During a PBS town hall segment in June of this year, the empty suit admitted, in response to a question posed by a concerned gun shop owner, that the FBI has warrantless access to your browsing history and most likely your email data as well. For those who are unaware, the FBI has the power to issue subpoenas to service providers, called National Security Letters (NSLs), demanding that they turn over basic information about a certain customer, like their name, address, length of service, IP address and/or phone records depending on which communications company was issued the NSL. That's right, any FBI field office can issue an NSL, because in the era of terrorism mass hysteria expediency takes precedence over principle. NSLs often come with a gag order, prohibiting a service provider from disclosing the fact that they received an NSL. What Obozo revealed in his response, perhaps unwittingly, is that the FBI also has subpoena power for browsing history and more than likely email data.
"[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
The terrorist watch list or the no-fly list, which Obozo expects us to accept as commonplace so he can introduce a no-buy list without resistance, is a clear violation of the 5th amendment and moral law.
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
No person should be deprived of their right to travel or their right to buy a gun without a criminal or civil proceeding, especially if they are a U.S. citizen protected by the Bill of Rights. And last time I checked, Barrack, visiting an ISIS website is still legal, and it doesn't necessarily mean one sympathizes with them. Someone could read Das Kapital without being a marxist, Mein Kampf without being a neo-nazi, and by the same logic, DABIQ without being an ISIS sympathizer because people can and often do read opinions they don't agree with (it's called intellectual curiosity). I have a free pdf copy of the 7th issue of DABIQ, and guess what? Not an ISIS sympathizer. Just think of how many academics and journalists Barrack would prohibit from flying because he's a dumbass that thinks people only read stuff they agree with.
While he might not have done much to the second amendment, which he shouldn't be praised for because it should be expected from someone in his office, he certainly obliterated the first, fourth, and fifth amendment without hesitation. The fact that no one in the audience was shocked by his response or challenged him indicates the sheer extent to which peoples' minds have been paralyzed by fear and the mass hysteria (not much different than the red scare or Salem witch trials) that has been conditioned by war on terrorism propaganda from MSM talking heads.