[A]ll of us—government, law enforcement, communities, faith leaders—need to work together to prevent people from falling victim to these hateful ideologies....I see the proposal to try to keep guns out of the hands of "dangerous people," but what's the proposal for keeping the ideas that make them dangerous out of their heads? We "need to work together to prevent people from falling victim to these hateful ideologies," but what does this work consist of and how on earth could we do it "together"?
It’s another tragic reminder that here in America it’s way too easy for dangerous people to get their hands on a gun. For example, right now, people on the No-Fly list can walk into a store and buy a gun. That is insane....
And what's with the passivity — the idea that these murderers "were radicalized" and that people "fall victim" to the ideologies they come to believe? It almost sounds as though Obama invites us to empathize with the terrorists, to see them as victims of their own thinking processes. A more Obama-friendly way to put that is to say that our focus should be on the larger enterprise that is winning converts. And yet it doesn't seem aimed at that larger enterprise, because he says "need to work together to prevent people from falling victim," as if he's envisioning us reaching out to the potential terrorists among us, enfolding them in neighborly love.
ADDED: I'm getting a CNN breaking news email at 6:16 Saturday night saying: "President Obama will deliver an Oval Office address at 8 p.m. ET on Sunday about terror threats in the wake of the San Bernardino shootings." I guess the weekly address has been deemed inadequate.
পোস্টগুলি
১৬৭টি মন্তব্য:
Empty words from the Muslim in chief.
Obama is an enemy of freedom and decency.
Anyone who supports him is an enemy of freedom and decency.
He's still trying to work the hope-n-change angle. There might be a few women still listening to their boyfriend.
Just renewed my NRA membership. They're throwing in a nifty free duffel/gym bag as a bonus if you renew today.
'...Just like those horrible bitter clingers and all the violent racists who refused to vote for me.'
More mush from the faculty lounge.
What's insane is that the no-fly list is maintained by name, not by identity, so toddlers have been barred from flying because their parents accidentally named them the same as someone legitimately on the no-fly list.
That's assuming that the people placed on the no-fly list are there legitimately in the first place. Given Janet Napolitano's rhetoric I can picture people being placed on the list for no good reason.
If Barack Obama wants us to believe that he can keep guns out of the hands of terrorists while protecting the rights of ordinary citizens, he can start with the gangs in Chicago. I rather doubt that any gang members have legitimately acquired their firearms, so Obama and his good buddy Rahm Emanuel can start by disarming the Chicago gang-bangers.
Seems fair to me.
"It’s another tragic reminder that here in America it’s way too easy for dangerous people to get their hands on a gun. For example, right now, people on the No-Fly list can walk into a store and buy a gun."
We all know Obama considers Americans who disagree with him dangerous. And we also know Obama would make a pointed effort not to "profile" Muslims. He was told by two governments the Tsarnarevs were dangerous and he didn't do anything about them. They flew back to the ME before blowing up the marathon finish. Before the investigation is over we will know more about the woman who shot up SB. The media can't hide it. I am positive there are markers there.
In the end the only people who would be put on that list are political opponents of Obama here in the US. He created ISIS and tried to halt efforts to destroy it. His administration blocked most of the Air Force's planned bombing runs on ISIS over the last couple years.
At some point you people will have to admit Obama is just on the other side.
Obama is a moron or an ignorant robot that refuses to learn, if it doesn't fit his narrative, it simply does not compute.
Maybe we could go back in time and help Obama think more like people who think differently from himself.
The magic shoe of cobbled-together Leftish coalitions is looking more like the old, ratty boot it's always been.
Might have helped prevent certain dangers were facing now.
The American people need to realize that if Obama would have half-way been doing his job for the past seven years there would have been no Paris or San Bernadino killings.
Obama had the chance to crush ISIS in its infancy and he refused to do so.
He wasn't interested in war, but the jihadists sure were.
Obama is a complete embarrassment. Total failure.
Electing Hillary will be more of the same. She just doesn't play golf but is historic in her own way.
"And what's with the passivity — the idea that these murderers "were radicalized" and that people "fall victim" to the ideologies they come to believe?"
Isn't denial of personal responsibility a characteristic of the leftist viewpoint? Everything is pathology and therapy, there's no room for the exercise of free will mor any real consequence for it.
it would underscore a threat we’ve been focused on for years
Really?
The failure to see this as a war of ideas is a very basic failing.
It's like trying to win the Cold War while calling Communism a noble economic philosophy.
It's kind of like, you know, they contracted Cancer and we need to work together to find a cure. There is one difference where the analogy breaks down. We declared 'War' on Cancer.
... people succumbing to violent extremist ideologies
Only one hateful ideology comes to mind.
The two attackers had their consciousness raised by a skillful community organizer. Obama's just giving the guy props.
What is the no fly list? What's the criteria to get on it? Who's on it? Why are they on it? If mistakenly on it, what's the procedure to get off of it. Do you know you're on it other than when you try to fly? How many are on it in error? How many are on it because they were somehow confused with another person? The 4 year old that was on the list, we all agree he shouldnt be able to buy a gun, being 4 and all. But was he too unsafe to fly? How about Ted Kennedy? I agree he shouldnt have been able to buy a Buick, much less a gun. But was he too dangerous to fly? I'm sure real reporters asked these questions, I just need to find the transcript.
He is so wrong for the times and for the people. But he worked well for the people who propped him up to 'win' both times.
"It’s another tragic reminder that here in America it’s way too easy for dangerous people to get their hands on a gun,"
Like the Police in Chicago? Are we going to have background checks and psych evals for them?
Islamic terror is not our nation's greatest threat. Let's not overreact.
We must take away a constitutional right without due process from anyone on the terror watch list.
Derbyshire and Steyn say that the 2nd generation is the camel that follows the nose under the tent.
Derbyshire thinks that they're from a low-IQ population and so don't make it well in a Western society, and rebel. Islam offers the course of action. Kill everybody.
I think that it's that Islam doesn't teach good character as something to aspire to instead.
Good character beats IQ, and makes it irrelevant.
[A]ll of us—government, law enforcement, communities, faith leaders—need to work together to prevent people from falling victim to these hateful ideologies....
What have YOU done with the Saudis, the state sponsor of hateful ideologies?
San Bernardino needs to be seen in the context of the argument over admitting Syrian refugees. Both of these killers passed the serious and stringent vetting process that Obama assures us will prevent any terrorists from being admitted along with legitimate refugees. The difference: We had a lot more information about these two terrorists than we will have about virtually any of the refugees from Syria.
Would taking the guns away from the frontier settlers have deterred the Indians from attacking them?
Or vice versa?
After 7 years of Obama rhetoric and his appalling cabinet appointee disasters, the entire nation should laugh and shun him and anyone attached to him. He is a putz. Obama does not care about our safety. He cares about scoring political points against HIS enemies.
The guns the shooters used in San Bernadino were illegal under California State law. That should have stopped the attacks right there. They must be some really special murderers who are capable of disobeying laws.
Obama should just come out openly as a Muslim. Congress couldn't do anything about it, and the Democrats would defend him even more vociferously than they do now.
"but what's the proposal for keeping the ideas that make them dangerous out of their heads"
I imagine this is the part where the Left immediately segues into their desire to make "hate speech" illegal (hate speech of course being all speech they disagree with).
I'd recommend setting some serious reader to work finding something good in Islam and slanting its taught interpretation what way.
A nice standard is what Levinas did for Judiasm and Christianity in "Difficult Freedom."
Show how, in a Western culture, it makes actual sense.
but what's the proposal for keeping the ideas that make them dangerous out of their heads? We "need to work together to prevent people from falling victim to these hateful ideologies," but what does this work consist of and how on earth could we do it "together"?
If you can't see how they're doing it, you're probably falling victim to it in one way or another.
Gun control is a smokescreen, just like the Syrian refugees debate was a smokescreen.
Any time there's a conspicuous failure in this administration, they try to start a huge, emotional debate about a policy that has little chance of passing. It lets their side vent all their anger about the failed policy, but takes attention away from the failure itself.
