1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Gun Nazis: "NO GUN FOR YOU!" legislation

Discussion in 'Politics, Elections & Legislation' started by Brian in Oregon, May 4, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    "No, you can't purchase a firearm...I can't tell you why, it's a national security matter".

    BOHICA. No due process. Secret "Star Chambers". Thomas Jefferson just rolled in his grave.

    Hearings

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

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

    Witnesses<br>
    Panel 1

    * The Honorable Frank R. Lautenberg, U.S. Senate<br>
    * The Honorable Peter T. King, U.S. House of Representatives<br>
    * The Honorable Michael R. Bloomberg, Mayor, City of New York<br>
    * The Honorable Raymond W. Kelly, Police Commissioner, City of New York<br>

    Panel 2

    * Daniel D. Roberts, Assistant Director, Criminal Justice Information Services Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Justice<br>
    * Eileen R. Larence, Director, Homeland Security and Justice, U.S. Government Accountability Office<br>
    * Sandy Jo MacArthur, Assistant Chief, Office of Administrative Services, Los Angeles Police Department<br>
    * Aaron Titus, Privacy Director, Liberty Coalition<br>

    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.
     
  2. Bushmaster1313

    Bushmaster1313 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,605
    Gun Nazis:

    Would posting Conservative leaning, Right to Bear Arms approving, Administration critical posts on sites like this give the Attorney General grounds to deny a transfer?

    Better buy your guns now.
     
  3. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    Gun Nazis:

    Posting on ts.com grounds for denial? Probably not.

    But, there has been reference made to other more hard core pro-gun and pro-freedom sites that could be interpreted as cause for concern.

    It has been suggested on several liberal websites by various individuals that they ought to maintain a list of posters from gun sites and furnish them to the feds for a denial list. Would the feds use it? Well, anyone remember the "rat out your gun owning neighbor even if they've done nothing" laws that got passed in some states? This whole thing is so ripe with denial of due process that any of this might be possible. The people supporting it do not care one whit about the Constitution, Bill of Rights, or the rights of citizens.

    A lot of us pointed out when the No Fly List first came out that it could set a bad precedent for gun owners. Well here it is.
     
  4. patrick Swartz

    patrick Swartz Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2007
    Messages:
    121
    Gun Nazis:

    Brian

    Thanks for staying on top of this sort of issue.I for one am intrested in what you post.

    Thanks

    Patrick Swartz
     
  5. no5shooter

    no5shooter Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    453
    Gun Nazis:

    I'll echo Patrick and say Thanks, Brian.

    Just to toss a little fuel on the fire, anybody remember when our illustrious Secretary of Homeland Defense categorized returning military veterans as potential domestic terrorists? All that idiot Napolitano has to do is get the ear of the other idiot, Holder, and it's SHTF time if she decides to promote her point of view regarding veterans. Time to clean the (black) rifles, I think. We may need 'em yet.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.