Over the weekend, the gun blogs have been abuzz about a video clip (below) of a speech to the Brady Campaign, delivered back in May 2007 by White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel--at that time a Congressman (D-IL). He called for a couple of the usual staples of the citizen disarmament extremists--a "strengthened" background check system, and a renewal of the ban of so-called "assault weapons" (I've mentioned the growing push for such a renewal before). The main thrust of his speech, though, and what has drawn the attention of my fellow gun rights writers, is the idea of barring people on the "No-fly list" from buying firearms.
"If you're on that "No-Fly List", your access to your right to bear arms is canceled, because you're not part of the American family, you don't deserve that right. There is no right for you, if you're on that terrorist list."
On the face of it, I suppose it might sound like a sensible idea--who, after all, would be opposed to preventing terrorists from acquiring firearms? What we must keep in mind, though, is that what's being discussed here is not blocking firearm sales to terrorists (if we know that's what they are, why are they running around free, anyway?), but to suspected terrorists.
I have not, so far, found any mention of a bill introduced in the current Congress that would close the so-called "terror gap loophole" (I'm not making that term up), but two bills introduced in the 110th Congress, H.R. 2074 in the House, and S. 1237 in the Senate, should give us a pretty good idea of what to expect, and those bills, after all, were what Emanuel must have been referring to back in 2007 (he was a co-sponsor of H.R. 2074, by the way).
From the summary:
Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2007 - Amends the federal criminal code to grant the Attorney General the authority to deny the transfer of firearms or the issuance of a federal firearms and explosives license to any individual if the Attorney General: (1) determines that such individual has been engaged in or has provided material support or resources for terrorist activities; and (2) has a reasonable belief that such individual may use a firearm or explosive in connection with terrorism. Allows any individual whose firearm or explosives license application has been been denied to bring legal action challenging the denial.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 securityAuthorizes the Attorney General to revoke firearms and explosives licenses and permits held by individuals determined to be engaged in terrorism
Get that? To be deprived of one's Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms, one does not have to be convicted of a single crime, nor indicted, nor even charged--the Attorney General (the most rabidly, virulently anti-gun Attorney General in history)--an unelected official, by the way--can unilaterally "determine" that one's rights are null and void.
Then, there's the little fact that the terrorist watch list now has over a million names on it--Senator Ted Kennedy even made the "No-fly list" (granted, Sen. Kennedy has caused more innocent deaths than the vast majority of American gun owners, but I would have trouble accusing him of terrorism).
. . . Or, how about the little problem that simply having the name Robert Johnson is apparently enough to get you on the list--even if you never sold your soul to the devil down at the crossroads (sorry--couldn't resist a little joke).
. . . Or that you can challenge your "terrorist" status, but the Attorney General can keep secret the reasons for your name being on the list, making such a challenge rather difficult. No potential for abuse there, right?
The bottom line is that you don't even have to care about gun rights to be horrified by the idea of giving an unelected official unilateral power to deny Constitutionally guaranteed rights without a conviction, without an indictment, without being charged, without even being publicly accused of a crime. Ours is a justice system based on the presumption of innocence pending proof of guilt, or at least it's supposed to be, and what Emanuel advocates--to the cheers of the Brady Campaign--is anathema to that philosophy.
More, on a related note, here.
- National Gun Rights Examiner: The trail of tears
- Los Angeles Gun Rights Examiner: Saturday special: Answering the Brady Campaign Against Handgun violence.
- Cleveland Gun Rights Examiner: Can you effectively defend your beliefs?
- Charlotte Gun Rights Examiner: Phony gun groups: Fool me twice?
- Austin Gun Rights Examiner: Firearms: A great equalizer
- DC Gun Rights Examiner: DC taxpayers will pay for City Council's gun ban redux
- Milwaukee Gun Rights Examiner: Time to change our attitude about guns
- Denver Gun Rights Examiner: Who could know?
- Minneapolis Gun Rights Examiner: When is it good to fail?
Comments
Rahm Emanuel is also on a NO FLY list.
US FM 44-8 Chapter 5, SMALL ARMS USED FOR AIR DEFENSE
Many of us haev taken oaths to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America. Now, most certainly, would be no time to shirk our duties against active threats to freedom and proponents of tyranny.
Unfortunately most Americans are abysmally stupid and ego-centric in regards to the denial of rights by fiat of some unelected and dictatorial dross of mankind.
They aren't concerned because they think he means "those other people". And he does. What they aren't intelligent enough to realize is that to him we are "ALL" "those other people".
They had better wake up real soon. Or they will be the ones in the 40&8's. Look it up. Hitler's delivery system to the ovens.
What constitutional basis does the government have for creating and enforcing a "no-fly" list? None?
what you are forgetting is that before Bush and his Terror policies, we only had like 45 names on that list, and they were supposed to be threats. Now, Bush added even KIDS on the list. Blame the right and their fear mongering on the list.
otherwise, I agree. 2nd Amendment gives all Law Abiding citizens the right to own a weapon, and I believe that means a damned tank if I so want one. Because I miss the Bradleys I used to drive protecting our country.
Guys chill out, Obama's got this, don't sweat it.
Hey look the democrats wnat to bring back slavery! How nice of them to consider everyhone that maybe placed on a no fly list as a defacto criminal charged with a crime for being snitched on by anyone that feels like snitching, of even if you are taken aside and frisked for anything you go on a list. This equals slavery, Rahm wants to be known as a modern day slave owner, where can we go massa Rahm? Show us the way massa Rahm. Can we get our slave passes signed massa Rahm since we also will be denied the right to read or listen to the radio for fear we might make our own passes massa Rahm?
Just to clarify something here "fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms" bearing harms is not a fundamental right... it's not even clear that it's a constitional right (unless you're some gun nuts from the U.S.A... which should be the best reason to keep you from having any weapon, except maybe a plastic knife and fork)
Well, seems to me the constitution got tossed out the window on September 12, 2001.
RT
www.anon-tools.us.tc
You call people gun nuts, but this country was founded on violence. We didn't just borrow the land from the native americans. Also, just let me say what a good atmosphere it was after Katrina. All you hippies whining about gun control need to move to Canada. People don't just get along and I'll be damned if I don't have a gun to protect myself and my family. When I die you can pry it from my cold dead hands and poof, you have a gun too.
It's interesting to see people who were apathetic towards our government trampling our consitutional rights under the Bush administration are now finally paying attention because their guns are threatened. These unconstitutional actions by our executive branch has been along time coming. People need to keep aware of all these power grabs, no matter what party is behind them!
What I find interesting, Erik, is being told by someone who doesn't know me that I was "apathetic towards our government trampling our Constitutional rights under the Bush administration."
You very obviously don't know me, at all.
oops: your missing the point of the second amendment right to bear arms as a "fundamental human right", it is to protect our rights/freedoms by force if necessary. This includes going against our own government, or any foreign government who impede our rights similarly to our forefathers.unfortunately it is human nature to kill each other for stupid reasons but it is inevitable. Banning guns wont stop people from killing each other, tho it would cut the numbers down significantly. BTW the real terrorists are our own government officials who are slowly taking away our rights and disregarding our constitution. Big Brother is watching...
"oops: Just to clarify something here "fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms" bearing harms is not a fundamental right... it's not even clear that it's a constitional right (unless you're some gun nuts from the U.S.A... which should be the best reason to keep you from having any weapon, except maybe a plastic knife and fork)"
In D.C. v. Heller, the Supreme Court determined that there was an individual right to keep and bear arms. In Federalist 46, Alexander Hamilton more-or-less directly stated that the USA was a free nation, unlike all the kingdoms of Europe, because it had an armed citizenry willing to fight for their rights. Just because the English have empowered their Parliment to eliminate rights on a whim does not make the right any less fundamental.
I heard they are going to use the Gitmo loophole by moving the no-fly list people to our territory in Cuba that way they don't need to be charged to be stripped of their rights as humans. The only real dissolution of gun rights was demonstrated when, during a period of civil unrest, the Bush admininstration tacitly allowed the confiscation of legally owned firearms during katrina. A huge disappointment. Just at a time when the founders thought they might be important; as the police state moved in.
People like oops baffle me. How is it that all of the amendments in the bill of rights apply to "citizens" except for the one that makes it possible to have all of them including the Constitution itself. Funny how the founding-fathers put it #2 on the list, behind only free speech!! Yet because it has the word "militia" in it these idiots can't comprehend written english anymore. It says it's neccesary to bear arms to have a militia; not it's neccesary to have a militia to bear arms.
Scott, people like "oops" used to baffle me, too, until I discovered several things almost universaly true about them. #1 They know virtually nothing about what they express strong opinions. For instance, did you notice "oops" starts off stating a "fact" very matter of factly, absolutely sure he's right when he's obviously and patantly wrong. But did he even attempt to offer even one scource or fact that would support his idiotic statement? Of course not, because he doesn't know any. And #2 Stubborn goes with stupid. These type of folks, not only don't know anything, but neither can you teach them anything--almost as if they're addicted to stupidity. He named himself well:--"oops"! Don't waste too much time trying to enlighten these folks. They're liberals. They're stupid. And they prove the truth of the saying--"You just can't cure stupid."
P.S. Kurt, thank you for another enlightening article and video. Initially, Rahm Emanuel gives the appearance of being like oops-- stupid. But while Emanuel clearly is a brain damaged liberal, I DON'T think he's stupid. He's a sharp, trained lawyer. He knows exactly what he's doing and where he wants to go with gun control--total denial and destruction of Second Amendment rights. Give him credit for being up front about it. He wants to disarm America in preparation for his boss, Obama's socialist new world order.
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!