The wife in this case appears to have passed through "rigorous vetting" by writing the wrong address on a form. Maybe we should talk about that vetting process a little bit? It was the center of a huge debate after the last tragedy, which was just a couple of weeks ago.
If gun control worked, they wouldn't be pushing it. If gun control could pass, they wouldn't be pushing it. If gun control was supposed to work, it would still have been a conspicuous failure in this case because the guns used were illegally purchased and illegally modified. Gun control is not the debate we should be having right now.
So the "no-fly list" becomes a mechanism for the government to deprive people it doesn't like of constitutional rights and protections, without oversight or recourse.
Mullah Obama is right about the Muslim Prophecy victimizing people's minds with a Free Pass to raid infidels for loot and then cut off their heads where a free mind, or worse yeta mind renewed by Christ, lurks.
The modern influence is the use guns instead of a sword. So the Mullah wants all to go back to cutting off heads of infidels with swords.
But take courage. Fearless Leader saysClimate Change will raise sea levels and flood the guns until they are all too rusty and their Ammo is wet.
I used to think Obama was just incompetent.
Now I think he's deranged.
Would Ann address the legal aspects of denying a constitutional right to a citizen based upon an arbitrary No-fly list?
Screw the no fly no gun list. How about deporting their asses back to whatever shit hole they climbed out of?
You don't have a constitutional right to immigrate.
Ironically, this actually is the rare policy that Obama could implement unilaterally through "prosecutorial discretion" simply by indicting the terror suspects. Felony charges = can't buy guns.
What's that you say? Not enough evidence for an indictment? Innocent people might have their rights taken away for no good reason? Do go on.
Of course, they were "radicalized". Just like Vladamir Lenin was "radicalized". As Prof. Althouse points out, what's with the passive voice here? No, in this case above all, both Sayed Farook & Tashfeen Malik had ample opportunity to live their lives anonymously & in peace in the USA. Malik could have used her husband's authority as an excuse to step outside of the Islamicism of her past. "Oh, father, I want to follow jihad, but my American husband forbids it, & says the baby is my first moral responsibility now. He is right. According to sharia law, I cannot disobey my husband & I am responsible for the nurture of my child." But, no, she & they didn't. She walked away from her 18 month old child to murder & in certainty that she wouldn't be coming back.
Do you want to know what I think the FBI will find when they investigate this: Malik "radicalized" Farook. He was an all-American boy until he married the Pakistani nutjob. But then again, what "moderate" Muslim today would trust a Pakistani woman who willingly spent time in Saudi Arabia? Seems like a big bright red warning flag to me.
"the danger of people succumbing to violent extremist ideologies"
Maybe we should be more picky about letting in people who are susceptible to those ideologies? Seems easier than trying to fix them up after they're here, or always walking on eggshells so as not to trigger Sudden Jihad Syndrome. Just a thought.
The fact that the terror watch list proposal is clearly illegal pales next to the fact that it is opposed by Republicans. When confronted by conspicuous, repeated failure, the single most important message to put out is "I wanted to do something, but they wouldn't let me!"
The last thing you want is a proposal that would work or could pass, because that would take away your excuse for failure.
"It's entirely possible..." Noooo really? This is what passes for Presidential leadership.
" Hey! That was some massacre out in San Bernardino the other day, wasn't it. Let me tell you about my gun control measures instead."
And if so, it would underscore a threat we’ve been focused on for years—the danger of people succumbing to... climate change.
When you're a community organizer, everyone looks like a victim. Hammer, nails etc etc
The Israeli's I know, and work with, told me years ago that they considered obama a muslim. if not in fact, then by his actions, speeches. particularly his clear dislike for Israel. Four friends isn't a large sample. But I have listened to friends of theirs who come here for the wind surfing, kite surfing, and they say the same thing.
The other thing they always say is," when the fuck are you Americans going to realize you are at war, and have been, for decades. Are you so stupid you can't even say it out loud in the press, or on tv. "?
Half the country can't decide if the term domestic terrorist, workplace violence, misguided individuals, applies here.
Yet they can decide in a heartbeat that the real enemy is the tea party, the republican party, the NRA. or white guys like me.
Obama should look in the mirror for a picture of someone trapped by their own thought processes. Somehow, it was easy to see the PP shooter as a terrorist when he violated the holy of holies of the left, but he is unable to bring himself to call out these shooters as terrorists, to call what they did the evil that it is.
"were radicalized" Beware of politicians' use of the passive voice. There is only one purpose.
President: "...that is insane."
Yes it is. Insanity, not guns, is the problem.
In a 2011 Pew survey, 21% of American Muslims said that there is a great deal or a fair amount of support for extremism among Muslims living in the US.
http://www.people-press.org/2011/08/30/a-portrait-of-muslim-americans/
I wonder what the same number for Christians would be?
One of the weird things about the media is that they will print articles with headlines like "Most Muslims reject extremism", and when you look at the article, you can't help but notice that the number of Muslims who support things like death for apostates is huge.
B said...
Islamic terror is not our nation's greatest threat. Let's not overreact.
We must (sic) take away a constitutional right without due process from anyone on the terror watch list.
A faithful adherent of the one true religion, guns everywhere.
Barack Obama: "Islam is a religion of peace." Bullshit. The entire official and operational position of his administration is that "real" Muslims cannot possibly be terrorists, which is utterly delusional. Three examples amongst many.
I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their fingers! (Surah 8:12)
Those that make war against Allah and His apostle and spread disorder in the land shall be put to death or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, and be banished from the country. . . That is the punishment decreed by Allah. (Surah 5:33-38)
When the apostle heard what [Asma bint Marwan] had said [criticizing him], he said, “Who will rid me of Marwan’s daughter?” ‘Umar b. ‘Adiy al-Khatmi who was with him heard him, and that very night he went to her house and killed her. In the morning he came to the apostle and told him what he had done and he said, “You have helped Allah and His apostle, O ‘Umayr!” When he asked if he would have to bear any evil consequences the apostle said, “Two goats won’t butt their heads about her,” so ‘Umayr went back to his people. (Ishaq, para 996)
A more Obama-friendly way to put that is to say that our focus should on the larger enterprise that is winning converts.
But these people are already once converted by their own governments and state actors. Much of the problem in the ME Muslim countries is the lack of educated middle class. The gap between the rich and the peasants is far and wide. The rich and the royals use the peasants to do their dirty work and keep them preoccupied. The peasants are already once converted to carry out the dirty missions of their overlords. And what better way for the overlords to divert the attention of their peasants to outside forces who would otherwise pick picthforks and knives and run toward them? Focus on the state actors if you want to reform. But it is a case of fox guarding the hen house, isn't it?
There was a comment here on the post about Trump and his assertion that he saw people celebrating; the comment alluded to the commenter standing in line for ice cream and overhearing the guy in front saying he ran out of champagne the previous night (the night of 9/11) and the commneter followed the guy and saw him get into a flashy BMW, (I hope I am paraphrasing the commenter with some accuracy). So the rich guys celebrate with champagne and the peasants do their dirty work.
"so Obama and his good buddy Rahm Emanuel can start by disarming the Chicago gang-bangers."
Rahm just has them shot dead in the street, and Obama's FBI helps keep it under wraps.
> And what's with the passivity
Isn't it the view of the left that people are determined by their environment and class? Free will and good and evil are irrelevant myths to the lefty thinker.
Well at least Obama handled that 2008 financial crisis. Right? RIGHT?
"And yet it doesn't seem aimed at that larger enterprise"
Faux puzzlement, right? Shorter post: bullshitter bullshits. I know you are into words and everything, and I know you think you are pretty tough parser of other people's language, and we appreciate that, we do, but at some point even a law prof has to face reality.
"Jason said...
I used to think Obama was just incompetent.
Now I think he's deranged."
Nope, neither. This is calculated. He is simply evil. He hates America for what it is. He plans to take it down.
That "passivity" with which Imam Obama speaks was a feature back in 2008 when all the betters were dreaming of a "fundamentally changed" America. Oh my gosh, he is so calm, controlled, smart, thoughtful, nuanced, pragmatic, etc,.....! No Drama Obama, they called him. Some saw him as Spock. He is historic! None more brilliant! Now the passivity seems like he don't give a shit and hopes he can escape before a big one comes along.
