ABC Evening News reports Trump Supports “No-FLy, No-Buy” Restrictions

[Mac1958]

This is just another example of how the Right hurts itself with absolutism.

Bending here and there with reasonable, appropriate controls doesn't mean you're pooping on the Constitution.
.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

View attachment 78309

Also people on the terrorist watch list. Unlike everything else this boob has ranted and raved about; this would have stopped the Orlando Killer.

Secretary Clinton’s response: “Welcome to the Cause”

Your self induced fleeting orgasm will be found unacceptable to the majority of the American population.

Trump, whom I don't support, knows better.

Your no fly list is as credible as the Southern Poverty Law Center.

It'll fail on the first challenge. It's unconstitutional, you cannot deny a right over a suspicion

They're already doing it. That ship has sailed.

Wait for the challenge..it will fail. Take it to the bank...."shall not be infringed"

We’ll put that right next to the overturning of Obamacare and Gay Marriage. Care to try to get out of making me a cake, bitch?

There is no amendment specifically addressing gay marriage....you can't say the same for gun ownership now can you? Goofy old hag

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Trump sure makes a compelling Candidate LOL

Kasich Says He Can’t Support Trump
June 16, 2016


Gov. John Kasich (R) “is in agony over his decision last year to support the Republican nominee and the reality that Donald Trump is his party’s presumptive nominee,” Politico reports.

Said Kasich: “You know, it’s painful. It’s painful. You know, people even get divorces, you know? I mean, sometimes, things come out that, look, I’m sorry that this has happened. But we’ll see where it ends up. I’m not making any final decision yet, but at this point, I just can’t do it.”

 

[JoeB131]

There is no amendment specifically addressing gay marriage....you can't say the same for gun ownership now can you? Goofy old hag

Yes, there's an amendment that says you can have gun ownership in the context of a WELL REGULATED MILITIA.

Incidently, I do think the courts have abused the 14th Amendment finding things like legal abortion or gay marriage in there. These are issues that SHOULD have been resolved in the legislatures.

But instead of wondering what a bunch of slave rapists who shit in a chamber pot and wore powdered wigs did or didn't mean, how about we base on our policies on what makes sense TODAY.

Does it make sense TODAY to let an Omar Mateen buy a military grade weapon, despite showing all sorts of signs of being mentally ill? Obviously not.

Does it make sense today to ban gay marriage? Well, given your arguments against it consist of "I think it's icky", not so much.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Trump sure makes a compelling Candidate LOL

Kasich Says He Can’t Support Trump
June 16, 2016


Gov. John Kasich (R) “is in agony over his decision last year to support the Republican nominee and the reality that Donald Trump is his party’s presumptive nominee,” Politico reports.

Said Kasich: “You know, it’s painful. It’s painful. You know, people even get divorces, you know? I mean, sometimes, things come out that, look, I’m sorry that this has happened. But we’ll see where it ends up. I’m not making any final decision yet, but at this point, I just can’t do it.”

I am reporting every post you make that ignores the op thread topic. I started doing it yesterday. You are spamming and you are on notice.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

There is no amendment specifically addressing gay marriage....you can't say the same for gun ownership now can you? Goofy old hag

Yes, there's an amendment that says you can have gun ownership in the context of a WELL REGULATED MILITIA.

Incidently, I do think the courts have abused the 14th Amendment finding things like legal abortion or gay marriage in there. These are issues that SHOULD have been resolved in the legislatures.

But instead of wondering what a bunch of slave rapists who shit in a chamber pot and wore powdered wigs did or didn't mean, how about we base on our policies on what makes sense TODAY.

Does it make sense TODAY to let an Omar Mateen buy a military grade weapon, despite showing all sorts of signs of being mentally ill? Obviously not.

Does it make sense today to ban gay marriage? Well, given your arguments against it consist of "I think it's icky", not so much.

Save your elementary knowledge, old man

 

[NYcarbineer]

Your self induced fleeting orgasm will be found unacceptable to the majority of the American population.

Trump, whom I don't support, knows better.

Your no fly list is as credible as the Southern Poverty Law Center.

It'll fail on the first challenge. It's unconstitutional, you cannot deny a right over a suspicion

They're already doing it. That ship has sailed.

