Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Homeland security
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Glocktogo" data-source="post: 2821296" data-attributes="member: 1132"><p>The GOP is being led on this subject by RINO pols like Peter King (R) NY. He's a full blown Statist and doesn't care about your rights. So turning to the GOP on this is a non-starter.</p><p></p><p>BTW, you do realize that even if the system is overhauled, denying a constitutionally enumerated right based on a Homeland Security Watch List is essentially a "Precrime" measure? Are you sure you really want to go down that road?</p><p></p><p>The Terrorist Indices Datamart Environment (TIDE) is an aggregate of about 26 different lists. People nominated to those lists for additional scrutiny are often cross-populated to other watch lists, sometimes automatically via internal reporting protocols. There are currently about 1.2 million names on these lists. Obviously most of them never actualize in the commission of a felony crime. </p><p></p><p>People like POTUS and most of the elected officials who are throwing this idea around, don't actually have a clue how the system works. They also don't understand why it works the way it does. Doing things like putting a denial flag in NICS based on a watch list nomination, can have 2nd & 3rd order effects that are detrimental to the mission they're designed to support. </p><p> </p><p>No, this is a bad ideal all around. Not to mention that I'd like for anyone to point out to me when any of these active shooters have been on a terror watch list prior to committing their attacks? Yeah... Didn't think so. <img src="/images/smilies/frown.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":(" title="Frown :(" data-shortname=":(" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Glocktogo, post: 2821296, member: 1132"] The GOP is being led on this subject by RINO pols like Peter King (R) NY. He's a full blown Statist and doesn't care about your rights. So turning to the GOP on this is a non-starter. BTW, you do realize that even if the system is overhauled, denying a constitutionally enumerated right based on a Homeland Security Watch List is essentially a "Precrime" measure? Are you sure you really want to go down that road? The Terrorist Indices Datamart Environment (TIDE) is an aggregate of about 26 different lists. People nominated to those lists for additional scrutiny are often cross-populated to other watch lists, sometimes automatically via internal reporting protocols. There are currently about 1.2 million names on these lists. Obviously most of them never actualize in the commission of a felony crime. People like POTUS and most of the elected officials who are throwing this idea around, don't actually have a clue how the system works. They also don't understand why it works the way it does. Doing things like putting a denial flag in NICS based on a watch list nomination, can have 2nd & 3rd order effects that are detrimental to the mission they're designed to support. No, this is a bad ideal all around. Not to mention that I'd like for anyone to point out to me when any of these active shooters have been on a terror watch list prior to committing their attacks? Yeah... Didn't think so. :( [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Homeland security
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom