Up | February 17, 2013
>>> i think the most simple thing we can do and we have to make this a number one issue as a test vote and then take it into the election that is if you're on the no-fly list because you're known as maybe a possible terrorist you cannot buy a handgun in america.
>> that's rahm emanuel in 2007 calling for what's been known in gun safety circles as a no-fly, no-buy policy. there's bills introduced in congress and on a certain level it makes sense. if you can't get on a plane why would we let you buy a handgun. what do you think of that kind of policy?
>> it's beabject silliness. to think americans are made safer by precluding americans placed on no-fly lists by unknown fbi agents to have never had to explain themselves to independent decision makers and to assess quality of their information. i want provides until lugs of safety here.
>> but he said something there that's counter to the policy. he said if you're on the list --
>> as maybe a possible terrorist.
>> ted kennedy couldn't buy a gun. he was on the list.
>> then the question becomes, the question here and this i think is why this relates back to the background check question, is the it execution or is it the conceptual idea? is the problem this list keeping and maintenance of some sort of third category of people that are suspicious and suspected, or is the problem just that that's fine we just don't do a very good job of making sure that the list is pruned and properly maintained. . it depends on what you do with the list. fbi intelligence officers have to have a listing order to determine who to track. there's a difference between privacy interests and listing being used for determining who is the terminology known or suspected terrorist somebody worth tracking and monitoring. you have to have lists to do your job. the question is when the lists turn to the basis information posing affirmative restraints on individually better. and in that situation there absolutely needs to be clear notice as to the basis, the fact that you're on the list and a meaningful opportunity to chalt challenge.
>> you can't separate out the idea from the idea of the execution. so when your point of departure is when it's a fact that you are maybe possibly a terrorist then you're not going able to have a gun. where does the overlap between background checks and no-fly list. you can look at gun control as something that people are advancing as a policy idea. when you peel off the first layer of the cake you say what's in here. it's people control. if you want to do gun control by doing more people control you should say so. that's a policy option. we should be clear that the project is to do people control in the same way and that's the way the lists are used.
>> there's two different ways. this is key. banning certain kinds of weapons is gun control . background checks is people control. i agree. there's different approaches to tissue and the point i would make is because of the way our political discussions get framed the people control is more popular. that's one that will have more political legs.
>> there's two different types of people control. there's a background check . do we know you're crazy or a criminal. then your name, a name that's like yours is on a list and we can't tell you why. there's no real -- that's a problem. the fact that the fbi is not willing to be courageous enough to sit down with somebody and go through the facts and say you served in the military for ten years u-told us why you were coming it turned out to be true, you got a family to get back, to let's get you back there.
>> let me reiterate this point, the key difference here and the thing that makes the no fly list, it's own special kind of monster in the national criminal background check , the database that was started in 1968 and gun control act and broadened in 1993 through the brady bill most of the things that get you on the less that are adjudicated officially. if you have a criminal felony conviction you have been afford due process and that's noted in the list. the problem is this haze of suspicion. the thing that both scares me and also makes me really suspicious of the way the list is operating is that there's 22,000 names on it. when you go read the faq on the fbi list, this is what i love. it's basically asking about i can get off this list. misidentified persons are delayed while the government works to distinguish them from the terrorists in the tdsb. there's a terrorist in there. there's 22,000 terrorists and we're just saying don't get on a plane.
>> we don't believe these people are terrorists --
>> didn't think that.
>> if they had information pep were actually convictable they would convict them. it's not as if our law enforcement agencies post-9/11 have been hesitant to bring charges against persons that are properly chargeable with terrorism.
>> one of the big problems is this is a loophole for the working class terrorist. you're a rich terrorist you get on the qe2 and there's no sail list.
>> or cruise boat or drive a van and buy fertilizer. don't get on that delta flight to cleveland but go ahead and do whatever you want .
>> take the train. thanks a lot. the big political story be everybody is missing, my