>but there are other factors that may play a bigger role, like mental health, social stability, criminal history, training in weapons, etc
Sounds like we need some sort of way to vet people coming into the country?
Sounds like we need some sort of way to vet people coming into the country?
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2015/11/20/infogra...
note: multiple stages of bio checking, numerous three-letter agencies, additional steps for Syrians.
I used to post this every other day on fb, but lately I just realize there are simply groups who repeatedly gaslight each other and aren't interested in reality. One of them referred to my post as "liberal facts," implying, apparently, that the government doesn't perform the above screening process which it claims it does. shrug.jpg
Unless the government has every present and future terrorist's fingerprints in a database, how will scanning fingerprints be effective? It cannot be, it logically does not make sense. This logic is confirmed by FBI director Comey who told congress the same thing.
Perhaps that is where your disagreements with the "far-right" are stemming from?
It therefore seems reasonable to me you might want to restrict travel from countries that either have such weak governments that fake 'official' documents can be obtained (somalia, syria, yemen etc) or countries that have a stated policy of non-cooperation with the US government on such matters (Iran).
That would also explain why you would not exclude people from 46 other muslim majority countries - there would be no reason to if their official documents can be relied on, and they are responsive to queries from the US when some information needs to be verified.
Of course, it would be silly to (for example) bar someone from immigrating solely because they played laser tag, but I'd assume they would aggregate multiple factors into a total score and measure it against some threshold.
Vetting has long been a part of the US travel visa system.