I voted for McCain.
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam."
So why doesn't Obama try radicalizing everyone with American Exceptionalism? Because he doesn't believe in it.
A more Obama-friendly way to put that is to say that our focus should on the larger enterprise that is winning converts. And yet it doesn't seem aimed at that larger enterprise, because he says "need to work together to prevent people from falling victim," as if he's envisioning us reaching out to the potential terrorists among us, enfolding them in neighborly love."
Dylan Roof. He spent over an hour in church with warm,welcoming parishioners and then he murdered them. So much for winning hearts and minds.
Funny thing about gun control advocates, they believe if whatever measures they advocate are employed the problem will go away but using the same conceptual restrictions for other problems like illegal immigration, welfare scamming and subsidizing social pathology's why that's fascist and unworkable.
If a couple of Muslims going on a murder spree doesn't really say anything about Islam, how can the rare case of a cop shooting an unarmed Black man say anything about racism in America?
To the liberal mind everyone is passive, simply a vessel to fill up with the goodness of massive government.
ARMeltdown (to a commenter referencing constitutional rights): "A faithful adherent of the one true religion, guns everywhere."
If there is one "positive" outcome to the events of the last 7 years of obambi's administration it is this:
Clarity.
We've always known that the modern left in the wsst never believed anything they lectured us about related to constitutional rights, due process, freedom, etc.
That has been made perfectly clear by the lefts unceasing and invariable support for all totalitarian enemies of the United States as well as their continuous attacks on the institutions of the west.
But with the election of Obama and the dems taking complete control of the federal govt in Jan of 2009, it was clear that the left really believed, really believed, that they had finally imported a sufficient number of 3rd world mentalities to ensure perpetual control of the levers of govt.
And that's when the masks truly came off, all the way, for the first time across the dem/leftist/liberal spectrum (which includes 95% of the establishment media "news" people).
Times of crises, where the reality of what's happening can no longer be denied or glossed over, always yield such clarity when you really find out what people are all about.
Guess what?
Our leftists are just like every other leftist going back to before the French Revolution.
What we have is the complete and total validation, without exception, of the premise underlying "Fen's Law": The left does not, and has never, really believed a single thing that they lecture the rest of us about.
This truth is stark and irrefutable.
Take our guns, our speech and our freedoms while your beloved "radicalized" muslims strike all other peoples across the globe, slice heads off of thousands on the beaches, shoot up the great cities of the west, murder those exercising their free speech values, arm children for battle, enslave as sex slaves the children of Christians and others across the globe, throw the only democracy in the Middle East to the butchers who wish to return us to the 7th century, and on and on and on?
I think not.
If you want them, I'm afraid you'll have to come and get them.
Of course, there will always be small people like the garages of the world who fall in line for totalitarianism and are happy to act as spies and henchmen for such regimes.
But in this nation, and perhaps, perhaps, still in Europe, there are enough who will stand athwart this "pathway" to a muslim dominated future and shout "stop".
One thing is for sure: We are going to find out because the other side is going to force us to choose.
So choose.
He's treating radical Islamic terrorists as if they were a community tormented by micro aggressions.
ARM: "A faithful adherent of the one true religion, guns everywhere."
Sigh, I've been resisting the urge to join the NRA, but people like ARM and the emotional garbarge from commentators for The Volokh Conspiracy: Can Americans be denied Second Amendment rights because the Attorney General suspects they’re terrorists? are wearing me down little by little.
"It is entirely possible that these two attackers were radicalized to commit this act of terror."
"And if so, it would underscore a threat we’ve been focused on for years—the danger of people succumbing to violent extremist ideologies," says President Obama in his weekly address.
As opposed to "Islam", which is a plain-old, regular, pacifist, civilized ideology. Especially the central pillar of jihad.
Thanks for the lesson on Islamic theology, Obama! I always appreciate it when Barack waxes profound and recondite on simple issues that anyone taking a college course can learn.
All of America can use a stern talking-down to or lecture on moral and religious principles the way only B.O. can do it. We, the meager voters and taxpayers, are so grateful.
What's next, Obamba? A weekly "Lessons of Islam" series from you?
Guns everywhere? Did u poll your neighbors?
So now The Constitution is a religion?
rhhardin said...
"Derbyshire thinks that they're from a low-IQ population and so don't make it well in a Western society, and rebel. Islam offers the course of action. Kill everybody.
I think that it's that Islam doesn't teach good character as something to aspire to instead."
One can't help but notice, that you don't need Muslim parents to become a "radical Islamist", although it helps. People become Muslims for the same reason they become Crips and Bloods and Mafiosi and Hells Angels. A gangster ideology offers material rewards and social esteem in return for loyalty to the in-group and a willingness to use violence against outsiders.
Obama asserts it is "our" responsibility to keep people from "succumbing" to an extremist ideology?
Ok, then, let's start with public colleges and universities - strip them of all the anti-Western, multi-cultural, pro-segregation-via-identity crap. No group/dorm/studies based on racial/sex identity. No "blame whitey" courses. Re-institute Core courses in Western Civilization. Promote E Pluribus Unim, melting pot, Americanism.
Then promote same in K-12 and reviving "Good Citizenship" grading in schools.
Anyone think Barry and friends would be cool with that?
That the East Coast Elite, from Barry to NYTimes, feel they know better how to run the lives of those of us who either live or work in San Berdo is beyond infuriating.
(I work for SB county, different department from the Islamist terrorist)
ARM
what is your solution to the problem that 300,000,000 guns in the hands of 80,000,000 people present? Strict gun laws like California? Illinois? Do you believe that a person bent on murder, a capital crime, gives much thought to the legality of murder or the the chance she might be caught violating a gun law?
It is clearly comfortable to snark about the gun "culture" but what solution do you support? Or are we happy to give ourselves hugs for being in favor of "common sense" gun laws and other bromides? Or, talk.
Why the passive voice? It's because Obama is a well-armed rhetorician. You name it -- bifurcation, straw men, equivocation, circular reasoning, onus probandi, ergo decedo, argumentum ad infinitum, -- he's got it in his arsenal. He delivers this weapons in scholarly measured tones (assuming there's a working teleprompter within eyeshot, off the cuff Obama's speaking style reveals what he is, the perpetually stoned sophomore) which confound the weak-minded like a run-of-the-mill Jedi trick.
It's because passivity is Obama's comfort zone. This is why he's never done anything with that supposed highfalutin law degree of his. Obama has never argued a court case more consequential than a parking violation because he fears confrontation with anyone on or above his level of authority. He'll beat down with relish, but he cowers when a real challenge appears.
So the Constitution is supposed to be "living" yet this guy can't change a damn thing. Heck of a job Valerie!
Would Ann address the legal aspects of denying a constitutional right to a citizen based upon an arbitrary No-fly list?
Since Ann hasn't responded yet, I will endeavor to take a whack at answering this.
The right to keep and bear arms under the 2nd Amdt, thanks to the Heller case, is an individual, fundamental right, and, as a result, government measures to curtail it must survive increased scrutiny, which means intermediate or strict scrutiny, instead of the usual rational basis/relationship level of scrutiny (which the govt. rarely loses on). Intermediate scrutiny requires that the object of the govt. measure be an important govt. measure, and in the case of strict scrutiny, the measure must be a compelling govt. measure. Protecting American lives would probably be an adequate justification under either standard. But, then the govt. measure must be least restrictive means, and it will almost assuredly fail here. Govt. could do so many things that would make this measure more narrowly tailored - such as only putting people on the list where there is probable cause that they might be terrorists. And, beyond that, again thanks to Heller and McDonald, we know that the 2nd Amdt. right to keep and bear arms is an individual right, and this means that any remedy that infringes this right must be justified on an individual basis, as well as on a class basis. So, even if a lot of Bruce Haydens were terrorists, the govt. would have to show that this Bruce Hayden was dangerous. (And, remember, the no-fly-list is a list of names, and not identities - if they can deprive someone their 2nd Amdt. rights based solely on their name, which is shared by others, then it is unconstitutional).
