01-29-2018, 09:41 PM
(01-29-2018, 03:49 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:(01-29-2018, 11:27 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: I see the "well-disciplined militia' clause establishing that people who would never be welcome into a well-disciplined militia for criminality, idiocy, lunacy, or overt disloyalty as potentially banning people from getting, keeping, or bearing arms. A no-fly list is probable cause for denying someone a right to bear arms.
There have been many rights established with and without a justification clause. The justification clause has nothing to do with it.
Again, the definition of militia includes all males of military age, with certain exceptions such as workers at shipyards and post offices that help the war effort by their normal work. It does not exclude felons or the mentally incompetent.
One who is a felon or one mentally incompetent can potentially lose a right, but one should use due process. The no fly list does not use due process, and should not be used to remove rights.
Although I agree due process should be used, my thought remains that in the case of gun rights, we should err on the side of taking them away. Few if any countries allow that "right" to the extent that we in the USA do. A gun confers too much power to kill on the person possessing it. Such a "right" needs to be qualified even more than are other rights, which are also qualified by law. A person on a no fly list was placed there for a reason. It is usually not arbitrary. I wouldn't mind though, if better due processing was used to draw up the no fly list, if it's believed that this process is too arbitrary. A few people have been put on that list just because they are political radicals of some sort.