WAR: Proposed Bill will deny U.S. citizens the right to own a gun

The simple fact that we have a list of 'suspected terrorist' living within the US illustrates that the FBI/CIA/Homeland Security is not doing their job. Why? Because we recognize the possible threat, but still let these people roam in America.

So? They are on a watch list. I wouldnt exactly call that "free" someones paying real close attention to them...

Now when one of these people decide to commit an act of terror, then people are going to question 'Well if they knew that this person was a terrorist, then why did they do nothing about it before hand?

Exactly...So then, wouldnt you agree that keeping guns from the legally is a good start? I do.

I'm not for guns but it is our constitutional right to bear arms. When the government begins to take that away, then something is severely wrong.

They aren't taking away anyones guns. They are simply preventing these people from obtaining NEW ones. I still have no problem with that. Again, they did SOMETHING to get on that list.

We Americans want it both ways. Its like " How dare you take my guns" but then as soon as a nut case starts shooting up someplace its "How did he get the guns to begin with?" Its either all or nothing.

"Mrs. McCarthy's bill would add the no-fly list used by airlines to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System used by gun store owners to make mandatory background checks. "

do they use this system for checking employment and stuff also?


if so, what's to stop the employer from finding a name on it, and saying opps, I guess I don't want to hire him....probably would have the fbi at my door or something. and, well, who knows, my name could be on that list. I've never flown anywhere, how would I know!!!
smells of McCarthyism.

So? They are on a watch list. I wouldnt exactly call that "free" someones paying real close attention to them...

What are the FBI watching for? Watching for these terrorist to commit a terrorist act and then say 'Oh...we knew he was going to do that, it's OK'. The Terrorist Watch list is senseless.

Spliff, the problem is that you don't need to do anything wrong to get on these lists. You just need to have the same name as someone who's done something wrong, or even just someone who has radical views. The no-fly list has names of political dissidents from other countries and within the US. It's not just a list of "convicted terrorists".

This is just another step in controlling the population, next the list will be used by credit institutions, state DMV's, employers, you name it. Then the list will grow so large that just about everyone will have to constantly prove they're not that John Doe and eventually we'll be lining up to get our Biometric/RFID cards like junkies waiting for a fix.

This is outrage!!! i want to kill this bill right away!!! they better not pass this bill because if they do, soon they going to pass a bill to ban all firearms, so the government can take over!!!

Sounds like it's time to ban senators and congressmen from having free speach and from righting stupid laws. I will vote for that. Only a f...ing idiot would come up with such crap.

Spliff, the problem is that you don't need to do anything wrong to get on these lists. You just need to have the same name as someone who's done something wrong, or even just someone who has radical views. The no-fly list has names of political dissidents from other countries and within the US. It's not just a list of "convicted terrorists".

This is just another step in controlling the population, next the list will be used by credit institutions, state DMV's, employers, you name it. Then the list will grow so large that just about everyone will have to constantly prove they're not that John Doe and eventually we'll be lining up to get our Biometric/RFID cards like junkies waiting for a fix.

Exactly. We all know about the case where Senator Ted Kenendy couldn't board a plane because some "terrorist" on the list had an alias of T. Kennedy. This seems totally engineered to make us register for biometric ID cards, now that you mention it.

Damn, why'd you have to mention that! There goes my day.

Zip

How can less than 5 million idiots take over a country of 300 million, of which 110 million own multiple guns? It can't happen. Only an idiot in DC who is stupid would think so. The ARMY, NAVY, AF and Marines would join the citizens in taking down the idiots if such a thing were to occur as they would defend their own brothers and sisters before defending some idiot behind a mahogany desk.

It is illegal for felons to own handguns, but they may still own shotguns and I believe rifles as well.

Not correct as I understand it they are not allowed to have any firearmthat would include all types of guns.


The federal laws are here.
As you can see the list is very extensive and refers to selling the guns so it is safe to assume if it is illegal to sell it to them it is also illegal for them to possess one.

straylight.law.cornell.edu...

(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person—

(1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;

(2) is a fugitive from justice;

(3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));

(4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;

(5) who, being an alien—

(A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or

(B) except as provided in subsection (y)(2), has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 (a)(26)));

(6) who [1] has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;

(7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his citizenship;

(8) is subject to a court order that restrains such person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child, except that this paragraph shall only apply to a court order that—

(A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received actual notice, and at which such person had the opportunity to participate; and
(B)

(i) includes a finding that such person represents a credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner or child; or

(ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause bodily injury; or

(9) has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

I thought that was why they were arranging all of these security breakins and indentity thefts....just how many paths do they need open to accomplish something?

[edit on 14-4-2005 by dawnstar]

the original submitter of this said

A new Bill has been introduced in congress to deny the sale of firearms to U.S. citizens that are on Homeland Securities 'Terrorist Watch List'. The current 'No-fly' list would be given to gun store owners for mandatory background checks.

this is an misunderstand on someones part -- the list would be a part of the background check that is done thru the NICS program. The dealers don't see the list. The dealer would not know why the person was denied -- then the person who was denied would be given a form to send in to find out the reason they were denied then if they feel it is a mistake they can pursue it.

Zipdot said

It is illegal for felons to own handguns, but they may still own shotguns and I believe rifles as well.

Actually it is illegal for a felon to own any firearm - handgun, rifle or shotgun. As a part of the background check when buying a new firearm the fact that the person was a felon would be picked up and their purchase would be denied. As above if they felt the denial was in error they will be given a form to fill out and send in to find out why (as the dealer isn't told the reason for the denial) and have the opportunity to change it if they feel it is a mistake. Also on the form you fill out when they do the background check are questions --Specifically question B -- Are you under indictment or in any court for a felony and Question C - Have you been convicted of a felony that can imprision you for a year. And if you were to lie and say not be assured it will be picked up on the background check.

Hope this helps



edited to clarify one of my "theys"



[edit on 14-4-2005 by justme1640]

We all know about the case where Senator Ted Kenendy couldn't board a plane because some "terrorist" on the list had an alias of T. Kennedy. This seems totally engineered to make us register for biometric ID cards, now that you mention it.

Interesting connection. Never even thought about it. The Terrorist Watch list could be some elaborate attempt or push to biometric American society or push the infamous DNA chip that we have seen as of of recent.

On March 26th, FBI director Robert Mueller assembled a study group to review the law that lets suspected terrorist buy guns in the United States after they've cleared background checks. I'm assuming that this group came to the conclusion that the best thing to do is simply ban guns to these Americans that are on the 'Terrorist Watch List'.

Got a link?


How do you clear a background check if you are on the terrorist watch list?

Originally posted by GrndLkNatv
How can less than 5 million idiots take over a country of 300 million, of which 110 million own multiple guns? It can't happen. Only an idiot in DC who is stupid would think so.

They did it already. It's called an election.

The ARMY, NAVY, AF and Marines would join the citizens in taking down the idiots if such a thing were to occur as they would defend their own brothers and sisters before defending some idiot behind a mahogany desk.

Yes, I think they would. I also think that's why the government's working so hard to introduce these new restrictions on it's citizens, because it can't count on the military to hold power. Interesting that the focus of weapons development is now robotics and remote controlled defences. They won't even have to get out from behind their mahogany desks.

i think one of the first things we need to know, is what it takes to be put on this list in the first place. why does someone get on this list?is it badmouthing the government? is it being a forener? did someone call and say they thought you may be a terrorist? (i can see quite a lot of problems with the last one, in fact with all i have mentioned).

if they have good enough grounds to consider you a possible terrorist why do they not take steps to properly investigate it before treating you as a criminal? i always thought it was suppost to be innocent untill PROVEN guilty. all we have is some list made up that only a select few know who is on it, and the reasons why. remindes me of the lists the ussr, kgb used to keep on possible dissidents.all it took for them was someone to denounce someone else, there was no need for proof. all that denounced person then needed was to do anything that may have looked remotetly questionable to be brought in and possibly be made to "disapear".natzi gemany did simmiler things as well. it is something that infact all dictatorships are know for.

that this seems now to be happening within the us is extreemly troublesome. that the government has used one possible terrorist attack, to bring in such laws remindes me heavily of the burning of the reichstag as cause for declareing marshal law in germany. you will note that the germans burned it down themselves, declareing it an act of agression.

even a suspected criminal can own a gun, right up to the point of being caught. this is because untill they can be proven guilty they are to be presumed innocent.

someone mentioned that if a "suspected" terrorist, uses a gun and commits a terrorist act that we will be upset. well you are right on that point. but you are wrong to think that it was because they would have been alowed to own a gun. the reason would be, why was it not investigated propperly to stop it before hand. if they have good enough evidance to take away the right to own a gun, why have they not in fact detained them and found out wether or not the person is infact a threat or not?

we have seen that "this list" has caused people to have problems flying who as far as i know are not terrorists, and considering that some are high members of the government tells me that the government dosn't realy think so either. so in that case how many joe sixpacks are out there who have simmiler problems for no fault of their own?

it looks to me like just another case of unfounded acusations, causing many to suffer unjustly. just another case of useing the terrorist threat to take away the rights given by the constitution. are we now guilty before being proved innocent?

Guns don't kill people. People with guns kill people.

Guns are for corwards. The White man took gunpowder from the Chinese and created the most ludicrously coward personal weapon of history. Point and shoot, and kill. If you think about it, Europeans would have never invaded America without this stupid weapon, Cortez would have had his ass kicked by the Aztecs and the British would have never invaded anything at all!

Guns are pure EVIL.

About the guns: whether you agree with it or not, EVEN these "terrorists" on the "watch lists" have the American right to protect themselves and their families from harm with firearms. Once they commit a crime or plan to commit a crime with the firearms, then they can be arrested and that right can be denied to them. UNTIL THEN, the government has NO BUSINESS saying that a man cannot have a gun because somebody put him on a meaningless list.

This is an extremely valid point. There has to be some due process here.

Suspicion alone is NOT a good enough reason to deny a US CITIZEN of their rights.

Im torn on this issue. On one hand im an anti-gun advocate but on the other hand im for protecting the rights secured for us by our forefathers. I guess my views on guns will have to take a backseat on this issue. I'll have to conceed that this new bill is just another bill that removes power from the public and puts it in the hands of politicians which is stupidity.

If it takes the governments meddling in your "right" to own a gun that wakes you up to the blatant government abuses of the rest of your rights, then so be it. Why was there no uproar when your rights to travel freely were usurped? Why was there no uproar when your right to a free trial were usurped? No uproar when the FBI can search your home without a warrant? No uproar when your rights to privacy were obliterated? No uproar when your election was stolen for the 2nd time? No uproar when voters were denied their vote because their name was similar to that of a felon.

Each small, or not so small, erosion of personal freedoms leaves us poorer and weaker. Conversely it makes politicians richer and stronger. The time will come when we have so few rights that we legally wont be able to stop a single thing the government wants to do to us.

[edit on 14/4/05 by subz]

Make up your bloody minds! For the love of...

They are denying guns to those who they suspect to be terrorists, do you want these "terrorists" to be buying shotguns and pistols?