming of the poulterer's man. As he stood there, waiting his arrival, the knocker caught his eye. ``I shall love it, as long as I live!'' cried Scrooge, patting it with his hand. ``I scarcely ever looked at it before. What an honest expression it has in its face! It's a wonderful knocker! Shaving was not an easy task, for his hand continued to shake very much; and shaving requires attention, even when you don't dance while you are at it. But if he had cut the end of his nose off, he would have put a piece of sticking-plaister over it, and been quite satisfied. ...... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 221 #21 June 18, 2016 Ebenizer is a fictional character. Quoting Dickens doesn't explain anything.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe 1,523 #22 June 18, 2016 kallend*** The "No Fly" list is in no way an example of due process. It's the exact opposite. Why? Being on a no-fly list doesn't remove anyone's life, liberty (in context) or property. It might impinge on your pursuit of happiness, but these days no-one is too happy with airline travel. AFAIK, the "No Fly" list is perfectly legal, without due process. Because there is no "right" to travel on an airliner. It's a private conveyance. If someone is prohibited from flying, they have alternatives for travel ('Travel' has been found to be a right). However, the right to keep and bear arms is the 2nd A of the BOR. The Supreme Court found it to be an individual right (agree or disagree, that's what they ruled). So denying someone that right requires due process. For example, denying a convicted felon follows due process, because the trial that convicted them of the felony meets the standards. Notice, opportunity to be heard, right of appeal. None of those are in the "process" used for the No Fly list."There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #23 June 18, 2016 wolfriverjoe****** The "No Fly" list is in no way an example of due process. It's the exact opposite. Why? Being on a no-fly list doesn't remove anyone's life, liberty (in context) or property. It might impinge on your pursuit of happiness, but these days no-one is too happy with airline travel. AFAIK, the "No Fly" list is perfectly legal, without due process. Because there is no "right" to travel on an airliner. It's a private conveyance. If someone is prohibited from flying, they have alternatives for travel ('Travel' has been found to be a right). However, the right to keep and bear arms is the 2nd A of the BOR. The Supreme Court found it to be an individual right (agree or disagree, that's what they ruled). So denying someone that right requires due process. For example, denying a convicted felon follows due process, because the trial that convicted them of the felony meets the standards. Notice, opportunity to be heard, right of appeal. None of those are in the "process" used for the No Fly list. Easy work around - model it on the FISA court, which can deprive a person of a right and is apparently quite legal and passes Constitutional muster.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #24 June 18, 2016 kallend Easy work around - model it on the FISA court, which can deprive a person of a right and is apparently quite legal and passes Constitutional muster. What right(s) are the FISA court depriving of someone?Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #25 June 19, 2016 Bolas*** Easy work around - model it on the FISA court, which can deprive a person of a right and is apparently quite legal and passes Constitutional muster. What right(s) are the FISA court depriving of someone? Been sleeping for the past few years?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