Wait for the challenge..it will fail. Take it to the bank...."shall not be infringed"

We’ll put that right next to the overturning of Obamacare and Gay Marriage. Care to try to get out of making me a cake, bitch?

There is no amendment specifically addressing gay marriage....you can't say the same for gun ownership now can you? Goofy old hag

There doesn't have to be. You have no idea how the Constitution works.

 

[dblack]

But you still support trump even though he wants to ban those on terrorist watch and no fly lists from having guns, right lard ass?

I support Trump as the lesser of two evils, he wasn't my first choice. Try commenting without looking like a foulmouthed middle school pig. It's getting annoying

Evil thanks you for your support.

I don't have much of choice, vote third and it's a wasted vote...vote for the corrupt old bitch and suicide is an option

The only wasted vote is a dishonest one.

Every election cycle pushes us further down the two-evils road to ruin. Every time we fall for it, Absurdity ups the ante.

Slippery slope fallacy, hyperbolic nonsense.

Nope. Just an observation of historical fact.

 

[JoeB131]

There is no amendment specifically addressing gay marriage....you can't say the same for gun ownership now can you? Goofy old hag

Yes, there's an amendment that says you can have gun ownership in the context of a WELL REGULATED MILITIA.

Incidently, I do think the courts have abused the 14th Amendment finding things like legal abortion or gay marriage in there. These are issues that SHOULD have been resolved in the legislatures.

But instead of wondering what a bunch of slave rapists who shit in a chamber pot and wore powdered wigs did or didn't mean, how about we base on our policies on what makes sense TODAY.

Does it make sense TODAY to let an Omar Mateen buy a military grade weapon, despite showing all sorts of signs of being mentally ill? Obviously not.

Does it make sense today to ban gay marriage? Well, given your arguments against it consist of "I think it's icky", not so much.

Save your elementary knowledge, old man

duly noted you lacked the intelligence to address the point.

Okay, I'll give you another try. In what universe does it make sense for someone like Omar Mateen to buy a machine gun?

 

[dblack]

They're already doing it. That ship has sailed.

Wait for the challenge..it will fail. Take it to the bank...."shall not be infringed"

They're already infringing the more basic right to freedom of movement.

Flying by commercial airline is not a Constitutional Right. A person on the No-Fly list is perfectly free to travel by other means.

Yes, it is. The Constitution explains that clearly in the ninth amendment.

Nonsense.

As already correctly noted: there is no ‘Constitutional right’ to fly on a commercial carrier.

For all your presumed knowledge of the Constitution, you have precious little understanding of our rights and how it protects them. By your reasoning, there's no Constitutional right to breathe.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

View attachment 78309

Also people on the terrorist watch list. Unlike everything else this boob has ranted and raved about; this would have stopped the Orlando Killer.

Secretary Clinton’s response: “Welcome to the Cause”

His tweet says that's what they'll be discussing. He doesn't say he's for it. If I were him I would
ban only Muslims, Mexicans and African Americans from buying and flying. They are all potential terrorists who hate White Christians of European heritage.

Damn You’re stupid.

He’s discussing it with the NRA who is all for terrorist on these lists being able to buy guys. Nothing to discuss if they are both for it, stupid.

If they want to buy guys isn't that slavery?

Also tell me did the 1994 assault weapon ban stop the Jonesboro shooting or Columbine shooting?

So what make you believe terrorists and criminals will obey laws that use a faulty list?

Trump is wrong as usual...

Welcome to the fight Donald!!!

Reality check for the Progressive:

The 1994 Assault weapon ban did not stop mass shootings nor did it prevent terrorist attacks on the U.S. soil.

Here is a list for you of mass shootings and from 1995 to 2004 please explain how the assault weapon ban worked to stop mass shootings and if you write " welcome to the fight Donald " then I will take it as you have no answer and you're nothing but a partisan nut that support the view of a man that want to ban Muslim's from entering the country...

List of school shootings in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Many of you on the left argue if this country had stricter gun laws that it would stop terrorism and would have stopped the Orlando shooter so then explain to me how the 1994 assault weapon ban did not stop these acts of terrorism on U.S. soil?

