I think the first 2 plus paragraphs say it best:

The American system of justice relies on core principles based on a fundamental understanding of natural law. First, the Constitution exists to restrain government from encroaching on the rights of its sovereign citizens. Second, each citizen retains those civil rights unless a jury of their peers convicts them of violating the law. Third, each citizen is entitled to due process and a presumption of innocence from the government until conviction.

In the wake of the Orlando shooting, the familiar rush to use the no-fly and terror watch lists as a bar to owning a firearm violates every single one of these principles.

The danger to constitutional republics from sudden crises comes from the very human impulse to restore order by any means necessary. In almost every instance, it results in the erosion of the balance between government power and personal liberty.

Last edited by Brady Bunch (6/15/2016 1:33 pm)

"In the wake of the Orlando shooting, the familiar rush to use the no-fly and terror watch lists as a bar to owning a firearm violates every single one of these principles."

Then why do 100% of security and law enforcement groups support banning individuals on the no fly and terror watch lists from legally purchasing weapons? Is this just overreaching by an unrestrained government agency, or is it just a good sense step in possible prevention of a mass killing incident?

"The danger to constitutional republics from sudden crises comes from the very human impulse to restore order by any means necessary. In almost every instance, it results in the erosion of the balance between government power and personal liberty."


Or we could continue down the pathway we have taken as a country after every one of the mass killing incidents: horror, prayers & condolences, arguments about gun control, ad nauseum dissection of the crime, victims, shooter, family of the shooter, friends of the shooter, the psychological state of the shooter, if/how/where and who radicalized the shooter, etc., and in two months forget about the entire incident as it fades from the news cycle . . . Until the next tragic incident. Or, do we finally sit down and have a reasonable, rational discussion about root cause analysis and calmly discuss possible plans that can be put into action that may lead to a solution.

Last edited by Rongone (6/15/2016 2:41 pm)

Goose wrote:

Rubbish.
Modest efforts to keep military grade weapons out of the hands of terrorists in no way endanger the republic.

And I refuse to accept the premise that selling AR-15s in the civilian market violates 'natural law'.

I suppose natural law doesn't include my right to life?

What modest efforts would you like to see done?

I am for anything that does not conflict what I quoted from the article

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

LIFE. It's like the first right cited. Talk about Natural Law.
LIFE. Not the right to own any weapon you could ever imagine despite the risk to others.
Not, the right to pose a clear and present danger to all around you.

And, what power does government have? How about the power deriving from the consent of the governed?
Does that include the 71% of Americans who favor banning people on terror watch lists from buying guns?
The 93 % who support universal background checks?
The  58% who support and assault weapons ban?

http://www.voanews.com/content/us-gun-poll/3373993.html

Last edited by Goose (6/15/2016 3:36 pm)