Terror Loophole vs. 2nd Amendment :: The next move in disarming America?

Has the government finally found the perfect way to disarm America?

I realize this subject has been posted on already here at ATS, the fact that a few congressmen and some other officials are now trying to push for preventing people on terror watch lists from accessing weapons. However there is a twist here that I would like to explore further.

Now I am not saying that this is necessarily a means to totally disarm America. I am simply thinking this may be a means to disarm Americans at will, completely disregarding the 2nd amendment.

First, lets have a bit of a background on what official are proposing.

The "Terror Loophole".

The law that requires background checks on gun buyers is full of loopholes, some big and some small, but the most egregious loophole of all may be the fact that people on the F.B.I.’s terrorist watch list are legally entitled to buy firearms and explosives. And they have been doing so at an alarming rate. Between February 2004 and December 2010, individuals whose names turned up on the list were cleared to purchase firearms or explosives a total of 1,321 times, according to the General Accounting Office. Felons, illegal immigrants and mentally ill applicants are barred on the obvious grounds that they could present a heightened risk of violence. Not so, terrorist suspects — an anomaly that congress has occasionally tsk-tsked over since the 9/11 atrocities, but done nothing substantial to repair.

Source: takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com...

So this is the basic gist. It sound pretty logical right? I mean, we probably shouldn't be allowing these types of people to be purchasing guns?

There is a problem here though.

The "Terror Watch List" is full of errors, and the entire system is fraught with fraud, errors, and inconsistencies. This was well known even back in 2007 as the following article clearly defines.

According to The Washington Post:

The government's master watch list of known or suspected terrorists continues to be marred by errors and inconsistencies that can obstruct the capture of terrorists or cause innocent people to be detained by U.S. authorities, the Justice Department's inspector general said yesterday.

As one of the most powerful intelligence tools created by the Bush administration after the 2001 attacks, the watch list is used to screen about 270 million people a month and its content can determine whether people are allowed to fly on airplanes or detained after routine traffic stops.

Its size has more than quadrupled since its creation in 2004, to the point that it contained more than 720,000 records as of April, according to the new report. It is growing at the rate of more than 20,000 records a month.

But Inspector General Glenn A. Fine said its management by the Terrorist Screening Center (TSC) "continues to have significant weaknesses," producing a high error rate and a slow response to complaints from citizens.

Source: www.washingtonpost.com...

The article goes on to say:

In an examination of 105 records, for example, the auditors found that 38 percent of the records contained errors or inconsistencies that the TSC's own quality-assurance efforts had not found. They also discovered that the TSC is operating two versions of the database in tandem without ensuring that their contents are identical, which they said could result in missed opportunities to identify terrorists.
Source: www.washingtonpost.com...

This data is pulled directly from the Justice Departments own findings, in the report titled:

FOLLOW-UP AUDIT OF THE TERRORIST SCREENING CENTER
Source: www.justice.gov...

While I will admit, this is a report generated in 2005, and much has changed since then, it still seems to show that the system is fraught with errors.


So we now have two things to keep in mind.

1) Government is trying to take guns away from those on the terror watch list.
2) The terror watch list is full of errors.

So now let us move to the next piece of the puzzle.

Just how -does- one end up on the terror watch list?

Well, according to this How Stuff Works article, it actually seems pretty hard to get on it. The article says the following:

Getting put on the watch list isn't exactly like making prom queen, but it does require a nomination. An agent from the FBI, NSA or other federal agency nominates you. Then, that nomination moves on to the FBI's Terrorist Review and Examination Unit. If you check out as a known or potential terrorist, it's on to the Terrorist Screening Center and the watch list.

What exactly does it mean to be "appropriately suspected [source: The White House]" as a potential terrorist? The FBI and the federal government remain tightlipped about specific qualifications, continually referring back to the generic guidelines established in the Presidential Directive.

Source: people.howstuffworks.com...

The thing that sticks out here to me is the following:

The FBI and the federal government remain tightlipped about specific qualifications, continually referring back to the generic guidelines established in the Presidential Directive.

So how one gets on the list is actually pretty much whatever the president decides?

The final piece of the puzzle

A Department of Homeland Security intelligence assessment equates gun owners with violent terrorists and states that radical extremists are “stockpiling” weapons in fear of an Obama administration gun ban.
This newly uncovered document is just the latest in a long sordid line of training manuals in which the federal government characterizes millions of American citizens as potentially violent terrorists who are a threat to law enforcement.
The document is entitled Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment (PDF link) and was released just a few days ago. The paper is labeled Law Enforcement Sensitive and states, “No portion of the LES information should be released to the media, the general public, or over non-secure Internet servers. Release of this information could adversely affect or jeopardize investigative activities.”
Source: www.prisonplanet.com...

I know I know, you're saying to yourself: "Prison Planet? Oh Come on..."

But the fact remains that the exact definitions of how to get onto the terror watch list are not publicly known, and who is to say they are not adding these people to it? Who is to say they could not add whoever they wanted, for no reason what so ever?