Terrorism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As you can see from those lists your laws do nothing to stop terrorists and criminals and only punishes the law abiding citizens. Those like you believe that passing a law will detour a terrorist or criminal but the reality is they do not obey your stupid laws.

Also let me add the usage of any list is the dumbest thing I ever read in a long damn time. Many Americans are on the No-Fly list and are not enemy of the state but share a name with a possible terrorist.

Your list convict someone without due process of the law. Your list will be used for political hit list and you do not even care.

It is the government job to prove someone guilty of a crime before you can take away someone constitutional right to bear arms.

It is not the individual to prove themselves innocent to a individual in D.C. that is a ignorant tool for those like you.

Many of you write about how the individual can appeal and have their name removed and that take money and time and even then the idiots in D.C. will move at a snail ass pace to correct their mistake if they ever correct it and while that is going on the innocent person had been found guilty of something that the Government never proved they were guilty of...

So go ahead pass your laws because it will not stop the next terrorist attacks and when the next one happen with your little laws in place then pass more laws because that is all you can do until you pass a law that humans can no longer exist...

Also I do not need to worry about being on the list and I am not a member of the NRA nor the Republican party and have been cleared by the FBI more times than you ever had a rational thought on gun control, so I have no worries about your stupid laws but I worry about the innocent person that will be convicted of being an enemy of state because they were on a faulty list that had Ted Kennedy on it!

Note:

You are agreeing with Donald John Trump when the reality is Trump has been wrong on so much but he agree with your hatred for the second amendment so now he is a good guy but the real reason why he support those lists is it mainly has Muslims and non-whites on it so yeah go ahead and applaud Donald John Trump!

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Finally, when will someone admit the FBI failed to contain the threat?

They knew this guy was a threat and still no flagging. If something must change then flag the individual and open another investigation and surveillance on them but the lists are not accurate and could be used as a political hit list.

I know you will disagree until another Republican is in the Oval office and then you will demand those lists not be used and I will be laughing at you!

i will admit, the FBI failed to contain the threat. mostly because they don't have enough resources to evaluate the threat.

But this wasn't an ISIS plot, it was a crazy guy who couldn't handle being gay.

Show in my response I wrote ISIS or even ISIL?

They have the resources and they failed to do their damn job. Too many excuses for the failure of the government to do their damn job, and now they need to explain what they will do to fix their stupidity and mistake.

A man that pledge his loyalty to Al Qaeda to Hezbollah and had known contact with a known terrorist and investigated by the FBI should have been flagged.

Also the Gay twist is something I do not believe. I know for a fact that if you are going to do a crime you will do surveillance of locations and use apps to get information about events that you can attack.

So I don't buy " He was Gay " but will admit the guy was mentally insane!

 

[candycorn]

View attachment 78309

Also people on the terrorist watch list. Unlike everything else this boob has ranted and raved about; this would have stopped the Orlando Killer.

Secretary Clinton’s response: “Welcome to the Cause”

His tweet says that's what they'll be discussing. He doesn't say he's for it. If I were him I would
ban only Muslims, Mexicans and African Americans from buying and flying. They are all potential terrorists who hate White Christians of European heritage.

Damn You’re stupid.

He’s discussing it with the NRA who is all for terrorist on these lists being able to buy guys. Nothing to discuss if they are both for it, stupid.

If they want to buy guys isn't that slavery?

Also tell me did the 1994 assault weapon ban stop the Jonesboro shooting or Columbine shooting?

So what make you believe terrorists and criminals will obey laws that use a faulty list?

Trump is wrong as usual...

Welcome to the fight Donald!!!

Reality check for the Progressive:

The 1994 Assault weapon ban did not stop mass shootings nor did it prevent terrorist attacks on the U.S. soil.

Here is a list for you of mass shootings and from 1995 to 2004 please explain how the assault weapon ban worked to stop mass shootings and if you write “ welcome to the fight Donald " then I will take it as you have no answer and you're nothing but a partisan nut that support the view of a man that want to ban Muslim's from entering the country...

Perhaps it did; perhaps it did not. The only provable item is that it did not stop all attacks.

As Donald Drumpf transitions from denier to embracing some gun controls…eventually he’ll have to give up his idiotic ban on muslims since there is no way to determine if someone is practicing Islam outside of asking them.

