Skip to main content

View Diary: Poll: It turns out supporting gun safety legislation is also smart politics (63 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You can approach this from (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Norm in Chicago

    two directions.

    1) Gun ownership is a right. Rights must be upheld otherwise they become meaningless.

    2) People have been identified who may pose a danger to public safety. What can be done to make it harder for them to become armed?

    The first position makes safety and survival less important than a concept which must be adhered to no matter what. It makes the concept absolute and all-important.

    The second position says, we have a problem. How can we sensibly address it.

    It's true that the no-fly list should require a higher legal standard. Perhaps a discussion about using it to identify individuals who would fail a background check could lead to the goal of making the list more legally rigorous.

    •  Yes, how they are identified is the issue (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      noway2, Not A Bot

      What I've said is that if they are identified as a danger to public safetly through due process in court, then rights can be denied to them.  Being put on the no fly list should require a court hearing and a chance to defend one's self in court, in my opinion.

      But the FBI saying "Oh, he's a scarry dark skinned Muslim", or an armchair psychologist saying "he has Aspergers and is clearly disturbed" doesn't quite cut it.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site