barring gun purchases by people on the terrorist no-fly list

You would not think something like this would be controversial in a nation that girds itself against terrorist attacks and has long been ravaged by regular mass shootings, at schools, workplaces, movies, malls.   You would not think something like this would be a partisan issue, anywhere.   If the government has the right to maintain a list of people it suspects of terrorist ties, what theory ensures the right of these possible terrorists to have and to hold the most deadly guns the law allows?

Is it just me?  I know back in the day a well-regulated state militia was essential for putting down slave revolts.  I am well aware of the mythical American hero, the unblinking rugged individual putting his life on the line without a shiver, standing in the center of dusty Main Street, facing down evil with a Colt 45.   I get that one man with a gun, with no hesitation to kill, has always been the equal of several more powerful men with legitimate grievances.   I understand the outsized role the gun has played in American history, and how the gun has been romanticized and fetishized.

What is controversial about:  barring gun purchases by people on the terrorist no-fly list?   Maybe fucking Wayne LaPierre can explain that to me and my stymied countrymen.