I should note that pretty much everyone who has pushed this nonsense knows better. They almost all supposedly are or at least were attorneys, and levels of Constitutional scrutiny are tested on the bar exam. And, have been for a long time. They could play dumb before Heller, but it has been the law of the land for 7 years now, and should be assumed to know its main determinations, including that the 2nd Amdt right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right, and that it is an individual right. I am in particular talking about President Obama, AG Lynch, and former Sec. of State Hillary! Clinton. They know better, and should be embarrassed to be pretending to the contrary.
What a lot of crap from Obama. Only evil hateful people DECIDE to participate in violent extremist ideologies. These murderers are not in any way whatsoever, victims. Is Obama claiming that good, innocent people are brainwashed to kill?
Obama sympathizes with radical islam.
I'm an extremist, yet I feel no urge to shoot anyone. (Except maybe in self-defense or in the tradition of Lexingtonm and Concord--say, if Big Brother's stormtroopers tried to steal my guns. But hopefully it wouldn't come to that.) I'm an extremist for liberty. I like to give this homey example: if you tried to poke me in the eyes one hundred times, I would resist you, to the best of my ability, one hundred times. No matter what excuse, superstition or shibbolteth you gave me to justify poking me in the eyes--whether for "the Good of the Country," to help the Poor, to help the Rich, because God told you to, etc., etc.--I would never consent to your "right" to poke me in the eyes.
A "moderate" would let you poke him in the eyes, say, fifty out of hundred times, if you convinced him it was for the Common Good or some such shibboleth.
It's all about victimhood with the nation's first affirmative action president. President of the Harvard Law Review yet never published an academic piece before or since. Adjunct (or whatever) at University of Chicago Law School for 12 years, holding roughly the same position as Judges Posner and Easterbrook (check them out, they were kinda busy during that period), yet no academic output while holding that spot. Just a couple of "autobiographies" that differ greatly from the few writing samples we have ever seen of our most brilliant President ever and we later found out contained "composite characters." (We only discovered this when someone finally did a little research and figured out some of the people he wrote about could not have existed, i.e. when he got caught)
Then he was elected president due to constructive affirmative action. He has been inhabitating space above his pay grade his entire career with only the moral cowardice of his contemporaries in the academy and the partisan media keeping him afloat.
ARM, that is just snark and unworthy.
Obama is of course just deflecting attention from some of the more embarrassing aspects of recent events. His administration has a lot to apologize for.
Still, there are indeed things American Muslims (not the US government) can do to change their image. I don't know why they are such absolute failures at public relations. Their response, consistently, is a combination of huffy denial and officially sanctioned veiled threats against their critics.
This is a losing approach.
There are actually Muslim traditions that can work in their favor. Consider for instance Ivo Andrics' novel "The Bridge on the Drina". The bridge, protagonist of the story, was an act of charity, benefiting all, not just Moslems, supported by a religious foundation, typical of Muslim practice of the day. Islam had Andrew Carnagies in spades. This can work. American Jews for instance, starting over a century ago, founded charity hospitals that treated their rather hostile urban neighbors, Irish and Italians. It's hard to despise the people who are helping granny. I suspect that the rather high esteem which Jews enjoy in the US is partly the result of decades of charitable works.
One interesting sort of traditional Muslim public charity - free coffee. Imagine a series of Muslim religious foundation-run free coffee booths in major cities.
Obama could be said to be laying a predicate for denying free speech without due process to those on secret government lists.
If a primary danger is "falling victim" to an ideology, and we accept tossing out the Fifth amendment on the basis of being on a list, by what argument do we stop the government from similarly disregarding the First.
I'd be less concerned if the campus nonsense hadn't made it clear the political Left has as little regard for the First Amendment as they do for the Fifth.
Zach wrote -
"Gun control is a smokescreen, just like the Syrian refugees debate was a smokescreen.
Any time there's a conspicuous failure in this administration, they try to start a huge, emotional debate about a policy that has little chance of passing. It lets their side vent all their anger about the failed policy, but takes attention away from the failure itself."
That's a great observation. I would only add that it diverts the other side as well; either like me sputtering about Obama et al. denying the obvious or playing moral defence against the smokscreen.
Brilliant in its own sick way.
At the center of the Christian religion is the image of Christ crucified.
At the center of the Muslim religion is the idea of a warrior with a sword.
And as for changing Muslim minds -
Again, consider the effect of practice on the mind. The reason for religious ritual is to change minds and direct them as desired. People end up thinking as they do as much as doing as they think.
Charity may be the key, not charity to Muslims but charity BY Muslims. We can't make them harmless by being good to them, probably, but they can make themselves harmless by being good to us. Charity is indeed a Muslim tradition. They have something to build on and change the vibe in their own society.
Assimilation undermines the purpose of class diversity schemes. Mr. Pro-choice in Chief denies the prerequisites for liberty and embraces the left-wing ideologies, including the Islamic religion marred by left-wing ideology, that are spread through coercion and force.
Let's put Lois Lerner in charge of the No-fly list.
My guess is people who are proposing the No-fly "loophole" closure really don't care if people are unfairly denied guns. Which, of course, makes them susceptible to over-listing people. After all, that would just get more guns off the street.
But think about how little the left cares about Lois Lerner and the IRS, about the "John Doe" investigation, about reading Petraeus's emails with his mistress, about the Secret Service releasing information about a US Congressman to try to embarrass him.
They really seem not to care about deliberate, unconstitutional targeting.
(I do believe the No Fly list was declared partially unconstitutional, and the government was told it needs to inform people when they are put on the list and how to remove themselves if they believe it is in error) But we'll see if the Administration follows that order.
Oh, and yes, "Has been radicalized" is funny to me like "Fallen in with a bad crowd".
Nobody is ever the bad crowd, nobody radicalizes himself. It all just falls out of the sky, onto their heads.
Gun control is an appropriate response to San Bernardino in the same way that air traffic control was an appropriate response to 9/11.
"A faithful adherent of the one true religion, guns everywhere."
No, you are the faithful adherent of a religion, Progressivism.
Progressives gave us Prohibition, no matter how hard the left tries to blame Republican "Puritans."
We now see the new age Puritans trying to end freedom of speech.
Gun confiscation is another item of their (your) agenda. Guns were ignored in this country until the 1960s brought the Progressives to power. Since then, it has been a big item and lots of hot air is expelled trying to create a "crisis" of gun ownership. The crisis is with criminals, many created in the black community by the LBJ "War on Poverty" which has destroyed the black lower middle class.
Schools had rifle teams in the 1950s. My first gun was given to me when I was 9. Nobody thought anything about it.
The National Rifle Association conducted shooting matches back to the 1920s. Only after the Progressives went after guns did it become the civil rights organization it is now.
Chicago is the utopia your types want to create. Good luck. You and Progressivism created "the gun culture" by threatening prohibition.
I'm waiting to see atty general Linch, and the ACLU fight for the rights of people who appear by name or dress to be Muslims when gun store owners refuse to sell them guns.
HAROLD ICKES: Mr. President, the Japanese have attacked Pearl Harbor!
FDR: Damned aircraft carriers. It's high-timed we banned them!
Mohammed made his fake religion from Moses Law but he left out an atonement sacrifice, other than shedding the blood of any infidels thatrefuse an offer to join his Band of Raiders.
Legalistic religions including, Christian variations, have an inherent problem from within when the dedicated Law Keepers discover they are getting nothing for their hard trouble other than some pride and a small cut of the loot. Then they instinctively feel driven to condemn others for the silliest and smallest violations of made up corollary laws to the Mosaic Law.
Their sin's guilt and shame burden crushes them until a suicide attack that some one tells them will please the big, bad allah rock kept in Mecca even seems rational to them.
The headline in the Virginia Pilot this morning:
FBI Treating Attack as Act of Terrorism.
How politically correct of them.
What segment of the American people did not immediately think of Muslims committing Jihad when we first heard of the mass murders in San Bernardino? It’s not as if it’s an isolated case. The Religion of Peace is keeping track even if the media is averting its eyes. Or treating it as casually as they do the daily slaughter in the Black neighborhoods of Chicago. Paris, Beirut, Chad, Iraq, Nigeria, Afghanistan, Central African Republic, Yemen .... this list goes on. Over 26,000 attacks since 9/11/2001. In the U.S. we have had a small number of murders and attempted murders. For those who don't remember: SEVEN ISLAMIC TERRORIST ATTACKS IN USA IN SEVEN YEARS FOR OBAMA ADMINISTRATION.
But we were warned by our security services and Islamic terrorist have promised to come to our shores. Yet the Obama Administration and the Liberal establishment continues to tell us how successful they have been and how safe we are. Feel safe now?
The San Bernardino attack is practically a textbook case of Islamic terror.
Mass shooting by hooded killers at a soft target, check.
Indiscriminate killing for purposes inspiring fear or terror, check.
Nothing personal, you're just part of the crowd, check.
The only things missing were shouts of “Allahu Akbar” while their victims were being killed and that none of the killers were named Mohammad.
What passes for immigration policy today is little more than a democrat scam to import voters. They really don't care if they lose the country as long as they get to stay in power.
Let's try this analysis for Obama's failure to communicate. He's a tone deaf simple twit with an absolutely closed mind. He knows what he knows--and not much else penetrates that thick skull. There are none so blind as those who will not see the facts in front of their face.
For years since 9/11 students of Islamic terrorism have been warning about this kind of attack in the U.S. We have seen similar attacks throughout the world, most recently in Paris. The presumed target is always soft and a place where people congregate. Many of the predictions assumed that the target of Muslim Jihadis would be a crowded shopping mall or a sports stadium. So far, many of the devout Muslims who carry out these attacks in the U.S. are not terribly sophisticated, a beheading here, an ambush shooting there. This time they were prepared with guns, ammunition and bombs. They saw an opportunity, a large Christmas party of fellow workers, and decided that this was good enough for a first strike.
It was only the Liberal part of America, represented here by the members of the media, who wanted fervently to place the blame elsewhere, anywhere, except the obvious. Building on the narrative that anti-abortion rhetoric was responsible for the shootings in Denver, some hoped it would be a Planned Parenthood attack, noting that an abortion clinic was only 1.3 miles away. CNN, HuffPo, MSNBC Rush to Connect Shooting to Planned Parenthood.
They “knew” that it had to be some crazed Right Winger. If he were a Tea Party member who supported Donald Trump it would be icing on the cake and a confirmation of their fervent desires. A few got ahead of themselves.
Markos Moulitsas tweeted: Yo GOP, kinda hard to talk about “keeping people safe” when your peeps are shooting up America.— Markos Moulitsas (@markos) December 2, 2015
Geraldo Rivera was also on the case, getting it exactly wrong: The key now is for us to be as outraged by San Bernadino massacre as we would be if Muslim extremists were doing the killing. This is terror — Geraldo Rivera (@GeraldoRivera) December 2, 2015
Despite the fact that California has enacted all of the gun control laws that a Liberal could love, they immediately began blamed guns rather than the people who used them, calling for more gun laws.
Despite his recent visit to Paris, Barack Obama spoke one of his classic lies: “We have a pattern now of mass shootings in this country that has no parallel anywhere else in the world.” (Except for the 26,000 since 9/11. Check out the Religion of Peace website, Barry).
Hillary Clinton blames the guns rather than the killers: I refuse to accept this as normal. We must take action to stop gun violence now. -H https://t.co/SkKglwQycb — Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) December 2, 2015
Socialist Senator and Democrat Presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders also blamed guns: Mass shootings are becoming an almost-everyday occurrence in this country. This sickening and senseless gun violence must stop — Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) December 2, 2015
Geraldo Rivera blamed the Constitution: Mass shooting in San Bernadino California at a Center for the Developmentally Disabled WTF! The 2d Amendment is Stupid!!! Don’t rationalize. — Geraldo Rivera (@GeraldoRivera) December 2, 2015
When it became apparent that the mass murderers were devout Muslims, and one was actually a woman, it became time to attack Christians.
A few examples:
Other countries must have fewer mass shootings because their conservative politicians offer thoughts and prayers more vigorously. — Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) December 2, 2015
At least 14 dead and 14 injured. But lucky for them, the GOP is offering up loads of thoughts and prayers! — Markos Moulitsas (@markos) December 2, 2015
Fuck your prayers. https://t.co/y1nb2Jbxif— timheidecker (@timheidecker) December 2, 2015
And let’s not forget the NY Daily News with its patented patina of Christian hate. It even sickened some Liberals:
GOD ISN’T FIXING THIS: https://t.co/eKUg5f03ec pic.twitter.com/j4gEFg9YtJ — New York Daily News (@NYDailyNews) December 3, 2015
But back in Realville. Most Americans who were not Left wing ideologues knew that this was terrorism in the name of Islam almost from the start. Yet even today, the media and other Liberals will not – or dare not – speak the truth. It's terrorism-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-Islam. And if you disagree, if you take the devout Muslim Jihads at their word you're a bigot, racist, nativist hater who is afraid of women and little children
I've had a visitor the last few weeks, my older sister. She was born in the Netherlands and was a teenager when Hitler invaded her country. She sees many ugly similarities between America and Europe today and those terrible years of occupation. The Netherlands has a long history of classical Liberalism, Libertarian-ism and soft Socialism. America’s Pilgrims first came to the Netherlands from England to freely practice their religion. Soft drugs have been legal in the Netherlands for decades, as is prostitution. Euthanasia is legal and widely practiced while guns are virtually unavailable to everyone except criminals.
The Occupation has shaped my sister's views of history and current events. While stories abound of heroic struggles by extraordinary people against the Nazis in the occupied countries, the vast majority kept silent and tried to get on with their lives. Few spoke out when the Jews were rounded up and sent to their deaths. They knew that speaking the truth was dangerous. In the Netherlands you could be denounced by members of the NSB (National Socialist Beweging) – Dutch Nazi sympathizers. That kind of mind control is evident in Europe and America today. That's evident in the Virginian Pilot headline. People who are not afraid to speak the obvious don't wait for the FBI to call an act of terrorism for what it is. Must we be afraid to say what's paralyzingly obvious until a government agency gives us permission? Or are the editors of the Virginian Pilot really that oblivious to what's going on around them?
You are not going to get rounded up for expressing your support for the Constitution, or for publicly worrying about Muslim terrorism. But the threat is there because the Liberal media will savage you. And if you say it loudly enough, the Obama Justice Department under Loretta Lynch will come calling. So like a good Dutchman under Nazi occupation, it’s best to keep quiet, to keep your head down and hope that this too shall pass.
Except this time, there is no America who will liberate you from the occupation. Because the occupation has come to America.
Trump Takes His Biggest Lead Yet in the Polls. And do you want to know why? Think Obama policy about people who say they want to kill us, and prove they are ready and able.
The president said Thursday that the FBI is exploring whether the attack was an act of terrorism or workplace violence. If only they had waited until after the Christmas Party and shot up the government agency where Farook worked, I'll bet that that's exactly what Team Obama would have called it. Any takers? ARM...? ARM...? Bueller ...?
...to prevent people from falling victim to these hateful ideologies....
That is a very odd way of putting it, isn't it?
It's as it they were just walking down the street and this hateful ideology jumped them. They fell down and it took them over. It wasn't an active act on their part; they were victimized. Passive recipients.
It's the very language we see on campus. It's the very language that CAIR and other Muslim groups tend to use.
Obama clearly sees this much like the left did during the Cold War. At that time we had the anti-communists on one side and the anti anti-communists on the other. The anti anti-communists were worried about our reactions, our policies, things that we did. We had to worry about not helping the hardliners in Moscow. We had to worry about doing things to cause a backlash. It wasn't the actions of the Soviets they were focused on; it was OUR actions.
Obama is more concerned with what we do, how we respond to this threat then he is worried about the threat itself. We must not violate our values, our principles (unless it's the 2nd Amendment apparently). It's not what THEY do; it's what WE do.
