Posted on 12/21/2005 8:39:03 AM PST by jmc813
Twice, the leadership in the U.S. Senate has tried to run H.R. 3199 up "the hill." Twice it has failed.
On Friday, supporters of the bill failed to garner the 60 votes needed to stop the filibuster of the PATRIOT conference report. The final vote was 52-47.
At issue for gun owners is a provision that would allow the FBI to obtain "firearms sales records." The bill extends Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act and allows agents of the federal government to get "firearms sales records" which, in their opinion, are relevant to investigating terrorism.
These records would be obtained from gun dealers, who are required by law to keep the gun purchase records (4473 forms). Thus, an anti-gun administration could then easily compile gun owner registration lists -- an enterprise which has often been a prelude to gun confiscation.
Congressmen on both sides of the fence made reference to GOA's concerns last week when the House considered the latest version of H.R. 3199.
During the debate, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) stated that people "should take note of what is happening here because the expanded police powers of the Federal Government will be used against them. Our Second Amendment friends already understand that...."
And Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) challenged House Republicans to consider whether they are really comfortable with "allowing the FBI to access Americans' reading records, GUN RECORDS, medical records and financial records without judicial approval; [or] allowing the FBI to search someone's home without probable cause and without telling that person about the search."
In the Senate, Larry Craig (R-ID) and Russ Feingold (D-WI) led the opposition to the latest version of the bill. If a compromise is not reached, 16 provisions of the bill will expire on December 31 -- provisions that include the Section 215 "gun registration" language.
Much has been made of the expiration date later this month. People should understand that only 16 provisions of the original PATRIOT Act will expire on New Year's -- and these provisions are some of the most controversial ones in the original act, as they affect the Fourth Amendment protections that American citizens enjoy.
REGISTRATION OF GUN OWNERS
H.R. 3199 would extend provisions which the FBI claims would allow it to seize 4473 forms, without the approval of any judge.
This runs contrary to the protections that were gained in the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986, when it prohibited the establishment of any registration system with respect to firearms [18 USC 926(a)(3)]. It is also significant to note that federal code bans inspections of gun dealers records, excluding four, narrowly tailored exceptions [18 USC 923(g)(1)(b)]. Those exceptions are absent with regard to the FBI's current practice of soliciting 4473 forms under the PATRIOT Act.
The protections that were won during the McClure-Volkmer battle took years to achieve, and it would be a shame to see those protections superseded by another enactment of gun control -- all in the vain hope that gun owners' purchase records can somehow help authorities curb terrorism. (Gun registration certainly hasn't worked to curb crime in any of the states or localities that have implemented it.)
For this reason, Gun Owners of America has told Senators that we would like to see serious reforms in this bill, including language which further restricts the ability of a future, anti-gun administration to muster a gun owner registration list.
The status of H.R. 3199 is unclear at this time. But it is more than likely that the Senate will hold another vote later this week.
ACTION: Please contact your two Senators and urge them to vote against the House-Senate conference report on H.R. 3199, unless gun records are removed from the records which can be demanded under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act.
You can visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators a pre-written e-mail message such as the one below.
-----Pre-written letter-----
Dear Senator:
Please vote against the current version of the PATRIOT reauthorization bill (HR 3199) because it would extend provisions which the FBI claims would allow it to seize 4473 forms, without the approval of any judge.
This runs contrary to the protections that were gained in the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986, when it prohibited the establishment of any registration system with respect to firearms [see 18 USC 926(a)(3)]. It is also significant to note that the law bans inspections of gun dealers records, excluding four, narrowly tailored exceptions [18 USC 923(g)(1)(b)]. Those exceptions are absent with regard to the FBI's current practice of soliciting 4473 forms under the PATRIOT Act.
You are certainly familiar with the rule of construction that deems more recent legislation to trump older legislation when there is a clear conflict between the two. The protections that were won during the McClure-Volkmer battle took years to achieve, and it would be a shame to see those protections superseded by another enactment of gun control -- all in the vain hope that gun owners' purchase records can somehow help authorities curb terrorism. (Gun registration certainly hasn't worked to curb crime in any of the states or localities that have implemented it.)
It is imperative that H.R. 3199 be amended to protect gun owner rights.
Please vote against cloture on H.R. 3199, unless gun records are removed from the records which can be demanded under Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act -- a move which would return the McClure-Volkmer protections as the operative law concerning when and where gun records can be demanded.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
I'm not happy about the 4473 archive either. I have a fair investment in private property documented by lots of those forms.
Now you're making me paranoid. Maybe it's time to start using PGPfone.
The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.
Must be he felt the criteria for suspension had been met.
LEOs also show up at gun shows and go out in the parking lot, write down license numbers and do a check. The highway patrol sets up DUI checkpoints and preforms a warrant less inspection of your current state of inebriation.
It is without a doubt that the Patriot act allows some loss of civil liberties. Since it may prevent us from dying at the hands of Islamo-Fascists, it also allows us to talk another day about what to do with any abuses found. Like the AW ban, what goes up, can come down. I vote we get through the present crisis and argue another day.
No one has yet proved to me the threat from Islamo-Fascists has gone away -- And with Iran getting nukes, saying their goal is to annihilate the US and Israel, I can argue the threat has increased.
We all think we can trust W, but what about the next one? Because the way the GOP handles the leadership role leaves much to be desired.
