Thankfully, GOA is countering Trump's disastrous decision to support Hillary and the Dems on "no-fly, no-buy." Here's the action link that GOA has set up for people to respond who care about their rights.

Republican Leaders Capitulate to Obama; Trump Stumbles in Debate | Current Alerts

Basically they are encouraging subscribers / members to write Trump through his webform:

using the following message to copy and paste for ease of sending on the issue:

Dear Mr. Trump,

While I appreciate your statements in support of the Second Amendment, and for putting forward a list of potential Supreme Court nominees who respect the Constitution, I am troubled by your support of stripping Second Amendment rights from people on a secret government watch list.

Innocent people put on such a list erroneously must, with great difficulty and expense, prove their innocence to the government. This turns the right to due process on its head.

And the fact is, many innocent people have been put on these lists in error.

For instance, legislators like the late Senator Ted Kennedy and Rep. Tom McClintock have mistakenly been placed on this list, as was an 8-year old boy from New Jersey. Not only that, it took eight long years for one innocent woman to get her named removed from the list.

Hillary Clinton likes to use the sound bite, "no fly, no buy." But sound bites don't make for good law.

Of course, no one want dangerous terrorists walking our streets. But if the government believes a person is too dangerous to fly, law-enforcement should obtain evidence and prove in a court of law that the person should be prosecuted.

This would both protect our constitutional rights and be enhance public safety.



I support the GOA form letter above, but I had more to add in my letter to Trump (which I've provided below - feel free to copy from it in your message to Trump as well). It's the same message I sent to numerous Congresspersons (including to ones such as McConnell, Toomey, and Collins, who I am not a constituent of) during the time when we helped defeat the various "no-fly, no-buy" proposals in June of this year. (Remember the whiny, bitchy sit-ins by Dems who couldn't handle the fact that their anti-2A proposals were not going to get consideration? That's why GOA's position on this issue is so important. They are taking the stance of defending our rights, even if Trump will not. And we know Hillary won't.)

----------- (My additional remarks to Trump) ------

Although four Senate anti-gun proposals (which would have relied upon so-called terror watchlists) failed on June 20, 2016, there were at least two more which came up for a vote on June 21, 2016.

Fortunately, all these proposals to use so-called "terrorist watchlists" against Americans to deny innocent people the ability to exercise their Second Amendment right, failed.

During that time, McConnell allowed Senator Collins (with her proposal involving the use of the "no-fly" list), as well as Senator Toomey — who has his own proposal to bar suspected terrorists from buying guns — a chance to have votes on their legislation. Those potential roll calls were intended to come within a broader spending bill that would funds the Justice Department and other agencies.

Fortunately, Republican members of Congress saw the light, listened to their constituents, and defeated these unconstitutional proposals.

I urge you to also OPPOSE any similar proposals - rather than SUPPORTING Hillary in her mad rush to ban and confiscate. Such proposals are unconstitutional for many reasons.

Documents published by The Intercept in 2014 showed that half of the 1.5 million people on the government’s shared list of terror suspects (added to various watchlists in five years after 2009) are marked by the US government as having “no recognized terrorist group affiliation.” Yet they were added to terror suspect and/or the no-fly list and had no means of getting off these lists.

Since the “no fly” list was formalized in 2001, the only way to know if the U.S. government would allow you to get on a plane was to show up at the airport and try to board a flight. The government would generally neither confirm nor deny that you were on the list, let alone tell you why.

On April 14, 2015, the government announced a new procedure for blacklisted travelers to try to clear themselves. Passengers who are denied boarding were then able to lodge a complaint with the Department of Homeland Security, which only if you had been denied a boarding pass or were harassed in the process of trying to obtain a ticket would provide confirmation of their “No Fly List status,” and an unclassified summary of the reason why — unless providing that information would go against “national security and law enforcement interests.”

Hina Shamsi, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Security Project, called the new procedures “grossly inadequate” and said her organization is already challenging them in court. The ACLU is representing 13 U.S. citizens who sued over the no fly list in 2010.

Lyman Latin — a disabled U.S. Marine veteran who was wrongly placed on the list and later joined an ACLU lawsuit in response — was unable to get a Veterans Administration disability evaluation completed because he was blocked from flying from Egypt to the United States. As a result, his disability payments were reduced, and he had to move into lower-cost housing, exacerbating the impact of his disability. Another Army veteran represented by the ACLU was stuck in Colombia for years due to his inability to fly home.

In 2014, a federal judge found that the government’s old redress process — which never confirmed or denied anyone’s status — was unconstitutional. The government’s response was the new procedures, which Shamsi says still doesn’t go far enough. These procedures, which cause innocent persons to be presumed guilty by the US government without cause, charges, conviction, and indeed without any form of due process, are patently and facially unconstitutional. The US government's job is not to decide to use the no-fly lists for further purposes, but rather, to decide how to immediately abolish the list and destroy the data it contains. That is what should have already happened. Every moment that this does not occur, the US government is harming innocent persons who do not deserve to have their rights impaired. Should the US government decide to use the no-fly list against US persons, the matter will become further actionable and a larger number of persons will have cause to take legal action against the US government, whether as part of the ACLU suit or upon their own initiative.

The Second Amendment reads, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It does not read, "The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall be infringed, with the use of blacklists established by the Government, and shall be infringed, by the Attorney General, whenever the Attorney General feels like it."

If the US government thinks someone is a terrorist who lives in the US and enjoys the rights that come with being here, they must charge that person with a crime and provide due process of law, not strip a person's rights away based on secret government watchlists (that in fact have already been designated as unconstitutional by a US court).

All of these proposals to attempt to restrict our use of arms by way of use of unconstitutional blacklists must be opposed at every opportunity. And they will be. Should you, Mr. Trump, not oppose the use of these unconstitutional secret government blacklists to strip away our rights, we certainly will oppose and overturn them, in court - just as we have in the past.