I will not start a politics discussion on facebook part ...

[acroyear70]

I *almost* posted this on FB. I really did. Sanity saved me at the last second.

The ACLU has openly come out against the idea of using the No Fly List as a criteria for any further restrictions against those whose names are on it

Comments

Yeah, you do have a point there...

[motherwell]

The no-fly list is about as evil as the no-vote lists Republicans have been cobbling up since the '90s. Not a good basis for doing what they were originally (allegedly) supposed to do, and certainly not a good basis for anything else you could piggyback onto them. (Oh, look, the spellchecker on my end recognizes "piggyback" as a verb. The deterioration of the English language continues along with that of English-speaking culture...)

[wilhelmina_d]

You're absolutely right. I'm seriously troubled by the direction in which we're going. Now Trump is sounding like he is using Mein Kampf as a guidebook, too.

[silvrwillow]

"On top of that, it is obvious that it would not have even stopped San Bernardino at all, as 1) neither shooter was on the list, and 2) they weren't the ones who purchased (from a store) the applicable weapons in the first place, so they never would have been detected by such a check even if they were on that list.

When a proposed solution doesn't actually solve the problem, and it wouldn't solve the problem of ANY of *big* events of the last few years, either because these types of weapons weren't involved, or they weren't on the no-fly list, then it is not a solution, it is rotten theater."

Yes. This. It's applicable to several very similar issues, and that's all I'm going to say about *that*.