Very odd way of looking at the problem.
I wonder what ideology he finds most dangerous these days. He'll never tell us. If asked he will weasel around it. Like he did in this speech.
No ARM, a faithful adherent to the rights guaranteed by our Constitution.
There are several problems with the "no fly" list proposal.
1. The list is incompetently maintained and includes many people who should not be on it.
2. The protection is illusory because most threats are unlikely to be on the list. (See San Bernadino)
3. Those who are on the list can easily get guns illegally. (See Paris.)
4. Due process.
5. Misallocation of resources. (How about more attention to a no immigrate list instead.)
By the way, it is a certainty that the attackers were radicalized. By whom or what is the only question.
So, going on the No-Fly list is a conviction? Where's the appeal process? Where's the discovery process by the accused? Where's the disclosure of who's on the list? Guilty until proven innocent seems to be a concept Mr. Obama embraces. He should turn in his law license.
@ARM, make a show of good faith. Disarm the inner city gangs and MS-13.
"For example, right now, people on the No-Fly list can walk into a store and buy a gun. That is insane...."
This, from a guy with a law degree from Harvard. I am not a lawyer but have heard of "due process". That the top law enforcement officer in the country doesn't give a crap about the law is not comforting. What is terrifying is that hardly anyone seems to care.
I see that Ann has baited the Althouse Hillbillies to come out in full force with this thread. This couple in California is the exact equivalent of Timothy McVeigh. Though obviously McVeigh did ten times the evil in his pursuit of his twisted religious based ideology.
"Mass shootings" include people acting in jutstifiable self-defence wounding/killing perpetrators. Starts and four casualties and does not have to result in fatalities.
And what's with the passivity I'm pretty sure the word passivity was under Obama's picture on the ballot in both 2008 and 2012.
"This time they were prepared with guns, ammunition and bombs."
They were trying hard to imitate the Paris attack. The Islamist tactic is to set off a bomb or a shooting, like they did in Bali. Then, when the first responders show up to treat the wounded, they set off a second bomb to get the responders. This is a tactic used over and over.
In Paris, the plan was for the first suicide bomber to get into the stadium and blow himself up. That would set off a stampede for the exits. When the people ran outside, the other two suicide bomber would blow themselves up. The double bombing tactic.
The first guy could not get in and blew himself up in the entrance. The other two blew themselves up at random when it was apparent the plan was not going to work.
The second bomb was the three pipe bombs wired to the radio controlled car. Richard Fernandez thinks they were staying in radio range of the second bomb to kill the paramedics and cops. It didn't go off. Maybe a loose wire.
Just a typical housewife says the CAIR lawyers.
"And what's with the passivity — the idea that these murderers "were radicalized" and that people "fall victim" to the ideologies they come to believe?"
Obama is trying to absolve both Mr. and Mrs. Farook Jihad of any moral agency for their rampage as well as himself for having to do anything effective about it. That's what the passive voice is for. The French noted this same passivity in his rambling, incoherent response to the ISIS assault on Paris.
Obama only uses the active voice against his domestic political oppon..er "enemies", as he refers to them.
For example, right now, people on the No-Fly list can walk into a store and buy a gun. That is insane....
While he is trying to hide it, he is basically saying that he should get to decide who can buy a gun or not. Pure fiat.
Seriously, if he was so concerned he would have them deported.
You know one way to keep people from being radicalized is to kill the people doing the radicalization. And destroying the stronghold they are doing it from.
We had something called the The German American Bund (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_American_Bund) in the U.S. during the 1930s. The U.S. was able to respond to and contain it. Perhaps we should take a look at how they did that.
Would Ann address the legal aspects of denying a constitutional right to a citizen based upon an arbitrary No-fly list?
Mark Ruffalo was once on the no-fly list, b/c he p*ssed off some Pennsylvania regulators with his opposition to fracking. The Obamarrhoids are at least that petty, and more. They've weaponized the career bureaucracy against their domestic political opposition. If they keep chipping away at Law Enforcement (thank g-d for the current FBI director) and the Flag Ranks (at least some retired are finally speaking out) it's only a matter of time before REAL weapons are deployed.
"Most Muslims reject extremism", and when you look at the article, you can't help but notice that the number of Muslims who support things like death for apostates is huge.
It's not even the attitudes, it's the creation of an unassimilable community (like the ghettos in Paris, London and Moelenbeek or the Somalis in Minnesota) into which active cells can blend and from which the extremists can recruit. The good people who might otherwise step forward are the first terrorized (into silence).
None of this matters to the Obamarrhoids, if it has even occurred to them.
If gun control worked...
Stop-n-frisk was working, and also protecting the communities most at risk from the violence. But Stop-n-frisk is anathema to the Left. And so the bad parts of Chicago are more dangerous than Beirut.
> I see that Ann has baited the Althouse Hillbillies to come out in full force with this thread.
I think Ann is trying to get more liberals in the comments, hence the moderation. It's a lost cause, informed and intelligent liberals are a rare and endangered species.
From District of Columbia v. Heller, the SCt's main gun rights case (written by Scalia):
"Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. See, e.g., Sheldon, in 5 Blume 346; Rawle 123; Pomeroy 152–153; Abbott333. For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues. See, e.g., State v. Chandler, 5 La. Ann., at 489–490; Nunn v. State, 1 Ga., at 251; see generally 2 Kent *340, n. 2; The American Students’ Blackstone 84, n. 11 (G. Chase ed. 1884). Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment , nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."
But how would that apply to people on the No-Fly list? Are these people like felons (they haven't been convicted) or the mentally ill? Are there cases about the mentally ill wanting to buy guns and challenging the characterization of them as mentally ill? I assume legal issue would be mainly about the process that goes into putting someone on the list (and how one gets off it). I haven't researched this. Presumably, people have challenged the no-fly restrictions. I would think that if the process is good enough, the list could be used to cut people off from buying guns, because of that language in Heller.
@moneyrunner Great post. "Except this time, there is no America who will liberate you from the occupation. Because the occupation has come to America."
I read the related post below from another blogger (sorry, do not have the cite, and emphasis is mine) that really struck me, and, similar to your comment, they show how we need to be considering the broader implications of our current divisions and the concomitant dilution of any American culture that binds us:
"...The wheel of the world has turned. The post-WWII order is done. Like the arrangement after Bonaparte was sent to St. Helena this one is done.
Now there are powers, and powers that were powers under the previous settlement. What should be done?
That beats the heck out of me...
We are fortunate that the residual power of the USA is still so great. For if that residual power, the memory of the fear of what the USA can do when it does what few nations ever do - focus - is dismissed as a crazy dream, then billions will die.
Early.
I mean, everyone does die. It's just that a large number will die. Early."
"Though obviously McVeigh did ten times the evil in his pursuit of his twisted religious based ideology."
You do realize that McVeigh was agnostic don't you?
Or is this a parody? The internet has rendered me unable to tell the difference anymore.
Every year there are any number of deeply disturbed people who commit random mass killings in this country. There is probably not much we can do to deter it beyond dumb luck. We should resist the urge of do somethingism. That is an important conservative impulse.
This from the ACLU explains the judge's ruling when the no-fly list was declared unconstitutional, and some of the problems with it at the time (2014)
From the linked article:
"According to media reports, there are more than 20,000 people on the No Fly List. Their only recourse is to file a request with the Department of Homeland Security's Traveler Redress Inquiry Program (DHS TRIP), after which DHS responds with a letter that does not explain why they were denied boarding. The letter does not confirm or deny whether their names remain on the list, and does not indicate whether they can fly.
The ruling from the U.S. District Court in Oregon found, “[W]ithout proper notice and an opportunity to be heard, an individual could be doomed to indefinite placement on the No-Fly List. … [T]he absence of any meaningful procedures to afford Plaintiffs the opportunity to contest their placement on the No-Fly List violates Plaintiffs’ rights to procedural due process.” "
Well, if this is a threat we've been focused on for years, what precisely are we DOING to stop it? It appears that the government is losing the battle!
I don't believe a free government with our Constitution CAN do anything to stop someone being radicalized, so the effort has to turn to stopping radicals who want to commit acts of violence.
He has so lost Main Street.
J. Farmer wrote: "Every year there are any number of deeply disturbed people who commit random mass killings in this country. We should resist the urge of do somethingism. That is an important conservative impulse."
Excellent point, but I believe resisting the urge of do somethingism is also an important liberal impulse.
We have got to resist Utopian-type impulses, because historically, the attempt to perfect human beings and their societies has imploded disastrously.
@Christopher,
For some reason, there is the belief on the Left that Timothy McVeigh was an Identity Christian. It was even there on his wikipedia page, although it's been excised in the latest rendition. The only problem is that, at no time in his life has McVeigh ever said that he was involved in Identity Christianity.
McVeigh was, for most of his life, a very lapsed Catholic, to quote from the wikipedia:
...In a 1996 interview, McVeigh professed belief in "a God", although he said he had "sort of lost touch with" Catholicism and "I never really picked it up, however I do maintain core beliefs."[90] In McVeigh's biography American Terrorist, released in 2002, he stated that he did not believe in a hell and that science is his religion.
He did, however, receive the Last Sacraments before his execution. Maybe he just wanted to cover what bases he could...
But, yes, the idea that McVeigh was religiously motivated lives on in the mythology of the Left.
"I would think that if the process is good enough, the list could be used to cut people off from buying guns, because of that language in Heller."
I would think that the odds of THIS administration developing a "process [that] is good enough" is vanishingly small.
Obama:
"For example, right now, people on the No-Fly list can walk into a store and buy a gun. That is insane."
If it is insane to allow them to buy a gun, it is also insane to allow them to buy knives. Or even pressure cookers. Or to raise children. Or improve their education. Or walk the streets, really.
What does Obama think these two would have done if they hadn't been able to buy a gun legally? Become Quakers out of sheer inability to commit gun violence?
For a one-time "constitutional law professor", Obama never sounds more like an idiot than when he discusses the law and the constitution.
Ann: Presumably, people have challenged the no-fly restrictions. I would think that if the process is good enough, the list could be used to cut people off from buying guns, because of that language in Heller.
If the process was good enough, I agree.
The process, as is, is not remotely good enough. Keep in mind that Senator Ted Kennedy was on the no-fly list. The thing was not designed for the purpose being proposed here and would perform poorly and almost certainly corruptly.
There is also the matter of how one is supposed to challenge being on the list given the secrecy that is supposed to be involved. This was meant for intelligence gathering. It's a rather sensitive thing to be in a public courtroom.
"Every year there are any number of deeply disturbed people who commit random mass killings in this country."
The mass killings that are NOT by Muslims are mostly by paranoid psychotics. The Connecticut school shooting was clearly of this type. The Colorado theater shooting was another. The Tucson shooting that injured the Congresswoman was yet another. Clearly there were family members or multiple members of the public familiar with these people who should have been able to get a legal hearing and some sort of mandatory treatment.
The college student who shot up UC, Santa Barbara had a family who were desperately trying to get help for him. The Tucson shooter had terrorized school students at Pima JC.
There ought to be a way that families or groups who are familiar with these deranged individuals can get treatment of a mandatory type. It should be possible, for example, to make an injectable long acting form of an anti-psychotic drug. Confinement should not be absolutely necessary with the better drugs we have now.
THAT is the shame of these cases, not legal gun owners.
@theranter,
I believe the blogger you are quoting is Richard Fernandez ("Wretchard" of the Belmont Club, a PJM blog).
Blogger Once written, twice... said...
I see that Ann has baited the Althouse Hillbillies to come out in full force with this thread. This couple in California is the exact equivalent of Timothy McVeigh. Though obviously McVeigh did ten times the evil in his pursuit of his twisted religious based ideology.
Sometimes I worry that the Leftists will take over in America and turn it into a Hell hole like they did in Russia, China, Cambodia, North Korea, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, East Germany, Mongolia, and Vietnam. Then I read a comment like "Once Written, Twice . . ." and I realize these guys are as dumb as a box of rocks! No problem!
Christopher said...
You do realize that McVeigh was agnostic don't you?
Or is this a parody? The internet has rendered me unable to tell the difference anymore.
You got it right. "Once written" could be convicted of attempted parody, along with his self-deprecating humor about "hillbillies".
Now I am relieved. Hillbilly Hater has commented. I was beginning to worry about him. But, I am a little confused. Does responding to Hillbilly Hater violate the Althouse Commenter ROE? Is Hillbilly Hater violating the ROE by demeaning and humiliating his lessers? I feel microagressed. Shouldn't comment moderators give those of us who are Hillbillies a trigger warning? I'm feeling a little unsafe.
You realize, of course, that neither Syed Farook or Tashfeen Malik were on the no-fly list.
Richard Fernandez is a Filipino-Australian.
Proud of him, I am.
Kababayan ko 'yan.
I believe that Moslems strongly uphold the ideals of honor and justice, more so than charity. And is it honorable to come here crying "help me" or asking to be treated as equals in citizenship - and then gun down the ones that welcomed you? Is it honorable to shoot women, is that even allowed under Islamic law? Is it honorable to seek out places where no one will have a gun and then go there to shoot people? Is it honorable to drink and watch pornography; and then shoot women; and call that shooting a "jihad" that washes out drink, dope and pornography. Is "jihad" the abandonment of your own mother and child to the mercy of the "infidels". Maybe you're having a little trouble explaining your kind of jihad to your God.
Seyd, isn't it a little strange that you left it to America to keep your relatives, an old women and a baby girl safe? Maybe you knew who we are; maybe you knew what season it is. So why did you shoot us?
Jim Nicholson said...
"Gun control is an appropriate response to San Bernardino in the same way that air traffic control was an appropriate response to 9/11."
Nicely done.
Bruce Hayden-- Ann Althouse
Would either of you care to make a prediction on Peruta vs. San Diego, currently before the Ninth Circuit?
Obama still thinks terrorist will stick to using guns.
Expect more terrorist of ISIS leaning immigrants. Pipe bombs, pressure cooker bombs, car bombs (using fertilizer and diesel), propane cylinder bombs, gasoline (fire) bombs, cars ran into crowds, acid bombs, etc.
Yet nutjobs like Obama still want more Muslim immigrants.
He just might cost you your life if he has his way.
Aren't you happy you voted for him?
Bet those people shot dead at that party are cause no doubt most of them voted for him.
Once written, twice... said... [hush][hide comment]
I see that Ann has baited the Althouse Hillbillies to come out in full force with this thread. This couple in California is the exact equivalent of Timothy McVeigh. Though obviously McVeigh did ten times the evil in his pursuit of his twisted religious based ideology.
Are you pretending to be stupid? McVeigh was revenge for Govt murder at Ruby Ridge. Or was it Waco? How many murdered at Waco? 70? 80? Hard to keep track sometimes. John Kerry would say McVeigh had a legitimate beef..
So..how does this work? Does she get virgins as reward too? That would suck for her. Won't she be jealous of her beau?
Once in 2004, Senator Edward Kennedy went to board a plane and found that he was on the no-fly list. And yet they let him into the Senate chambers! President Obama has to know this.
I suspect that President Obama will use his address tomorrow to announce executive action on gun control. And based on his comments about the no-fly list, it is clear that he is all for arbitrary executive authority trumping not merely the actions of the legislature but even their freedom of movement should an anonymous or incompetent bureaucrat overreach in His name.
For shame.
Thank you Bruce and Ann!
One of the things I see little of is a discussion of oil as a strategic weapon.
Saudi Arabia, Russia, Venezuela, Qatr, Nigeria, other countries have no source of revenue other than oil. Some can sell oil at $40-45/bbl and still make money because production costs are low. Saudi Arabia is one. Most of the others are not.
None of them can fund their national budgets with oil anywhere below $80-100. Some need more. I've seen $120 for Venezuela.
the $40-45 oil we currently have is a good tool but we can do more. Keystone would have helped kill some of the demand for other oil. Allowing the US to export oil and gas would also help. I'd even be OK with a tax on all oil coming in by ship. Say $5/bbl or so. We do not import much oil but every little bit we can reduce it will help. Since Mexican/Canadian imports come by pipe and rail, no tax on them.
