Inconvenient Fact for Republicans: Your Party is Helping Suspected Terrorists Legally Purchase Guns

gun-nuts3When it comes to the issue of guns and gun regulations, there are many aspects on which I can slam the illogical nature of most conservatives and the Republican party. In this country we can’t even begin to have the slightest bit of rational discussion about gun violence or sensible gun regulations because many on the right simply won’t have it.

To listen to many of these folks talk, you’d think requiring a background check on all gun purchases is some radical idea that would somehow infringe upon their rights. Then again, it’s pointless to try to reason with people who think more guns are the answer to gun violence.

The bottom line is, the Republican party is nothing more than a bought and paid for puppet controlled by the NRA.

But in a true twist of irony, so to speak, their funded devotion to the NRA has many Republicans at a crossroads with another common talking point they use to try to terrify Americans into voting for them: Terrorism.

You see, right now, it’s perfectly legal for suspected terrorists on the “no-fly” list to purchase guns. Yes, people our government deems too dangerous to travel on a plane can still legally purchase guns.

Just think about that for a moment. Terrorist suspects, currently in this country, who our government believes could be here to help set up a future terrorist attack could be legally stockpiling weapons and ammunition… because Republicans continue to oppose legislation that would close the loophole that allows those suspected of being terrorists from buying guns.

Why? Well, because there’s a chance that someone who might not be a terrorist might accidentally be put on that list.

Yes, you’re reading that correctly. Republicans would rather make it easier for potential terrorists to get guns than to close a loophole because there’s a slight chance that someone who’s not a terrorist might accidentally be placed on that list.

The same people who want to ban all Syrian refugees from coming to the United States, refugees who endure a 18-24 month grueling security check before even being allowed to come here, because there’s a small chance that a terrorist might slip through the system – have absolutely no problem with known terror suspects who are already in the United States purchasing as many guns and as much ammunition as they want.

I would like to remind everyone that this isn’t Democrats or President Obama who want to see these terror suspects allowed to buy guns (you know, the people Republicans always say are too soft on terrorism) – it’s Republicans who are blocking the closing of this loophole.

This is how absurd today’s GOP has become when it comes to guns. They’re controlled by the NRA to such an extent that we can’t even pass legislation to prevent suspected terrorists from being able to purchase weapons and ammunition because Republicans won’t allow it… which really means the NRA opposes it.

So, the next time you see a Republican going on and on about how President Obama is putting American lives at risk, or how we need to do everything we can to combat terrorism, know that they’re full of crap. This is a political party that’s fighting to keep open a loophole in our laws that allows suspected terrorists to legally buy guns and ammunition – weapons that could potentially be used to carry out a terrorist attack here in the United States.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.


Facebook comments

  • strayaway

    Who gets to decide who is a “suspected” terrorist? Will it be the cronies of president Obama or President Trump? Things like that might make a difference regarding who is on a government list. I would involve a judge and a court hearing before declaring someone a “suspected” terrorist.

    • Randyh

      UR Nuts

      • strayaway

        UR inarticulate.

    • MyLovelyNose

      Were you so concerned when the no-fly list was created, or were you busy with Bush’s flight-suit happy dance?

      • strayaway

        What, in your opinion, is wrong with observing the requirements of the Fourth Amendment?

      • MyLovelyNose

        Nothing, except that in the PATRIOT Act, the 4th Amendment doesn’t apply. And the Bushies filled their diapers in hateful glee! They didn’t whine at all. All for it, in fact. “If you haven’t done anything wrong,” they crooned, “You have nothing to worry about.”

      • strayaway

        I disagree. The government decides who is a “suspected” terrorist. The Democrats’ intellectual brownshirt organization SPLC decided that anyone with a Constitution Party or Libertarian Party bumper sticker on their bumper should be considered by police to be a potential terrorist. Pretty soon, the federal fusion center in Missouri made glossy brochures to that effect. Recent revelations by Snowden confirm that the federal government is prying into our emails and phone calls. Try to remember that Bush hasn’t been President for 7.4 years. That’s obfuscation. The Obama administration has stiffened and expanded Bush’s attacks on privacy.

  • Brian

    And your party are the ones letting suspected terrorists into the US in the first place.

    • strayaway

      My party? Which one is that? I think Bush and Obama should be sharing a cell. If, however, you are suggesting restricting immigration to prevent some future 9/11s, Boston Marathon problems, San Bernardino’s, and Orlandos, I’m on your side.

      • MyLovelyNose

        There are more Christian terrorists who are American citizens in this country than there are covert Muslim extremists. More than a thousand hate groups that identify with Christianity. There are Christian pastors openly calling for gays to be executed–right on the same page as the Muslims who do. They both have the same basic fairy-tale book as their source, by the way.

      • Foster

        Site your source for this random loosely stated rhetoric? List this 1000 hate groups so we can see for ourselves it is complete B.S.

      • strayaway

        The NY Times claimed that Muslims and non-Muslims respectively have been responsible for 45 and 48 ideological murders in the US since 9/11. That includes the moist recent abortion killings by non-Muslims and San Bernadino. Go back one day and add the 2,996 ideological murders on 9/11 and the numbers are 45 and 3,004. If the 50 in Orlando were added to the list, they tally would be 3,554 ideological killings by Muslims vs. 48 ideological killings by non-Muslims in the US going back to 9/11. Then, consider that Muslims constitute 1% of the US population, multiply 3,554 X 100 = 35,540 vs. 48 to get a per capita murder rate by Muslims vs. Non-Muslim. I’ll let you work out the decimal point. Maybe you have better statistics to make your point?

  • Foster

    This guy had high security clearance at his job and would not have failed a background check so MUTE point ya’ll !