I ask you this

Do you find it plausible that the government could use this technique to label people as terrorists in order to take away their guns?

Is it not plausible that the government could at some point decide that, "Someone who owns X amount of guns or more" is labeled as a possible terrorist, and placed on the watch list?

Let's not forget what happened to FPSRussia's business partner.

Nearly 40 law enforcement officers converged Tuesday on the property of a Franklin County man whose business partner was shot to death in January in a homicide that continues to trouble investigators,” onlineathens.com reports. “Federal agents, accompanied by Georgia Bureau of Investigation agents and deputies with the sheriff’s offices in Franklin and Hart counties, raided the Royston residence of [Kyle "FPS Russia] Myers. Authorities also raided on Tuesday the 60-acre farm of Lamar Myers, Kyle’s father, in Lavonia . . .

Source: www.thetruthaboutguns.com...

So what say you ATS? Is this the next move?


Title taken from following article:
abcnews.go.com...

There is ONE thing I would call a loophole and I challenge anyone to go find it. It's not hard and it's no trick question. In anything more than a cursory reading of ATF regulations regarding how the current background check functions? It stands out like a sore thumb. It's got absolutely nothing to do with private party sales or gun shows. They created the biggest loophole all by themselves ....and might explain why they have never mentioned it. The media hasn't either, that I've heard said.

It's the fact no one on either side at ATS has, which deeply disturbs me. Outside of that one they wrote right into the law from the start? Well... One man's loophole is another man's right to trade freely with another citizen ...which is what we enjoy here in the Midwest, regardless of how other states may do it.

They can close their own loophole and explain to people how and why they deliberately made it before making up new ones that aren't even what they present them to be.

(Really... NOT a trick question..... shouldn't take more than a few minutes reading ..and it really does have the most impact, finding it one's own self... It's kind of a "You HAVE to be KIDDING me" moment, given how these idiots talk for the TV on a regular basis)

If they wanted to disarm you would of they passed the bills instead of stone walling the potus in congress.
You people make zero sense to me. Also where did you get your theory they want to disarm america ? Do you not really notice or realize what they are trying to do in the government on the gun debate I don't recall anything about disarming the public , that was just fear mongering by people like alex jones and youtube wanna be reporters .

Gullible

reply to post by xmaddness


I also have to say disagreeing with the government could label one a terrorist .

Things are sooooooooooooooo messed up down there , I really do feel bad for you people watching your country go this way

Given that the "terror watchlist" is a load of crap being on it in no way should exclude you from purchasing a firearm, flying or anything else.

All this nonsense has to stop. Why do I have to share this world with idiots?!?!?!

Originally posted by freedomSlave
If they wanted to disarm you would of they passed the bills instead of stone walling the potus in congress.
You people make zero sense to me. Also where did you get your theory they want to disarm america ? Do you not really notice or realize what they are trying to do in the government on the gun debate I don't recall anything about disarming the public , that was just fear mongering by people like alex jones and youtube wanna be reporters .

Gullible

edit on 3/5/13 by freedomSlave because: (no reason given)

You are right, and I do not necessarily think this is a move to completely disarm America, but rather more of a mechanism to strip individuals of their 2nd amendment right on a case by case basis. It would be the perfect way to disarm militia's, or people who they just label as "dissenters".

Now, as to where my idea of them wanting to completely disarm Americans comes from, well, I simply think that the US government is trying to decide what to do if there ever came a time when the government has completely failed the citizens, and the citizens decide it is time to rebuild America. Every empire in the history of mankind has toppled at some point. Why would the US be any different?

Think of it more as a "contingency plan".

Also, with the current economic status quo, it would seem to me one of these tipping points may come if the US dollar ever fails. Hopefully it will never happen, but history makes me think otherwise.

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Given that the "terror watchlist" is a load of crap being on it in no way should exclude you from purchasing a firearm, flying or anything else.

All this nonsense has to stop. Why do I have to share this world with idiots?!?!?!

This is exactly my point here. The terror watch list being a complete load of crap. It seems to me they can add people for whatever reason they feel, without having to disclose that reason at all. Its the perfect "catch all".

People have got this backwards.

Before there were'terrorists' there were gun owners.

From 1934 to date people have been manipulated to fear them, and they all yelled, ' Government please save us, from all the baddies'.

And gun control was born

Years of manipulation, Years of laws the state has already successfully disarmed America.

The Feds,military,cops, and criminals are all better armed than the average gun owner.

Mission accomplished!!!

The only problem with that logic is who decides what a terrorist suspect is.

Look at the history of it, with cases like veterans and children being on no fly list etc.

Exclusion of people who have yet to commit a crime based solely on suspicion is UN-American bull.

Originally posted by neo96
Years of manipulation, Years of laws the state has already successfully disarmed America.

The Feds,military,cops, and criminals are all better armed than the average gun owner.

