A new way to ban guns--brand everyone as 'terrorists'

May 5, 3:15 AMSt. Louis Gun Rights ExaminerKurt Hofmann

Previous Next

8 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

   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.