Report: Senate Democrats may try to add gun measure to Syrian refugee bill

Hot Air ^ | November 23, 2015 | Taylor Millard

[Torcert]

[..]This ignores the fact of how stupid terrorist watch lists are because they don't do the job the government claims they're supposed to. The Intercept (which isn't exactly a conservative or libertarian publication) got hold of the National Counterterrorism Center guidelines for putting people on watch lists last year. Some of these guidelines includes social media and what 'walk-ins' say, even if government employees are told not to use hunches.


So, yes, you might be on a terrorist watch list if you tweet, Facebook, or use other social media sites to post an article someone doesn't like. The rules are so vague that even those who might be criticizing or pointing something out for others to see could end up on the list. But the Democrats and their allies in the media are all in favor of passing a law keeping people on watch lists from getting guns.
Jim Geraghty at National Review has more on the problems with the watch lists.

Indeed, it's terrible for law-abiding Americans with no ties to terrorism to end up on some sort of government-run list of people under suspicion. Of course, that's precisely what has already happened; I wonder if Iftikha knows Ted Kennedy and the Weekly Standard's Stephen Hayes ended up on terrorism watch lists. This is one of the reasons many Republicans don't want to ban gun sales to people on the "terror watch lists" because there's little public disclosure about just how someone ends up on the "terror watch list" or "no-fly list" and once you're on it, it's exceptionally hard to get off. There is no independent or judicial review; once on it, you are guilty until proven innocent.

[Torcert]

He’s just following Lenin’s dictum: “A lie told often enough becomes the truth”