Neo do you really think a firearm is gonna defend yourself against a tank , a drone , a missile . Law enforcement really do need to be better equipped than an average citizen as they are the ones responding to calls .

Or do you think you are entitled to missiles and nuclear arms as well to be up to par with military to defend yourselves from a tranny government .

Also there is zero control of guns in your country it is just a free for all...
"successfully disarmed" do you not hear what you are saying

reply to post by freedomSlave


So tired of that strawman

Never fails someone always wants to bring a nuke or tank to a gun fight.

Can own a tank btw.

What part of the right of the people to be armed is so hard to understand?

Why would anyone support the disarming of the American public when that government 'benevolence' is on display for all to see in a history book?

Not a crime to own anything only what matters is the act that violates the action of harming, or killing of another.

Besides most people can't afford those, but most people have the means to own firearms.

Originally posted by freedomSlave

Originally posted by neo96
Years of manipulation, Years of laws the state has already successfully disarmed America.

The Feds,military,cops, and criminals are all better armed than the average gun owner.

Neo do you really think a firearm is gonna defend yourself against a tank , a drone , a missile . Law enforcement really do need to be better equipped than an average citizen as they are the ones responding to calls .

Or do you think you are entitled to missiles and nuclear arms as well to be up to par with military to defend yourselves from a tranny government .

Also there is zero control of guns in your country it is just a free for all...
"successfully disarmed" do you not hear what you are saying

edit on 3/5/13 by freedomSlave because: (no reason given)

Nukes and tanks aren't firearms.

Everyday its the same with the pro-gun!

Government says "We want to be careful and run background checks and mental health checks, too keep the guns out of the hands of those who would do harm with them"

Pro-Gun Nuts scream "THEY ARE DISARMING US!!! ILLUMINATI!! NWO POLICE STATE!!"

This is pathetic, you people are a SMALL majority of Americans (those who feel the government is out to take away everything) and thank 'diety' for that... Most Americans are starting to gain common sense and realize these gun restrictions/laws are actually for your benefit.

I am starting to wonder if the government is right, you people DO need your firearms taken away. You might end up shooting your local congressman when he shows up at your door to talk; thinking he is there to take your guns.

reply to post by TheSparrowSings


Likewise it's everyday with the same "Anti-gun" people, who would rather lay down their guns, and just do whatever the government tells them to do. Throughout history, the governments that take the guns away, either through voluntary means, or through other means, end up being the most destructive governments in the history of man kind in the long run.

Its all government propogated.

F alse
E vidence
A ppearing
R eal

Been there mo forever.

9000 to 1 they lost.

Originally posted by neo96

What part of the right of the people to be armed is so hard to understand?

lol neo when have I ever said people don't have a right to be armed? aside from felons and people with mental problems.

ETA do even know what I am arguing about in these threads?

reply to post by freedomSlave


Do tell what is your argument?

Laws already say felons can't own guns they do anyway.

Laws already say mental people can't own guns they do anyway.

So the point is?

reply to post by neo96


What is wrong with having to register a firearm what is wrong going threw background checks ? If you are a law biding citizen what is the big deal unless there is something to hide.

What is wrong with a ban on certain firearms . a shot gun works for home defense an ar 15 seems a little excessive for everyone and anyone to own . If you want to shoot on a range or out in the middle of nowhere I really don't care I have known a few people who shoot in competition , It is just not my thing .

I do have a problem with guns from the usa being smuggled into Canada and put into the hands of our criminals who don't care where they have a shoot outs with rivals in parking lots , malls , residential areas ect.ect.ect. All because of the lax gun laws in the usa makes it easier for the black market in Canada for firearms .

Adding more guns and such a reckless sales of firearms and ownership how does that help anything. How does more make less ?

double post

reply to post by freedomSlave

What is wrong with having to register a firearm what is wrong going threw background checks ?

Plenty

some people like me have problems with the invasion of privacy,civil liberties, and being guilty until proven innocent.

Don't think a person has to 'register' their private property to anyone see:

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

If you are a law biding citizen what is the big deal unless there is something to hide

Heard this before really trying to using the Patriot Act argument for background checks, and registration?

What is wrong with a ban on certain firearms . a shot gun works for home defense an ar 15 seems a little excessive for everyone and anyone to own . If you want to shoot on a range or out in the middle of nowhere I really don't care I have known a few people who shoot in competition , It is just not my thing .

Really don't have to explain what I own to anyone because it implies a person rights come from their nextdoor neighbors, where as they never have have, and never will..

I do have a problem with guns from the usa being smuggled into Canada and put into the hands of our criminals who don't care where they have a shoot outs with rivals in parking lots , malls , residential areas ect.ect.ect. All because of the lax gun laws in the usa makes it easier for the black market in Canada for firearms .

Actually the reverse is true gun control laws is why there is a black market people not figured out when people want something they usually get it?

Adding more guns and such a reckless sales of firearms and ownership how does that help anything. How does more make less ?

See the response above adding more laws does nothing to help.