Senate panel to demand disarming legally innocent

[mrjarrell]

All in the name of the so-called "War on Terror". Fear is useful tool and now they're using it against us. Anyone could be on the FBI's watch list these days. Tea partiers, members of gun forums or just about anyone. Qualifications for that list shift with the political winds. And now they're going to use that fear and that list in an attempt to disarm innocent people.

via Gun Rights Examiner (lots of links in the article for the curious).

A Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs hearing will be held today to explore denying guns to people the government suspects of terror activity.

Being spectacularly wrong in his suspicion that the attempted Times Square SUV bomb was the work of Americans mad about the health care bill, New York Mayor and anti-gun (unless they're held by his taxpayer-funded bodyguards) zealot Michael R. Bloomberg will continue his personal vendetta against domestic freedom today on Capitol Hill. Per The Huffington Post (but curiously, not too many other media sources—it's almost like they're trying to keep awareness low key):

Bloomberg is upset about a federal loophole that, amazingly enough, allows people on the FBI's Terrorist Watchlist to legally buy guns and explosives.
​

Amazing is right. He wants a fundamental right denied to people who have neither been charged with, tried nor convicted of any crime. And when is this pathological control freak not upset?

The hearing on "Terrorists and Guns: The Nature of the Threat and Proposed Reforms" is scheduled for today at 10:00 AM in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, room 342.

Shall we look at the balanced "witness list"?

First up is Frank Lautenberg, sponsor of S. 1317: "Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009." We discussed that here.

Next on the list: Rep. Peter King, sponsor of the House companion bill H.R. 2159, same title. We talked about Rep. King's exercise in oathbreaking infringement here, and a related effort based on the "no fly list" by Carolyn "Shoulder Thing That Goes Up" McCarthy here.

Then Bloomberg takes his turn, followed by NY Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly. Hmm, looks like the first panel is...what's the term...rigged?

Perhaps Panel 2 will add some needed balance?

Let's see, an assistant director for the FBI, a Homeland Security bureaucrat, an assistant chief from the LAPD...oh wait, here's one, Aaron Titus of The Liberty Coalition. Man, this is starting to remind me of that gig taking on all comers over at The New York Times. Although I would feel better if the Coalition had sent somebody besides their privacy guy, who doesn't even mention the Second Amendment on his personal blog. Except looking at their"leaders" page, not a one of them claims to be a 2A scholar...

Just so we're all clear on the tone that will be set in the hearing...

Here's some summary analysis, from Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership:

In general, this bill would amend the Gun Control Act (GCA) to grant the Attorney General the discretionary authority to deny a firearm transfer or state-issued firearms permit to any prospective transferee or permittee through Brady background checks...

The bill would also amend the GCA provision (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)) that enumerates several classes of persons who are prohibited from shipping, transporting, possessing, or receiving a firearm or ammunition...
​

Read the rest at the source.

 

[rambone]

No judge, no jury, no appeal. Sounds like the most efficient way to deny people their rights.

 

[Bert]

seems like it won't take long till we are asked to turn over our weapons . I will be making up a bill of sale for each gun I have . I think using politician names on each sales slip could be fun .

 

[LPMan59]

someone sent me this link yesterday:
Michael R. Bloomberg: Terror Suspects Are Buying Guns - and the FBI Can't Stop Them

what a load of crapola. anyone else appreciate the irony about how libs scream bloody murder in reference to the PATRIOT Act, but they oh-so-willingly will deprive Americans of their rights over a list?

i love the comments too, especially the traitor who says he carries.

 

[thej27]

Didn't know I could buy dynamite at a gun show. I guess now all the terrorists can go there and get their explosives instead of going to the trouble of making the homemade stuff like they have been all this time.

I was reading the comments on the huffington post. Now I already knew most of them would be full of ignorance but the level those comments were off the scale. The typical "no one needs an ak to hunt", "the 2nd amendment is outdated." "close the gun show loophole" were all there. But there was also the "criminals go to gun shows to buy all their guns they don't buy them illegally" was there to. Nice how they ignore study after study saying the so called "assault weapons" are rarely used in the commission of a crime, and only a very small percent of guns used in crimes comes from private sales at a gun show.

And how they are usually hypocritical when they see a criminal die in a criminal on criminal crime and are glad about one less bad guy and they should just let them kill each other off but refuse to take in account the thousands of those deaths when they quote the x amount of people that died from gun violence. I guess a criminals life only matter when it comes to a statistic they support.

 

[garagegunmaker]

This is a completely unconstitutional denial of rights. Hopfully this does not happen.

 

[mrjarrell]

This is a completely unconstitutional denial of rights. Hopfully this does not happen.

It's all in the name of the "War on Terror" now. Look for something from this panel and look for bipartisan support when it does come.

 

[dburkhead]

Letter to the President, Vice President, Bayh, Lugar, and the members of the relevant committee:

I am truly appalled to see that the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is considering testimony from people advocating forbidding the purchase of firearms to people suspected of terrorist activity. Suspected, not convicted. I implore you to stop this travesty now.

This is a clear and flagrant violation of the Constitution. The Supreme Court, In District of Columbia vs. Heller ruled that the right to keep and bear arms is a right possessed by individuals. And while we are still awaiting a ruling over whether the Second Amendment applies to the States, it is quite clear that it applies to the Federal Government.

This ruling makes it clear that one of the liberties US citizens possess is the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. It is legitimate for the US government to restrict that right for people who have been convicted of violent felonies. The Fifth Amendment states that people may not be deprived of Life, Liberty, or Property except by Due Process of law.

Due Process means conviction in a court of law with the right to hear one's accusers and see the evidence against one and to answer them with the court making the determination on the loss of life, liberty, or property as provided for by law.

It is unconstitutional, bordering on the tyrannical, to restrict people's liberty on simple suspicion. Please squelch this idea now.

We shall see.

 

[Shadowbeach]

.

 

[Tactical Dave]

They will just buy guns from people off the internet who don't care so what is the point?

The NYC guy was an american citizen..... most people just require a drivers liscence to tell them a gun face to face........ There are those who don't even ask for that.

 

[mrjarrell]

All this despite the fact that only one "terrorist attack" (Ft. Hood) has involved a firearm of any type, (and Maj, Hassan would still have been able to purchase a firearm, as he was on no list). The hatred and fear from these people is palpable and getting more desperate by the day.

 

[Rammer]

Where does it end. Hopefully it ends soon
Rammer

 

[Manan]

Florida adopted a right-to-carry law in 1987. At the time the law was passed, critics predicted increases in violence. The founder of the National Organization of Women, Betty Friedan stated:

"lethal violence, even in self defense, only engenders more violence."

When the law went into effect, the Dade County Police began a program to record all arrest and non arrest incidents involving concealed carry licensees. Between September of 1987 and August of 1992, Dade County recorded 4 crimes committed by licensees with firearms. None of these crimes resulted in an injury. The record keeping program was abandoned in 1992 because there were not enough incidents to justify tracking them.

Florida adopted a right-to-carry law in 1987. Between 1987 and 1996, these changes occurred in Florida: homicide rate -36%, firearm homicide rate -37%, handgun homicide rate -41%.

221,443 concealed carry licenses were issued in Florida between October of 1987 and April of 1994. During that time, Florida recorded 18 crimes committed by licensees with firearms. That is .00008%.

 

[Mike H]

Thats about what I would expect out of that idiot.