Fine, then require the government to establish
"Probable Cause" (as required by the 4th Amendment) before they gather any evidence but only while done under the limitations of a
Search Warrant issued by a Competent Court (as protected by the 4th Amendment), then before any rights can be, violated, limited, or revoked by the government (including those of the 2nd Amendment), require the government to
inform the accused of what the charges are that are being brought by the government and what evidence they are based upon (as required by the 6th Amendment), then allow the accused to
retain legal council (as required by the 6th Amendment), and allow the accused
to call witnesses to testify as to their innocence (as required by the 6th Amendment) then, and only then, must
the government present their case before a Grand Jury (as required by the 5th Amendment) to seek an Indictment (as required by the 5th Amendment) to ensure that the accused is provided Due Process of Law (as required by both the 5th and 14th Amendments) just as any other person being accused of a crime by the government would be afforded
Equal Protection Under the Law (as required and protected by the 14th Amendment). What happened to The Presumption of Innocence (Innocent Until Proven Guilty) [
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffin_v._United_States]? Should we just allow some government employee in some office somewhere to decide who is allowed their rights as protected by the US Constitution, and who is not? If a "
potential terrorist" as you called them, is not allowed to buy a firearm, then should they also be allowed to vote? The Orlando terrorist was a US Citizen, with the right to vote in all US elections. Should he had been stripped of that right as well as his right to keep and bear arms? If that's true (although it's a huge leap in assumptions by you) then what you propose wouldn't work anyway - because "they already have guns" as you say. Really? Senator Edward Kennedy knew he was being watched before he showed up at Reagan National Airport and found out he was on the "No-Fly List?" Stop the attempt with a semi-automatic rifle? Maybe, but you said they already had guns. What it won't do, is stop a bomb with C4, or
Liquefied Oxygen from the welding store and basic Sugar, or Ammonium Nitrate [fertilizer] mixed with Fuel Oil, (
ANFO), or any number of other items that can be bought at Walmart that can kill just as many (if not more) than were killed in Orlando by a rifle. Really? Then how about let's also try restricting people on the list from being able to attend their Mosque, or Church, or to speak out, or to write their beliefs on an internet forum like this one since that's partly how radicalization occurs? It would be very simple... while we're removing rights, we can just add the 1st Amendment right to Right to Freedom of Speech and the Right to the Free Exercise of Religion. Isn't it worth it? In order to have an extra level of safety?
