
DHS official Seal
I have talked before about the rather . . . expansive criteria by which one can now be marked as a "terrorist" threat by the government. We have, in fact, reached the point at which simply affirming one's devotion to the Constitution can be enough to be lableled a "terrorist" threat. Now, in fact, it has become apparent that such "threats" as followers of Norse mythology are among those who must be kept under close scrutiny.
Back in February, I discussed White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel's support (at a Brady Campaign event in 2007, when he was still a congressman) for legislation that would empower the Attorney General to block gun sales to anyone who is suspected of being a "terrorist." Under the terms of the previous Congressional session's H.R. 2074 and S. 1237, for example, he would have this power:
Prohibits the sale or distribution of firearms or explosives to any individual whom the Attorney General has determined to be engaged in terrorist activities.Permits the Attorney General to withhold information in firearms and explosives license denial revocation suits if the Attorney General determines that the disclosure of such information would likely compromise national security.
Without a conviction, without an indictment, without a formal accusation, without even the requirement to disclose his "evidence," the Attorney General would be able to deny a suspected "terrorist" his Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms.
I actually started writing this article without realizing that with H.R. 2159, Congressman Peter King (R-NY) has, as of last week, introduced identical legislation this year (last session's H.R. 2074 was also his abominable handiwork).
Mayors Against Illegal Guns (founded by rabidly anti-gun NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg) is, predictably, enthusiastically behind such efforts (they call themselves "Mayors Against Illegal Guns," as if to fool gullible gun owners into thinking that they're only interested in fighting crime, but seem bent on making all guns "illegal").
The bi-partisan coalition of Mayors Against Illegal Guns today brought to light newly released FBI data that document 230 occasions in 2006 where persons on the violent gang and terrorist watch list were able to purchase guns because of a gap in background checks. Under the current federal laws governing firearms, there are nine factors that disqualify individuals from purchasing a gun, including felony convictions or evidence of a serious mental health problem, but being a known or suspected terrorist on the violent gang and terrorist watch list is not one of them. This serious loophole in federal law - known as the Terror Gap - renders the government powerless to stop a gun sale to a violent gang member or terrorist. Mayors Against Illegal Guns first began to highlight the Terror Gap in September 2007 and has supported legislation introduced by Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Representative Peter King (R-NY) to close this gap.
"Suspected terrorists can't fly in an airplane, but they can buy guns - and that defies common sense," said coalition co-chair and New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg. "Even after the Bush Administration endorsed legislation to close this glaring gap in our federal gun laws, Congress failed to act. This shocking new FBI report should be the impetus for Washington to act on this national security issue."
In summary, legislation like King's H.R. 2159 would empower the government--actually, considering our current Attorney General, one rabidly anti-gun official within the government--to cancel a person's right to keep and bear arms, if the government claims to suspect that person of being a terrorist. At the same time, the government is showing a tendency to regard a wider and wider swath of the citizenry as potential "terrorists."
I suppose saying this might render me suspect (as if I were not already), but that's a confluence of trends that I find deeply alarming.
Check out other Gun Rights Examiners:
- Atlanta: Restaurant with anti-gun policy saved by a gun
- Austin: Swine flu and gun control
- Boston: Massachusetts SJC rules on dangerousness of gun possession
- Charlotte: Humane Society of the U.S.: Not just your Mom's animal shelter anymore
- Cleveland: Necessity for protection creating new gun owners
- DC: It's springtime for gun rights in Wisconsin's carryland
- Denver: Montana seeks to test states' rights
- Los Angeles: Gun Control and some of my favorite quotations
- Milwaukee: Milwaukee Police Chief Flynn bullies gun owners
- Minneapolis: Are gun owners facing a ‘perfect storm’?
- National: What's the harm in waiting for government to recognize rights?
- Seattle: Public safety ‘crossroads’ in King County may reflect statewide, national problem on magnum scale
- Wisconsin: Sheboygan County district attorney backs VanHollen











Comments
so much for this years Young Republican Turkey Shoot.
before you can load them in the 40&8's, you must first disarm them through law or vilification, then you can transport them and kill them.
I was not aware of this pernicious move, but I am not a bit surprised.
It is part of an overall trend. The right to keep and bear arms is the single most important right as it defends all the other rights.
And, it is a God-given *right.*
The American way of life died 9-11-01. All citizens are considered a potential threat to the country. Due process, the ideals of which are in our constitution, is being dissolved because its gets in the way of government power. It is time to prepare, organize, and push the reset button.
Message to all Repubs:
You are the folks who decided to throw out Habeous Corpus, the Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg Statutes, and the all the rest of the Bill of Rights while your boy Bush was in power.
Now that the other side is in, if you lose YOUR personal freedom now to the rapacious state, then Ben Franklin's warning will finally come true on your ass:
"He who gives us essential freedoms for a little temporary safety, will end up with neither and DESERVES neither."
Enjoy your upcoming friendly knock on the door at night!! :-)
The Republicans did not throw out Habeas Corpus. It was suspended only during the American Civil War. The recent controversy was that the dems wanted to extend HB to POWs and illegal combatants. POWs or illegal combatants are not protected by the constitution and have no such rights. Also, you mentioned that they did away with the Geneva Conventions (sic). For your information there was only one convention and it applies only to soldiers in uniform. The ones at Gitmo have no such entitlement. The current administration is working on the neutering of the 1st and 2nd Amendment. That is a problem.
" Message to all Repubs:
You are the folks who decided to throw out Habeous Corpus, the Geneva Conventions, the Nuremberg Statutes, and the all the rest of the Bill of Rights while your boy Bush was in power.
Now that the other side is in, if you lose YOUR personal freedom now to the rapacious state, then Ben Franklin's warning will finally come true on your ass:
'He who gives us essential freedoms for a little temporary safety, will end up with neither and DESERVES neither.'
Enjoy your upcoming friendly knock on the door at night!! :-) "
I can't speak for anyone else, Steve, but I have never given the Republicans a free pass for their trampling of the Constitution. I have, in fact, pointed out that the bill I'm condemning here, H.R. 2159, was introduced by Republican Congressman Peter King.
I don't care which side of the aisle a politician sits--a trampler of freedom is an enemy of the people, utterly irrespective of party affiliation.
cool
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!