You are right. This is about how stupid and incompetent the “watch list” has become. If the “watch list” was administered competently, by good minds, making sure those on the list didn’t have access to weapons would be a no-brainer.
Unfortunately, as it stands now, administering the “watch list” seems to have been handed to people who flunked the Postal Service test.
We’ve created a shadowy “pre-crime” area. This question was inevitable to come up sooner or later.
We should be asking if America should be operating in this manner. If the person is too dangerous to fly, put him in a rubber room, because he’d also probably bomb a bus, a train, whatever.
However, the due process overhead would be immense; a lot simpler to keep lists.
Gee...Sounds kinda like that "due process" thingy.
I would support it if the bill for the law had a rider requiring all voters to have an ID and citizenship papers.
You are mistaken. This isn't about who aintains the "watch list", or how.
It's about the Fifth Amendment -- a person cannot be deprived of their constitutional rights without due process.
The "no fly" list is technically secret. But, for there to be due process, you must be advised that you are on the list. And there must be a proceeding to place you on the list -- during which you have the right to face your accuser.
Finally, there must be a prescribed procedure by which you can get your name removed from the list if you are innocent. There is none.
The FBI doesn't want the list conflated with gun rights, either. The innability to buy a weapon would tip off a terrorist that they are under suspicion.
Accordingly, the problem isnn't who maintais the list or how sloppily it's done. It is using the no fly list as a source list to deny constitutional rights in the first place.