Many of you on the left argue if this country had stricter gun laws that it would stop terrorism and would have stopped the Orlando shooter so then explain to me how the 1994 assault weapon ban did not stop these acts of terrorism on U.S. soil?

Again, the “all or nothing” stupidity of your position is profound and obscene.

As you can see from those lists your laws do nothing to stop terrorists and criminals and only punishes the law abiding citizens. Those like you believe that passing a law will detour a terrorist or criminal but the reality is they do not obey your stupid laws.

Well, if they are captured between purchase and execution, they are now going to jail. Otherwise, they are given a pat on the back of their NRA jacket and wished a good day.

Also let me add the usage of any list is the dumbest thing I ever read in a long damn time. Many Americans are on the No-Fly list and are not enemy of the state but share a name with a possible terrorist.

And many people are on the lists who do hold sympathy for terrorists. I have no sympathy for them.

Your list convict someone without due process of the law. Your list will be used for political hit list and you do not even care.

You’re missing your crown drama queen. Any list anywhere can be used for political purposes.

Note:

You are agreeing with Donald John Trump when the reality is Trump has been wrong on so much but he agree with your hatred for the second amendment so now he is a good guy but the real reason why he support those lists is it mainly has Muslims and non-whites on it so yeah go ahead and applaud Donald John Trump!

No dumbass,

Donald Trump is now agreeing with Hillary Clinton.

When he eventually releases his tax returns that will be because he has to.

 

[Vandalshandle]

View attachment 78309

Also people on the terrorist watch list. Unlike everything else this boob has ranted and raved about; this would have stopped the Orlando Killer.

Secretary Clinton’s response: “Welcome to the Cause”

His tweet says that's what they'll be discussing. He doesn't say he's for it. If I were him I would
ban only Muslims, Mexicans and African Americans from buying and flying. They are all potential terrorists who hate White Christians of European heritage.

Damn You’re stupid.

He’s discussing it with the NRA who is all for terrorist on these lists being able to buy guys. Nothing to discuss if they are both for it, stupid.

If they want to buy guys isn't that slavery?

Also tell me did the 1994 assault weapon ban stop the Jonesboro shooting or Columbine shooting?

So what make you believe terrorists and criminals will obey laws that use a faulty list?

Trump is wrong as usual...

Welcome to the fight Donald!!!

Reality check for the Progressive:

The 1994 Assault weapon ban did not stop mass shootings nor did it prevent terrorist attacks on the U.S. soil.

Here is a list for you of mass shootings and from 1995 to 2004 please explain how the assault weapon ban worked to stop mass shootings and if you write " welcome to the fight Donald " then I will take it as you have no answer and you're nothing but a partisan nut that support the view of a man that want to ban Muslim's from entering the country...

List of school shootings in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Many of you on the left argue if this country had stricter gun laws that it would stop terrorism and would have stopped the Orlando shooter so then explain to me how the 1994 assault weapon ban did not stop these acts of terrorism on U.S. soil?

Terrorism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As you can see from those lists your laws do nothing to stop terrorists and criminals and only punishes the law abiding citizens. Those like you believe that passing a law will detour a terrorist or criminal but the reality is they do not obey your stupid laws.

Also let me add the usage of any list is the dumbest thing I ever read in a long damn time. Many Americans are on the No-Fly list and are not enemy of the state but share a name with a possible terrorist.

Your list convict someone without due process of the law. Your list will be used for political hit list and you do not even care.

It is the government job to prove someone guilty of a crime before you can take away someone constitutional right to bear arms.

It is not the individual to prove themselves innocent to a individual in D.C. that is a ignorant tool for those like you.

Many of you write about how the individual can appeal and have their name removed and that take money and time and even then the idiots in D.C. will move at a snail ass pace to correct their mistake if they ever correct it and while that is going on the innocent person had been found guilty of something that the Government never proved they were guilty of...

So go ahead pass your laws because it will not stop the next terrorist attacks and when the next one happen with your little laws in place then pass more laws because that is all you can do until you pass a law that humans can no longer exist...

Also I do not need to worry about being on the list and I am not a member of the NRA nor the Republican party and have been cleared by the FBI more times than you ever had a rational thought on gun control, so I have no worries about your stupid laws but I worry about the innocent person that will be convicted of being an enemy of state because they were on a faulty list that had Ted Kennedy on it!

