Posted on 06/14/2016 12:10:43 PM PDT by servo1969
A New York Times editorial advocates for a new law allowing a secret court to take away citizens' right to own a gun at the discretion of the federal government.
Citing the Orlando terror attack that left 50 dead including the shooter and 53 wounded at a gay nightclub, the piece advocates for a "no-buy" list similar to "no-fly" lists. Under the law, suspected terrorists would not be able to buy a gun. In an attempt to ensure the integrity of the lists and preserve due process, the author proposes people only be added to this no-buy list after a secret court rules they are ineligible, similar to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court hearings where the federal government obtains permission to wiretap. Under this proposal, an American who has never been convicted of a crime could be denied their right to buy a gun simply because a secret court decided it should be that way.
The piece is written by Adam Winkler, a U.C.L.A. School of Law professor. Winkler argues the secret court is a good idea because the same kind of court is already used for government surveillance, and historically, the U.S. has committed worse rights violations such as Japanese internment camps.
"If the attorney general believes a suspected terrorist should be added to the list, she should have to go to court first and offer up evidence," Winkler writes.
Here's how it would work: When the attorney general wanted to revoke someone's Second Amendment rights, he or she would bring evidence to a court which would then determine if there is probable cause. The court proceedings would be secret and have no clear path to appeal.
This court proceeding, of course, would be secret. Although that denies the person included on the no-buy list the opportunity to rebut the attorney general's evidence, we do the same thing every day with search warrants and wiretaps for criminal suspects. Our right to bear arms is no more fundamental than our right to privacy, and treating them similarly can help keep us safer from terrorists.For maximum secrecy, Congress could assign these probable cause determinations to the jurisdiction of the existing Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. The judges on this court have a deep understanding of the nation's national security threats.
Winkler argued in a 2006 Huffington Post article that the NSA mass surveillance program was illegal because President George W. Bush abused and ignored the FISA court. The same court that was so easily abused by the administration for mass surveillance will apparently be entirely trustworthy when it comes to taking second amendment rights.
Near the end of the article, Winkler points out his plan to subject all of America to the secret court probably wouldn't stop a terrorist, anyway.
"With over 300 million guns in America and private gun sales allowed with no background check whatsoever, a determined terrorist will most likely still be able to obtain guns," he wrote. "Yet the easiest, most convenient way to buy guns -- from a gun store, with the best prices and selection, like the one where the Orlando attacker bought his guns -- wouldn't be available."
I think it’s time to secretly whisk NYT Editorialists away to secret courts and condemn them to punishments that we won’t tell what they are, until the punishment is executed.
I mean, if we’re gonna go full-on STASI, let’s go all the way.
Of Course. Why wasn’t the no-buy rule thought of before? Because you know, gang-bangers can’t buy firearms in Chicago because it’s illegal.
Then they should also have a secret court to remove publishing rights from any reporter deemed to be “stirring the citizenry” with anti-constitutional clap-trap such as this BS!
I’m pretty sure that terrorists are more interested in the selection available rather than the prices.
So the way to stop muslim terrorism is to take away the Second Amendment rights of US citizens. Sounds about right coming from them.
Bravo! Anyone still doubt a President Hillary would be a tyrannical dictator? Secret courts to deprive people selectively of liberty. In America. From a lawyer and scholar. Anyone else see a way forward that is not a sea of blood?
HAHAHA - we basically all had the same thought. I should have read down before posting.
+1
If Congress did that would be the end of the current Congress. Civil War, and the communists left, most of the MSM, and Hollywood types would experience total destruction.
PRIOR RESTRAINT!
UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
to avoid your bloodshed scenerio,
we have to defeat Hillary
So, you think this isn’t a problem because GOP controls both houses?
Think about that before you decided not to vote this November.
Historically, the U.S. has committed worse massacres including the one at Wounded Knee South Dakota in 1890. (Which was much larger, as Rush noted today.) So Orlando would be okay, according to the New York Times way of thinking?
Omar Mateen was a FL licensed security officer. Believing that any of the leftists' proposals would have prevented this massacre is magical thinking.
“In 2013 I published a follow-up called EXTORTION, which argued that members of Congress from both parties were in the habit of ‘extorting’ campaign contributions and other favors from businesses and out side groups. Money flowing into politics was not just about outside interests trying to ‘bribe’ politicians; politicians were knowing putting outside interests in a position where they had to buy ‘protection’ from them. I also released to the public for the first time the ‘party dues’ lists whereby politicians were required to pay a certain amount of money to their party in order to obtain seats on certain congressional committees. The more important the committee, the more you were expected to pay. I further explained how politicians from both parties were using leadership PACs to feather their own nests, tapping those funds to pay for things that enhanced their own lifestyles”....Clinton Cash page 4
Cold dead hands...
And don’t forget the 60,000 who die every year in car accidents....Bye-bye to our four-wheeled friends.
Interesting addendum to the “Feminization of Western Civilization” issue! Keeper!
They are looking for a civil war.
That just postpones things. The Rats will just slink out of DC while Trump is there knowing their comrades in the MSM prepare the way for them to return.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.