I think you fear our government more than you fear al Qaeda. It's hard for me to understand that...
...Unless, you blindly hate this president or republicans in general, more than you fear foreign terrorists?
GOA is the best!
Nor do I. I see the firearms sales as an after the fact tracing to find the nests. Which I assume is what we want the feds to do.
As with the AW ban, it can be taken down if abuse happens. Laws are changed all the time. You know that if the ACLU could find any abuse they would disclose it, even if disclosure were against the law.
Encrypting your communications is the surest way to get them intercepted. The NSA has bigger computers than you do, they will crack the code.
'Politics' is sick.
Banach's actions were "foolhardy and negligent". They also arguably violated that particular part of the US code that was modified by the patriot act.
That paticular code desn't have anything to do with domestic surveilence and the restrictions placed on domestic surveilence it. There is no requirement that the person being charged be tied to international terrorism.
There is no requirement to show that the person being charged under that section of law is an agent of a foreign power or involved in international terrorism.
You can debate if his foolhardy action rose to the level of offense described in that section of the law, but this has nothing to do with the federal government gathering domestic intelligence information.
"An analysis of the Justice Department's own list of terrorism prosecutions by The Washington Post shows that 39 people, not 200, as officials have implied, were convicted of crimes related to terrorism or national security."
So a considerable percentage were convicted of making flase statements during an investigation into suspected terrorism activities, or were found to have broken immigration laws rather than being charged with specificaly conspiring to perform a terrorist act, which is much more difficult to prove.
The Justice department spun things in a favorable light. The Washington Post spun things the opposite way.
No evidence off abuse of the Patriot Act mentioned.
Treasury Department figures reviewed by Newsweek show that this year the Feds have used the Patriot Act to conduct searches on 962 suspects, yielding "hits" on 6,397 financial records. Of those, two thirds (4,261) were in money-laundering cases with no terror connection. Among the agencies making requests, Newsweek has learned, were the IRS (which investigates tax fraud), the Postal Service (postal fraud) and the Secret Service counterfeiting). One request came from the Agriculture Department -- a case that apparently involved food stamp fraud.
Newsweek is not a reliable source for unbiased information.
The patriot act doesn't even claim that it's provisions related to money laundering are limited to terrorism.
Read the part on money laundering and it's purposes in section 302 of the Patriot Act.
The portions of the Patriot Act related to domestic survielence do require that the person who is the target of the survielence be involved with international terrorism or be an agent of a foreign power. The money laundering portions do not.
Fighting money laundering, even if it isn't related to terrorism is a stated goal of the Patriot Act.
Fighting money laundering not related to terrorism isn't an abus of the Patriot Act, it's using it as it was explicitly intended.
There are portions of the Patriot Act that apply even if the suspect is not involved in terrorism. When congress was attempting to combat terroists use of money laundering, they also gave the government more power to go after other money laundering. This isn't some streching of the law in a way that wasn't intended. This is explicitly mentioned in the bill where it decribes the purpose of that section.
Just had lunch with the Mrs and we were talking about this thread.
She told me that I get my opinions about 'getting a warrant from the judge' from my old friends who are in law enforcement because they are all very strong believers in "citizen rights".
Thinking about it, I'm sure she's right.
It's all playing the odds. The NSA's job is easy because most encryption out there is crap, just look at the built-in encryption for the various commercial desktop applications that can be cracked in under a second using desktop cracking software. But there's the simple mathematical fact that there aren't enough computers in the world to crack well-built 2048-bit encryption in a reasonable amount of time. PGPfone also has something to help against man-in-the-middle attacks. Aside from that, they have to get physical access to the computer or install software to gain access to the calls.
Sure, anything goes. We all have good intentions. The forefathers discussed this at length and their warnings have been passed on thru generations yet fear rules the day.
Suspected is the key word. Brandon Mayfield was suspected, had his rights violated, and was later exonerated. "Oops, sorry we used our expanded powers to violate your rights as a United States citizen, but you were after all a terror suspect, so you really didn't have any rights." The government has had to apologize to 12 other people for this, too.
Imagine one day being picked up and locked away, strip searched, put into solitary, no access to a judge or lawyer, no bail hearing, confined until the government decides its done with you. It's legal now. Hopefully, someone will find out what happened and petition the court for your release so the government doesn't sit on you too long.
I think you fear our government more than you fear al Qaeda. It's hard for me to understand that...
Enemies come and go. My children, their children, etc., will be affected by any liberties lost in the name of temporary security.
They'd like for you to think they can crack any code, but the facts are, they are limited by mathematics. Using good crypto like PGP with a strong key, strong passphrase, and good key management will protect your communications from being read, but it will also put you on a "watch this sucker" list.
Unfortunately, where the whole thing breaks down far too often is the key management part. Keeping your keys secure is not the easiest thing in the world these days. If they want your data bad enough they'll beat your keys and passphrase out of you with a rubber hose. There is is no way to really guard against that.
And that's another of my objections. The PA was sold to the public to protect us from terrorists, when in fact it was a general prosecutorial wish list that never would have been passed at any other time.
I do on statistical grounds. My chances of becoming a victim of terrorism are infintesimaly small. However, if the government starts chipping away at 2nd Amendment rights, everyone, including myself is affected.
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.