Posted on 04/03/2005 9:33:44 PM PDT by goldstategop
If a background check shows that you are an undocumented immigrant, federal law bars you from buying a gun. If the same check shows that you have ties to Al Qaeda, you are free to buy an AK-47. That is the absurd state of the nation's gun laws, and a recent government report revealed that terrorist suspects are taking advantage of it. There are a few promising signs, however, that the federal government is considering injecting some sanity into policies on terror suspects and guns.
The Government Accountability Office examined F.B.I. and state background checks for gun sales during a five-month period last year. It found 44 checks in which the prospective buyer turned up on a government terrorist watch list. A few of these prospective buyers were denied guns for other disqualifying factors, like a felony conviction or illegal immigration status. But 35 of the 44 people on the watch lists were able to buy guns.
The encouraging news is that the G.A.O. report may be prodding Washington to act. The F.B.I. director, Robert Mueller III, has announced that he is forming a study group to review gun sales to terror suspects. In a letter to Senator Frank Lautenberg, the New Jersey Democrat, Mr. Mueller said that the new working group would review the national background check system in light of the report. We hope this group will take a strong stand in favor of changes in the law to deny guns to terror suspects.
In the meantime, Senator Lautenberg is pushing for important reforms. He has asked the Justice Department to consider making presence on a terrorist watch list a disqualifying factor for gun purchases. And he wants to force gun sellers to keep better records. Under a recent law, records of gun purchases must be destroyed after 24 hours, eliminating important information for law enforcement. Senator Lautenberg wants to require that these records be kept for at least 10 years for buyers on terrorist watch lists.
Keeping terror suspects from buying guns seems like an issue the entire nation can rally around. But the National Rifle Association is, as usual, fighting even the most reasonable regulation of gun purchases. After the G.A.O. report came out, Wayne LaPierre, the N.R.A.'s executive vice president, took to the airwaves to reiterate his group's commitment to ensuring that every citizen has access to guns, and to cast doubt on the reliability of terrorist watch lists.
Unfortunately, the N.R.A. - rather than the national interest - is too often the driving force on gun policy in Congress, particularly since last November's election. Even after the G.A.O.'s disturbing revelations, the Senate has continued its work on a dangerous bill to insulate manufacturers and sellers from liability when guns harm people. If it passes, as seems increasingly likely, it will remove any fear a seller might have of being held legally responsible if he provides a gun used in a terrorist attack.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
I can certainly agree with that part of the statement.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
I live in Illinois. One of the worst if not THE worst state. I am almost 60 years old and I won't live long enough to see Illinois "grant" us our right to carry.
Today it's absurd that those on the Watch List can still buy weapons and tomorrow the NY Times will say it's absurd that these same innocents can't get their names off of the watch list.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Well, there's an objective viewpoint, eh?
I wonder what part of "shall not be infringed" they don't understand.
The Times has previously said that the terrorist watch list is racist and doesn't necessarily include terrorists.
"you are free to buy an AK-47".....NOT......how does the MSM get away with this bold face lie ? And why does the Pro Gun Lobby allow them to do such ?
It is a lie, not en error or a twist of a fact it is a lie....... . For civilians....An AK-47 is a NFA controlled class III , select fire rifle that to purchase takes months if not longer to get approved by the BATF and local law enforcement via a pile of paperwork and fingerprint cards . Some states don't allow Class III items at all for civilians........NY State is one of those that even Class III is banned. The New York Times is full of Crap as usual !!!!
http://www.evanshowell.com/Class_III_Transfers/class_iii_transfers.html
Even if such were possible to buy a Class III NFA Weapon easily after months of waiting for paperwork induced nightmares to go away, AK-47 or not, it is illegal regardless of the NFA Act to own one in NY state and .....Machineguns are ILLEGAL for individuals in DE, DC, HI, WA also........
IT'S BS PEOPLE !!!
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
On a terrorist watch list and still able to buy a Class 3 weapon? Fresh horseshit is spewing from the NYT again.
BS, if the check shows you are proved to have ties to Al Qaeda, you'll be denied. However being on "watch list" is not the same as being proved to have terrorist ties. If it's known that someone has such ties, they'll not be out buying a gun from a FFL, they'll be in jail or on their way to GitMo. Of course persons with such ties aren't going to be buying guns from FFLs and giving their correct name for the background check in.
That is fundamentally anti-American. It is more reminiscent of a Soviet-style police state than a Constitutional Republic.
They want to push this through so that statist bureacrats can steal the firearms of Americans by putting them on a "terrorist watch" list. The criteria for getting on this list could be something as simple as buying 1000 rounds of ammo, or buying two guns at once, or writing a letter to your congressman.
This is the kind of crap that the American Revolution was fought over.
Just wait until we have President Hillary, and AG Schumer. Then check to see who winds up on "domestic terrorism watch lists."
You know: gun nuts...Constitution fanatics...border watch groups...
Can't let dangerous folks like that have guns, no sirree, not when they are on "terrorist watch lists."
I've never liked this war war on "terrorists" jive. Way too vague! Bush had it right just after 9/11, when he said we were engaged in a "crusade" against muslim extremists. Now the war is against anyone on a "terrorist" watch list? No due process of law at all! .gov just puts you on the list, and you're a "terrorist"? No fly, no guns, no inalienable rights, indefinate detention, you're screwed, end of story.
Nuts to these neo-con facists, both D and R!
"Bear in mind that the people on these lists have not been convicted of, or even charged with, any crime that would disqualify them from buying a firearm: “…background checks found no prohibiting information, such as felony convictions, illegal immigrant status, or other disqualifying factors” (GAO report). This is why Lautenberg, the New York Times, and the ACLU are in such a bind. But the Times obviously thinks that hysteria and name-calling are useful proxies for rational thought: “buy assault rifles”, “enabled dozens of suspects to stock their personal or group armories”, “John Ashcroft, a gun rights zealot”, “the most extreme agenda of the gun lobby”. Note the Times itself uses the word “suspects” – yet the Times is apparently willing to forego small matters like indictment, trial, and conviction, in their haste to pass judgment. To the left, apparently, anyone who wants to buy a gun is ipso facto a terror suspect."
More:
http://www.tysknews.com/News/watch_lists.htm
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.