Bill In Congress Would Prohibit Gun Sales To Anyone Government Decides Is A “Terrorist”

KXMC TV ^ | 5/9/2009

[markomalley]

And the bill was introduced by a Republican, no less.

A new gun law being considered in Congress, if aligned with Department of Homeland Security memos labeling everyday Americans as potential “threats,” could potentially deny firearms to pro-lifers, gun-rights advocates, tax protesters, animal rights activists, and a host of others – any already on the expansive DHS watch list for potential “extremism.”

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., has sponsored H.R. 2159, the Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009, which permits the attorney general to deny transfer of a firearm to any “known or suspected dangerous terrorist.” The bill requires only that the potential firearm transferee is “appropriately suspected” of preparing for a terrorist act and that the attorney general “has a reasonable belief” that the gun might be used in connection with terrorism.

Gun rights advocates, however, object to the bill’s language, arguing that it enables the federal government to suspend a person’s Second Amendment rights without any trial or legal proof and only upon suspicion of being “dangerous.”

I don’t think anyone really has a problem with keeping weapons out of the hands of terrorists. The problems arise when it comes to who gets to define who is and is not a “terrorist.” And what standards are used. Also, since when can our rights be denied us because we might commit a crime?

According to the Department of Homeland Security attending a tea party, being a federalist, having an NRA sticker on your car or being pro-life indicates that you may be a terrorist. Or may, at least, have inclinations toward extremism and violence.

Now, I doubt that even if this law passed that we’d see a crackdown on gun-owning pro-life activists. But the problem here is that this law provides such a vague definition of who may and may exercise their 2nd amendment rights that the door is left wide open to no small amount of abuse.

Vaguely-written laws like this are extremely problematic because they put the decision as to whether or not we’ve committed a crime entirely as the discretion of cops and prosecutors. And if that’s the case, the only thing keeping us from being arrested and/or prosecuted are the whims of our law enforcement agents.

[panaxanax]

Impy, perhaps you didn’t see where Im stated...”I stand corrected”?

A bigger man would accept that as an apology and a ‘thank you’ for research on his past statements (even though it was BillyBoy that did said research). Thank you, BillyBoy.

Again, get over it, I have.

[paulycy]

and the Attorney General has a reasonable belief

So one person can take 2nd amendment rights away from anybody he or she decides is a potential risk?

The 2nd amendment is dead if this passes. Everybody to the right of The One is already on a terrorist list.

Of course, they'll still have to deal with the guns that have already been purchased...