Do everything we can to encourage fracking and other drilling. Screw Warren Buffet and his trains, let pipelines be built to carry the Bakken oil and gas more cheaply and with less environmental risk.
Israel is sitting on the Leviathan gas field just off their coast. It might be as big as Saudi Arabia. Let's encourage them to develop it and a pipeline under the Mediterranian to Europe.
If we were willing to, we could starve all these countries causing us problems back to the stone age. Let their economies collapse and let the people eat their politicians.
We have the power to keep people from screwing with us. We should use it more.
John Henry
he says "need to work together to prevent people from falling victim," as if he's envisioning us reaching out to the potential terrorists among us, enfolding them in neighborly love.
Why is it hard to believe he thinks it's our fault terrorists believe and act as they do? It seems a foundational belief exactly as he believes everyone else's anger at America or it's people is their fault.
"need to work together to prevent people from falling victim"
Stage an intervention..
"It is entirely possible that these two attackers were radicalized to commit this act of terror."
This reminds me of a Wittgenstein remark (from On Certainty): "I am sitting with a philosopher in the garden; he says again and again 'I know that that's a tree,' pointing to a tree that is near us. Someone else arrives and hears this, and I tell him: 'This fellow is not insane. We are only doing philosophy.'"
I am trying to figure out what the excuse would be for the things that Obama says.
Any chance O will call for Muslim control tomorrow?
He didn't play golf today meeting with his national security team instead. So, something's definitely up.
He does not want to confront this problem, no way, no how, not now, not ever. Bin Laden's dead and al Qaeda's on the run and that was supposed to be that. He should be collecting his second Nobel right about now, not having to deal with terrorist messes here and abroad, JV teams, Russian aggression, Syrian refugees, radicalized victims of violent extreme ideologies, recalcitrant dictators and the rest of the mess that is our world right now.
If only everyone had read and then followed his script.
I recently joined the NRA. I have never been a member before. I joined specifically because of Hillary Clinton's vilification of them. Also because they fight back. They are not wimps like most so-called conservative\libertarian politicians.
@Static Ping,
The process, as is, is not remotely good enough. Keep in mind that Senator Ted Kennedy was on the no-fly list. The thing was not designed for the purpose being proposed here and would perform poorly and almost certainly corruptly.
Too bad there wasn't a No Waitress Sandwich List they could have put Teddy on.
"Though obviously McVeigh did ten times the evil in his pursuit of his twisted religious based ideology."
I love it when the abusive ones display their ignorance.
John Henry wrote:
Saudi Arabia, Russia, Venezuela, Qatr, Nigeria, other countries have no source of revenue other than oil.
High on the list of stupid things liberals say is 'how did our oil get under their ground?'
Hah! Tee-hee! Smirk!
They have little use for it. They didn't find it, the Brits and the Americans did. The Brits and the Americans also invented the tech to get it out of the ground. It wasn't that long ago that if the Americans, Brits, and the Russians had decided to leave it to them, the Arabs would have had no way of getting it out of the ground.
In return for taking the oil they have no use for, we give them buckets and buckets of money.
"We have the power to keep people from screwing with us. We should use it more. "
I agree. The stupid is strong in the Democrat Party.
Funny how Once Written got owned by the hillbillies in this thread.
Is that desperation I smell?
“In his letter, McVeigh said he was an agnostic but that he would "improvise, adapt and overcome", if it turned out there was an afterlife. "If I'm going to hell," he wrote, "I'm gonna have a lot of company."
That's it in his own words. From other things I read THEN, that I cannot find now, he was sympathetic to Muslims because of his service in the Gulf War. I don't think it ever has been determined who funded the whole operation. There were rumors of Arab involvement. Don't think they were ever seriously pursued- it would destroy the narrative of a right wing whacko. The narrative must be maintained.
No brains, no balls, and no spine make for unhappy set of circumstances. Thanks, BamBam.
"It almost sounds as though Obama invites us to empathize with the terrorists..."
Huh! Almost... but... not quite.
He's probably just smarter than you. Yeah. That's probably it. Almost probably.
I think I would be a great president if I could only figure out the right words to say.
Since President Obama has recognized that "radicalization" is the root cause of the San Bernardino attacks, then wouldn't it make more sense to deny First Amendment rights to people on the no-fly list rather than Second? Because there is no Second Amendment right to pipe bombs.
After all if radicals aren't allowed to talk about radicalism they can hardly radicalize people...
And of course Top Men would be in charge of determining what speech is radical and who can be denied speech, it's not like they'd make mistakes or abuse this power...
Blogger Terry said...
High on the list of stupid things liberals say is 'how did our oil get under their ground?'
I am not one of the ones saying that, though I am a liberal (in the classical sense). It is their oil and we have paid them for it. As we should.
My point is that they have used our money against us. OK, let them keep their oil. Let us, who know how to do this, make oil in particular and energy in general so cheap that they can't get it out of the ground for less than it sells for. Failing that, let us get energy so cheap that, even if they can sell it for more than cost, they can't fund their economies.
Let them choke on their oil.
Plenty of alternatives that actually work that we should be encouraging. Nuclear, cogeneration, coal, OTEC, geothermal others. When I say encourage, I do not mean subsidize. I mean govt should get out of the way. If solar (maybe) and wind (maybe not) can be economical without subsidies, I am fine with them too.
John Henry
Looking forward to to Obama's update on the status of tip of the spear against ISIS being sharpened en Paris.
You know, you (Althouse) voted for Barack Obama in 2007.
Yes, I know you voted for Romney in 2011. But you don't ever get a pass for what you did to America in 2007.
Blogger Gabriel said...
Since President Obama has recognized that "radicalization" is the root cause of the San Bernardino attacks, then wouldn't it make more sense to deny First Amendment rights to people on the no-fly list rather than Second? Because there is no Second Amendment right to pipe bombs.
Speaking of 1st Amendment rights, we hear a lot of talk about banning strong encryption. Isn't encryption a 1st Amendment right? Is speaking in gibberish that only you and the listener can understand any different from speaking in Tibetan or a made up language? Remember the Navaho code talkers in WWII? Do we outlaw the Navaho language?
Several politicians, Diane Feinestein is one I particularly recall, have been making noises about banning or regulating encryption.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Emph added
What say you Ann as a conlaw professor. Do I have a 1st Amendment right to speak in PGP?
PGP is theoretically impossible to break given a long enough key. I think a keylength of 512 bits takes about 10,000 years to break using today's supercomputers. As Bruce Schneir says, "trust the math" Any tablet, phone or PC can easily handle 512 bits today.
John Henry
"They think it's your co-worker," Nick Paez remembered telling his mother.
"That doesn't make sense," she replied. "They were congratulating him for having a baby."
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-san-bernardino-shooting-victims-htmlstory.html
John Henry @8:23 pm
Right you are!
Oil is the source of the Islamists' money and we are paying them to terrorize us. And to make it even worse, we defend them and the sea lanes for free! FREE.
But increase the OPEC oil tariff to $20-25 bbl instead of $5. US oil producers need WTI at $50-60 to make money. If the Saudis crush our oil industry in 2016, it is back to $100-120 oil with OPEC making all of the money.
And completely unforgivable for Obama not to completely destroy the ISIS oil wells. Reason? He didn't want to hurt "the environment." That is the environment in Iraq that supplies the money for them to kill.
The GOP candidate that runs with this will change the race. I publically endorsed Carly and asked her to do this. You can access my blog through Power Line where Paul Mirengroff linked to my tiny blog. Over 4,000 views.
Reuters report from today below. This is why we need North American and energy independence.
RLIN (Reuters) - German Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel urged Saudi Arabia on Sunday to stop supporting religious radicals, amid growing concern among some lawmakers in Berlin about the funding of militant mosques by the world's biggest oil exporter.
The unusual criticism of the Gulf state follows a report by Germany's foreign intelligence agency which suggested that Saudi foreign policy was becoming more "impulsive".
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন