Would-be appointees quizzed on guns

Would-be appointees quizzed on guns

news.yahoo.com

President-elect Barack Obama’s transition team is asking potential appointees detailed questions about gun ownership, and firearms advocates aren’t happy about it.

The National Rifle Association has denounced the move, which has already led one Republican senator to consider legislation aimed at ensuring a president can’t use an applicant’s gun ownership status to deny employment.

It’s just one question on a lengthy personnel form — No. 59 on a 63-question list — but the furor over the query is a vivid reminder of the intensity of support for Second Amendment rights and signals the scrutiny Obama is likely to receive from the ever-vigilant gun lobby.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Tucked in at the end of the questionnaire and listed under “Miscellaneous,” it reads: “Do you or any members of your immediate family own a gun? If so, provide complete ownership and registration information. Has the registration ever lapsed? Please also describe how and by whom it is used and whether it has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage.”

...that son of a female dog! Why would it matter if his appointees and their close family members own guns? Hmmm... let's think here for a moment. Would there be less chance of having a messy internal cabinet strife and less risk of potential warning whistle blowing on any future efforts or plans to strip Americans of their Second Amendment rights by those who own firearms, or by those who do not own firearms?

From my cold, dead hands.

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

Tucked in at the end of the questionnaire and listed under “Miscellaneous,” it reads: “Do you or any members of your immediate family own a gun? If so, provide complete ownership and registration information. Has the registration ever lapsed? Please also describe how and by whom it is used and whether it has been the cause of any personal injuries or property damage.”

...that son of a female dog! Why would it matter if his appointees and their close family members own guns? Hmmm... let's think here for a moment. Would there be less chance of having a messy internal cabinet strife and less risk of potential warning whistle blowing on any future efforts or plans to strip Americans of their Second Amendment rights by those who own firearms, or by those who do not own firearms?

From my cold, dead hands.

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

What matters is that they own them legally. That they are registered.

Do you recall that one guy from NY that Bush wanted to appoint to Homeland Security? It came out he had hired illegal immigrants to work in his house. That ruined his chances and really looked bad on Bush for not vetting the guy.

All this is to make sure that if something comes out which can be used against the admin, that they have made all possible attempts at catching it.

I'm all for it. Because no where does it say they care that you own guns... just that they are registered.


Once again, ... Much ado about nothing.

[edit on 21-11-2008 by HunkaHunka]

Seems a bit ridiculous to me. If they really want to know who has a gun all they have to do is search the registration records. It may not turn up all the gun purchases, but it would turn up the majority of them. I honestly don't see what purpose this could have aside from allowing them to not hire/appoint anyone who is a gun-owner or lives with a gun-owner.

Maybe they dont want them pulling a Dick Cheney move.

Remember the Media circus that event created?

Originally posted by Jenna
Seems a bit ridiculous to me. If they really want to know who has a gun all they have to do is search the registration records. It may not turn up all the gun purchases, but it would turn up the majority of them. I honestly don't see what purpose this could have aside from allowing them to not hire/appoint anyone who is a gun-owner or lives with a gun-owner.

Because they need to Cover thier behinds if anything comes out which might indicate some issues with someone in the Admin.

It's the same thing as in the porn business.. they need a photo ID to prove your 18.. That ID might turn out to be illegal, but they have to ask to show that they are complying with the highest spirit of the law.

[edit on 21-11-2008 by HunkaHunka]

Hunka:

I usually agree with most of your ideas. This unfortunately is not one of them. One of the other questions on this was already about domestic helpers (workers).

If these people had any integrity at all they would write in "None of your business" and leave it at that. I do know that if I asked any of my family or friends a question like that, the answer would be a little more descriptive as will my answer when someone asks me the same. These people will not answer the way they should. They will not be that brave.

And before anyone says so, and not that it is anyones business, I voted for Obama.

reply to post by capgrup


My only point here is that it's not an attempt to filter out gun owners.


I agree it's invasive as all get out, but many of us who are applying (myself included) don't really mind.

Although that Soclialist Part my wife belonged to back in college might keep me from employment in the admin.

:-)

[edit on 21-11-2008 by HunkaHunka]

OH YEAH .... I bet they would definately admit to killing someone with thier hand gun or ... Especially if you just asked the question .. Let's go back and ask them have they ever STOLE anything too. And If they have ever changed Religions ... Or ever changed thier minds on a matter. I mean we shouldn't have people in office who are able to listen and comprehend what people tell them. lets get the people who are stuck in one dimentional aspects. WOOHOOOOO !!!!!!! GO OBAMA !! YOU ARE THE MAN ... THE BLACK MAN. Is that not a point not a Racial point of view ?!?>!?>! We gonna paint the whitehouse black ... Isn't that in a Rock Song ? Figured it would have to be in a rap song ... LMAO .. OH never mind it was Kid Rock Close enough. ROFLMAO !! DECEMBER 5th !!! Go Justices GO !!!!!!Remember Remember the 5th of December .. Wait .. none of us could even hear the argument they are goign to be making .. .HAHAHA H... I wish I was a supreme court justice they could pay me off by telling me my Childrens children would have good education .. Man that was easy ... =-)

Hunka:

Don't sweat it. According to some here on ATS, your wife being at a Socialist Party just might make you a shoe-in for a job. All kidding aside, good luck!!

Socialists Party your wife belonged to may keep you from being in the administration .. Shoot Throw that in there and she will become the PALIN of the DEMOCRAT's LMAO ...

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
reply to post by capgrup

 

My only point here is that it's not an attempt to filter out gun owners.


I agree it's invasive as all get out, but many of us who are applying (myself included) don't really mind.

Although that Soclialist Part my wife belonged to back in college might keep me from employment in the admin.

:-)

[edit on 21-11-2008 by HunkaHunka]