Terrorist watch list and Guns

[KimberPB]

Wow I'm kinda surprised how close it is! I'm more surprised that none of the NO's have voiced their side. I'd be interested to hear some reasons why they shouldn't be allowed to purchase firearms.

[mungo]

Yes, they should. I agree with all the above posts.

Plus, I don't think a terrorist is going to do any type of mass murders (to the degree to which they want to) with the types of firearms legal for sale. It's the illegal weapons they purchase that worry me.

[utimmer43]

Well, you all oughtta love this...Terrorist Watch List is No Hurdle to Gun Purchases- By Mike Lillis | The Washington Independent

Another day, another damning federal report regarding the ease with which potential criminals can purchase guns in America.

Just days after issuing findings that thousands of guns are being funneled illegally into Mexico, the Government Accountability Office reported that, in the last five years, folks known to be on the FBI’s terrorist watch list have tried to purchase weapons on 963 occasions — and succeeded 865 times.
(Mr. Lillis fails to mention that there are approximately 24,000 people on that list that don't belong there.)

The reason is simple: There’s no law against it. From the report:

Under current law, there is no basis to automatically prohibit a person from possessing firearms or explosives because they appear on the terrorist watch list. Rather, there must be a disqualifying factor (i.e., prohibiting information) pursuant to federal or state law, such as a felony conviction or illegal immigration status.

Last month, New York Democratic Reps. (Surprize, surprize!) Carolyn McCarthy and Steve Israel introduced a bill that would prevent those found to be on the Transportation Security Administration’s terrorist no-fly list from buying guns. The powerful gun lobby, however, opposes the concept of keeping Second Amendment rights from suspected terrorists.

What really pisses me off about this is that they believe that the obviously flawed terror watch list should trump the reasonably reliable NICS (or state-run counterpart) checks. They then have the audacity to say that if someone erroneously on the list wishes to buy a gun, all they have to do (as though it is such an easy process) is go to the TSA and have their name removed. I guess this is their way around our way around waiting periods.

BTW, I voted yes.

[rayven]

The key word is "suspected".

You can't deprive someone of their rights just because you suspect them of criminal action or intent. We'd all like to keep guns out of the hands of those who would do bad things with them, but using a secret list with no publicly reviewable criteria is a bad idea to bring that about.

[Daugherty16]

Originally Posted by rayven

The key word is "suspected".

You can't deprive someone of their rights just because you suspect them of criminal action or intent. We'd all like to keep guns out of the hands of those who would do bad things with them, but using a secret list with no publicly reviewable criteria is a bad idea to bring that about.

Rayven has just distilled the whole issue into just two sentences. +1

Fortunately i don't see McCarthy's proposed legislation going anywhere. Gun ownership is not a partisan issue, thank goodness. An awful lot of southern dems are avid hunters/sportsmen, and frankly without them the reactionary idiots like McCarthy might actually be taken seriously and their idiotic legislation (like the Rush bill also) might actually gain some momentum.

[Marine1]

Sen. Lautenberg’s new “Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009” HB 111-2159 and SB111-1317 would place unprecedented authority in the hands of the Attorney General to deny someone their Second Amendment rights without having been convicted, or even charged, with any crime. Instead, under this legislation, someone whose name is added – for whatever reason – to a terrorist watch list can suddenly find himself or herself prohibited from exercising their constitutionally-protected rights based on nothing more than suspicion.

You too can be a Rightwing Extremist and put on the Terrorist Watchlist. Here are some of the things that Homeland Security feels may indicate that you are a Rightwing Extremist:

• If you are a veteran with combat training
• If you are unhappy with the current economic or political climate
• If you believe in the US Constitution , States Rights and a limited Federal Government
• If you support the Second Amendment
• If you oppose outsourcing US jobs
• If you believe in protecting our borders
• If you believe in the sovereignty of the US
• If you oppose weapons restrictions and bans
• If you stockpile ammo or guns
• If you stockpile food and supplies
• If you use the Internet to learn about weapons and tactics
• If you use SSL or other encryption methods to communicate over the Internet

The source of this information is here.

Some of us fit all of these criteria. Most of us fit some of the criteria. I’ll bet all of us fit ONE. I fit all of these, yet I am just a proud American.

An unacceptable problem with the proposed Lautenberg legislation is that the Attorney General decides who get put on the list. He can make up any criteria for the list he wants. What happened to due process?

The other unacceptable problem with this is that you can be put on the list without even being investigated. Then once you’re on the list, there is no way to get off. Here is the source Department of Justice report

[svrivera]

I hear terrorists and don't think of Americans, I mean by think legal people here in this country working for the good of the country. Not here illegal and working here and sending funds out of it..

[Frankt897]

I voted no, but reading these posts shows me I didn't think it through...the word "terrorist" strikes a cord and I think of 9/11 and the war and I guess that's what anti-gun people are hoping for. I've had my eyes opened, I won't be so quick to answer next time.

[utimmer43]

Originally Posted by Frankt897

I voted no, but reading these posts shows me I didn't think it through...the word "terrorist" strikes a cord and I think of 9/11 and the war and I guess that's what anti-gun people are hoping for. I've had my eyes opened, I won't be so quick to answer next time.

That is exactly what the Anti's are hoping for, and among their ranks are the media. It is no accident that any media poll or news article that raises this question fails to mention how unreliable the no-fly list really is or that the people who actually DO belong on the list aren't going to the gun shop to make a purchase.

I wish others who voted "no" would pipe up and explain their answer like you have. Welcome to the forum.

[gollbladder13]

First, they didn't do anything, yet.

Second, let's face it. If a terrorist wants to "do their job", they're going to do it with more than just a gun. A sad reality, but a reality nevertheless...