Note:

You are agreeing with Donald John Trump when the reality is Trump has been wrong on so much but he agree with your hatred for the second amendment so now he is a good guy but the real reason why he support those lists is it mainly has Muslims and non-whites on it so yeah go ahead and applaud Donald John Trump!

Nearly 148 million applications for firearm transfers or permits were subject to background checks from the inception of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 on March 1, 1994, through December 31, 2012. During this period, about 2.4 million applications (1.6%) were denied (table 1). In 2012, approximately 15.7 million applications were subject to background checks, and 192,000 (1.2%) were denied, including about 88,000 denied by the FBI and about 104,000 denied by state and local agency

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/bcft12st.pdf

Consequently, 2.4 million felons, illegal aliens, and mentally ill people were denied the right to purchase a gun, and you have absolutely no idea how many of these people would have murdered someone if they had not been stopped by the background check law. Yet, the NRA, and gun nuts everywhere insist that background checks not be expanded to include ALL firearm sales.

 

[candycorn]

His tweet says that's what they'll be discussing. He doesn't say he's for it. If I were him I would
ban only Muslims, Mexicans and African Americans from buying and flying. They are all potential terrorists who hate White Christians of European heritage.

Damn You’re stupid.

He’s discussing it with the NRA who is all for terrorist on these lists being able to buy guys. Nothing to discuss if they are both for it, stupid.

If they want to buy guys isn't that slavery?

Also tell me did the 1994 assault weapon ban stop the Jonesboro shooting or Columbine shooting?

So what make you believe terrorists and criminals will obey laws that use a faulty list?

Trump is wrong as usual...

Welcome to the fight Donald!!!

Reality check for the Progressive:

The 1994 Assault weapon ban did not stop mass shootings nor did it prevent terrorist attacks on the U.S. soil.

Here is a list for you of mass shootings and from 1995 to 2004 please explain how the assault weapon ban worked to stop mass shootings and if you write " welcome to the fight Donald " then I will take it as you have no answer and you're nothing but a partisan nut that support the view of a man that want to ban Muslim's from entering the country...

List of school shootings in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Many of you on the left argue if this country had stricter gun laws that it would stop terrorism and would have stopped the Orlando shooter so then explain to me how the 1994 assault weapon ban did not stop these acts of terrorism on U.S. soil?

Terrorism in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As you can see from those lists your laws do nothing to stop terrorists and criminals and only punishes the law abiding citizens. Those like you believe that passing a law will detour a terrorist or criminal but the reality is they do not obey your stupid laws.

Also let me add the usage of any list is the dumbest thing I ever read in a long damn time. Many Americans are on the No-Fly list and are not enemy of the state but share a name with a possible terrorist.

Your list convict someone without due process of the law. Your list will be used for political hit list and you do not even care.

It is the government job to prove someone guilty of a crime before you can take away someone constitutional right to bear arms.

It is not the individual to prove themselves innocent to a individual in D.C. that is a ignorant tool for those like you.

Many of you write about how the individual can appeal and have their name removed and that take money and time and even then the idiots in D.C. will move at a snail ass pace to correct their mistake if they ever correct it and while that is going on the innocent person had been found guilty of something that the Government never proved they were guilty of...

So go ahead pass your laws because it will not stop the next terrorist attacks and when the next one happen with your little laws in place then pass more laws because that is all you can do until you pass a law that humans can no longer exist...

Also I do not need to worry about being on the list and I am not a member of the NRA nor the Republican party and have been cleared by the FBI more times than you ever had a rational thought on gun control, so I have no worries about your stupid laws but I worry about the innocent person that will be convicted of being an enemy of state because they were on a faulty list that had Ted Kennedy on it!

Note:

You are agreeing with Donald John Trump when the reality is Trump has been wrong on so much but he agree with your hatred for the second amendment so now he is a good guy but the real reason why he support those lists is it mainly has Muslims and non-whites on it so yeah go ahead and applaud Donald John Trump!

Nearly 148 million applications for firearm transfers or permits were subject to background checks from the inception of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 on March 1, 1994, through December 31, 2012. During this period, about 2.4 million applications (1.6%) were denied (table 1). In 2012, approximately 15.7 million applications were subject to background checks, and 192,000 (1.2%) were denied, including about 88,000 denied by the FBI and about 104,000 denied by state and local agency

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/bcft12st.pdf

Consequently, 2.4 million felons, illegal aliens, and mentally ill people were denied the right to purchase a gun, and you have absolutely no idea how many of these people would have murdered someone if they had not been stopped by the background check law. Yet, the NRA, and gun nuts everywhere insist that background checks not be expanded to include ALL firearm sales.

If you recall, the same backwards logic was used by GWB in the run-up to sending us into Iraq. Saddam had to prove he didn’t have WMDs before we’d agree not to invade. The left wing is having to prove that some guy somewhere didn’t mow down 50 people before the gun nuts will agree that banning weapons worked.

And when you point out the hundred or so nations that don’t have free access to weapons don’t have these bloodbaths; you’re told that their culture is different; whatever that means.

 

[JBond]

As Donald Drumpf transitions from denier to embracing some gun controls…eventually he’ll have to give up his idiotic ban on muslims since there is no way to determine if someone is practicing Islam outside of asking them.

So there is no good way to vet these people before they come here? Interesting.

 

[ClosedCaption]

View attachment 78309

Also people on the terrorist watch list. Unlike everything else this boob has ranted and raved about; this would have stopped the Orlando Killer.

Secretary Clinton’s response: “Welcome to the Cause”

How would it have stopped the Orlando killer?

The killer might not have bought the gun legally had he been on the list, so claiming it would have stopped him is not correct.

Also the No-Fly list is faulty and had Ted Kennedy and other on it that were not terrorists and it should be the government job to prove they are a threat and not the individual to prove they are not that person.

Finally, when will someone admit the FBI failed to contain the threat?

They knew this guy was a threat and still no flagging. If something must change then flag the individual and open another investigation and surveillance on them but the lists are not accurate and could be used as a political hit list.

I know you will disagree until another Republican is in the Oval office and then you will demand those lists not be used and I will be laughing at you!

In summation: Nothing will prevent anything and anything you do will fail. So its better to do things like offer hopes and prayers when the next one happens....and the next one....and the next one

 

[candycorn]

As Donald Drumpf transitions from denier to embracing some gun controls…eventually he’ll have to give up his idiotic ban on muslims since there is no way to determine if someone is practicing Islam outside of asking them.

So there is no good way to vet these people before they come here? Interesting.

You can’t deduce what someone’s religion is by asking them.
You can deduce where they have been by looking at their passport.
You can see if they have communicable diseases by taking their blood.
You can look at the epidemiology and determine where they have been based on the diseases in some cases.
Numerous things you can deduce. Religion isn’t one of them.

 

[JBond]

As Donald Drumpf transitions from denier to embracing some gun controls…eventually he’ll have to give up his idiotic ban on muslims since there is no way to determine if someone is practicing Islam outside of asking them.

So there is no good way to vet these people before they come here? Interesting.

You can’t deduce what someone’s religion is by asking them.
You can deduce where they have been by looking at their passport.
You can see if they have communicable diseases by taking their blood.
You can look at the epidemiology and determine where they have been based on the diseases in some cases.
Numerous things you can deduce. Religion isn’t one of them.

So known associates should not play a role in the vetting process? Such as attending a radical Mosque?

 

[candycorn]

As Donald Drumpf transitions from denier to embracing some gun controls…eventually he’ll have to give up his idiotic ban on muslims since there is no way to determine if someone is practicing Islam outside of asking them.

So there is no good way to vet these people before they come here? Interesting.

You can’t deduce what someone’s religion is by asking them.
You can deduce where they have been by looking at their passport.
You can see if they have communicable diseases by taking their blood.
You can look at the epidemiology and determine where they have been based on the diseases in some cases.
Numerous things you can deduce. Religion isn’t one of them.

So known associates should not play a role in the vetting process? Such as attending a radical Mosque?

Sure it should if you’re asking me.
The hard part is at the JFK International Terminal, it’s hard to tell what mosques they may have been attending in Hamburg, if the mosque is radical, etc….

If you have the 80% certainty that they are bad news, they should be denied using Colin Powell’s old 80/20 rule.