Gun Sales Logic

Terror and the No-Fly list –

Why banning guns can’t stop Radicalized Muslim Attacks

 

The entire country is in an uproar about the latest failure by Congress to approve the “no-guns” bill based on the FBI’s “no-fly” list that has many ramifications when you look at how it is compiled and put together. Setting aside the fact that Americans are not ready to sign over their constitutional rights to own a gun, this method of identifying gun terrorism is deeply flawed and would not have stopped the San Bernardino mass shooting.

 

However, California has decided that this is a proposed legislation they can live with and want to pass it into their already strict gun laws. The senators, representatives and the governor all feel safer knowing that if you can’t fly a plane, you can’t own guns.

 

The logic escapes me by a longshot but I can’t think like a politician. Owning a firearm should not be curtailed by random or arbitrary decisions based by the FBI. This list has approximately 47 K names on it and so far, none of the shooters involved in the past were on that list. The correlation that California lawmakers are referring to is mythical and unreasonable but they will do anything in the name of gun control including blaming Arizona and Nevada for their state laws concerning the ownership and sales of guns.

 

Thus the ‘can’t fly – can’t buy’ laws are now under consideration by California and I am certain, other states that engage in such limited thinking on gun control. The problem- the list is not accurate and draws fire even from gun control activists throughout the country. It’s that bad.

 

This collaboration of creating such a list defines ‘secrecy’ and incompetence as a vastly overbroad mechanism that manifests gun bans in its purest form based on rumors, and acts that could not be proven to be true or accurate. This list consists of names of ex-military, publishers of left-wing and right wing extremists, priests and nuns who have expressed resistance on immigration and human rights issues, journalists and Greenpeace and Green party affiliates.

 

An interesting fact revealed in a 2007 Department of Justice audit revealed half of these people listed on the no fly list were wrongly included and if this can happen to them, it can happen to you and reduce your abilities to travel unrestricted and ban you from owning a firearm for any reasons as this list is created based or applied on no actual basis or aspects of facts and your lifestyle. It is profiling at its best without a justification to do so.

 

The bigger problem is a more philosophical one: if you apply the no-fly list to guns, to what else can it be applied? Slippery slope arguments are slippery things, but in this case it’s a reasonable question to ask. If the no-fly list can be used to remove constitutional rights, there’s really no limitations on ways it could be used to limit other activities.

 

Are you ready to give up your Bill of Rights to our government's discretionary decision making? I didn't think so yet, you are willing to let them decide who flies and who can own or purchase guns based on a flawed methodology.