Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Terrorists and Guns: The Nature of the Threat and Proposed Reforms
U.S. Senate website ^

Posted on 05/04/2010 11:22:15 PM PDT by Neil E. Wright

H/T Mike at SipseyStreetIrregulars


Terrorists and Guns: The Nature of the Threat and Proposed Reforms

Wednesday, May 5, 2010
10:00 AM
Dirksen Senate Office Building, room 342

Add To My Calendar (vCal)

Witnesses

Panel 1

Panel 2


Background information:

In February 2004, then Attorney General Alberto Gonzales directed the Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of Legal Policy (OLP) to form a working group to review federal firearms and explosives laws*particularly in regard to NICS background checks*to determine whether additional authority should be sought from Congress to prevent firearms and explosives transfers to known and suspected terrorists. In the 111th Congress, Senator Frank Lautenberg and Representative Peter King have reintroduced a bill (S. 1317/H.R. 2159) that would authorize the Attorney General to deny the transfer of firearms or the issuance of firearms and explosives licenses to known or suspected terrorists. This bill reportedly reflects a legislative proposal developed by DOJ.

In general, this bill would amend the Gun Control Act (GCA) to grant the Attorney General the discretionary authority to deny a firearm transfer or state-issued firearms permit to any prospective transferee or permittee through Brady background checks, if the Attorney General determines that the prospective transferee is known (or appropriately suspected) to be or to have been engaged in conduct constituting, preparation for, in aid of, or related to terrorism, or providing material support or resources for terrorism, and has a reasonable belief that the prospective transferee may use the firearm in connection with terrorism (proposed 18 U.S.C. §§ 922A and B). The bill would make similar amendments to the provisions of the GCA governing the processes by which federal firearms dealer licenses are issued and revoked (18 U.S.C. §§ 923(d) and (e)).

The bill would also amend the GCA provision (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)) that enumerates several classes of persons who are prohibited from shipping, transporting, possessing, or receiving a firearm or ammunition, so that it would include persons who were the subject of terrorism-related determinations (described above). The bill would amend the GCA provision (18 U.S.C. § 922(d)) that prohibits any person from transferring a firearm to any prohibited person to include any person who was the subject of a terrorism-related determination as well. In addition, the bill would amend the NICS background check provisions (18 U.S.C. § 922(t)) to reflect that the Attorney General would have this new discretionary authority under the proposed 18 U.S.C. §§ 922A and B.

With regard to NICS denials of firearms transfers or state-issued firearms permits based upon terrorist watch list hits and subsequent determinations by the Attorney General, the bill would amend the Brady Act (P.L. 103-159) to allow a denied prospective transferee to request from the Attorney General the reasons for the denial, but it would also give the Attorney General the authority to withhold those reasons if he determines that such a disclosure would compromise national security. The bill would make a similar amendment to the Brady Act in regard to correction of erroneous information.

Furthermore, the bill would amend the GCA provision that addresses erroneous denials (18 U.S.C. § 925A), to allow any person denied a firearms-related transfer or permit to challenge that determination in U.S. court within 60 days of that determination. This proposed amendment would require the court to sustain the Attorney General’s determination upon a showing by the U.S. Government a preponderance of evidence standard that the determination satisfied the proposed provisions described above (18 U.S.C. §§ 922A and B). The proposed amendment would also allow the court to rely upon summaries or redacted versions of documents underlying those determinations, if those documents contained information that could compromise national security, but it would also allow a court to review the full, undisclosed documents ex parte and in camera at the court’s option or on the motion of the petitioner (denied person). The proposed amendment would also allow the court to determine whether the summaries or redacted versions of the documents were fair and accurate representations of the underlying documents; however, it would not allow the court to overturn the Attorney General’s determination based on the full and un-redacted documents.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government
KEYWORDS: 111th; 2010; assaultweaponsban; awb; banglist; barackhusseinobama; bhodhs; bhofascism; bhoguncontrol; bitter; blairholt; bloodoftyrants; bradywatch; cga; constitution; democratcongress; democratcorruption; democrats; donttreadonme; elections; guncontrol; holder; homelandinsecurity; hr45; lautenberg; liberalfascism; lping; nationalsecurityfail; nics; obama; republicans; shallnotbeinfringed; spartansixdelta; teaparty; terrorism; treason
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-97 next last
To: the OlLine Rebel

I’m glad you are offering a counterpoint. Here’s something else to bear in mind:

Judge orders release of 9 ‘militia’ members
http://freep.com/article/20100503/NEWS06/100503031/1319/Judge-orders-release-of-9-Hutaree-militia-members
[’Terrorist’ militia members out on bail?]


41 posted on 05/05/2010 6:40:46 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (We knew deep down it was this bad. Devour ugly truths with glee -- truth is our weapon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Thunder90

Word searches of ‘muslim’ and ‘islam’ led to your post 11.

This bill therefore must be tyrannical, not focusing on the real threat. Best I can tell for now, ‘case closed’.


42 posted on 05/05/2010 6:45:20 AM PDT by Arthur Wildfire! March (We knew deep down it was this bad. Devour ugly truths with glee -- truth is our weapon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright; Arthur Wildfire! March

“Time to let them know, in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS .... ‘FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS!!!!!!!!!!!’”

As it goes, that might be exactly what happens. But someone is going with me. That’s a fact.

Thanks ArthurWildfire! March


43 posted on 05/05/2010 7:04:51 AM PDT by MestaMachine (De inimico non loquaris sed cogites- Don't wish ill for your enemy; plan it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

btrl


44 posted on 05/05/2010 7:08:41 AM PDT by Clinging Bitterly (We need to limit political office holders to two terms. One in office, and one in prison.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neil E. Wright

I requesting the thread title be ammended to read

[LIVE] — The Hearing is about to start


45 posted on 05/05/2010 7:12:25 AM PDT by davidosborne (DavidOsborneDotZurvitaDotBiz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne

http://c-span.org/Watch/C-SPAN3_wm.aspx


46 posted on 05/05/2010 7:14:31 AM PDT by davidosborne (DavidOsborneDotZurvitaDotBiz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne

CSPAN just cut away as the hearing was about to start.. hmmmmm


47 posted on 05/05/2010 7:15:23 AM PDT by davidosborne (DavidOsborneDotZurvitaDotBiz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne

http://www.foxnews.com/

Fox is also streaming it.. link available at top of page


48 posted on 05/05/2010 7:17:30 AM PDT by davidosborne (DavidOsborneDotZurvitaDotBiz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Marty62

The NY Times Sq bombing was an example of us failing to close the Craigslist Loophole


49 posted on 05/05/2010 7:17:34 AM PDT by Ender Wiggin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne

CSPAN-3 stream is up and feed is a little ahead of fox..


50 posted on 05/05/2010 7:21:27 AM PDT by davidosborne (DavidOsborneDotZurvitaDotBiz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne

bump bump bump


51 posted on 05/05/2010 7:21:34 AM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne

bump bump bump


52 posted on 05/05/2010 7:21:34 AM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne

bump bump bump


53 posted on 05/05/2010 7:21:35 AM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dalebert

Sounds like LIEberman is blaming GUNS for terrorist acts right off the bat..

Its the TERRORIST -— not the TOOL !!! using this logic we need to ban airplanes so nobody has access to a plane because it can be used as a weapon


54 posted on 05/05/2010 7:24:05 AM PDT by davidosborne (DavidOsborneDotZurvitaDotBiz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne

DEPENDS on YOUR definition of “SUSPECTED TERRORIST” Joe!!!


55 posted on 05/05/2010 7:25:59 AM PDT by davidosborne (DavidOsborneDotZurvitaDotBiz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne

bet Leib thinks he can get dem votes if he throw in gun control...


56 posted on 05/05/2010 7:26:18 AM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne

Susan Collins is up.. blaming the GUNS more the PEOPLE !! -— grrrr


57 posted on 05/05/2010 7:27:31 AM PDT by davidosborne (DavidOsborneDotZurvitaDotBiz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne

BI PARTISEN DOES NOT COUNT if the R’s are RINOS !!!


58 posted on 05/05/2010 7:29:29 AM PDT by davidosborne (DavidOsborneDotZurvitaDotBiz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne

Any guesses as to how many times Susan Collins uses the words BI-PARTISEN in her openining statement


59 posted on 05/05/2010 7:30:03 AM PDT by davidosborne (DavidOsborneDotZurvitaDotBiz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne

Lautenburg is up


60 posted on 05/05/2010 7:35:54 AM PDT by davidosborne (DavidOsborneDotZurvitaDotBiz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-97 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson