Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com

Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/)
-   Legal and Activism (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/)
-   -   Bloomberg: Deny Second Amendment to People on Terror Watch List! (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/bloomberg-deny-second-amendment-people-terror-watch-list-26840/)

Bigcountry02 05-06-2010 01:08 AM

Bloomberg: Deny Second Amendment to People on Terror Watch List!
 
WTF! The Terror Watch is a joke, they have names of babies on the list. They do not research the names!

Watch the video that is embedded!

Bloomberg: Deny Second Amendment to People on Terror Watch List

Notorious gun-grabber Mayor Michael Bloomberg has exploited the fizzle non-bombing in New York’s Times Square to call for denying the Second Amendment to over a million Americans.

Bloomberg told the Senate Homeland Security Committee today he strongly supports congressional efforts to close a “terror gap” in the nation’s gun laws. Bloomberg pointed to a new Government Accountability Office report showing that individuals on the terrorist watch list were able to legally buy firearms and explosives from licensed U.S. dealers.

“That is a serious and dangerous breach of national security,” Bloomberg testified. The FBI should have the authority to block such sales, “but right now, they don’t,” he said. “It is time to close this ‘terror gap’ in our gun laws,” reports the Washington Post.

From March 2009 through February 2010, according to GAO’s Eileen R. Larence, 272 background checks yielded matches to persons on the terrorist watch list, one of whom was purchasing explosives. Several others were listed not only in the FBI’s Known or Suspected Terrorist File but were also on the Transportation Security Administration’s no-fly list, said Larence.

In September 2007, the Inspector General of the Justice Department reported that the Terrorist Screening Center — the FBI-administered organization that consolidates terrorist watch list information — had over 700,000 names in its database. The list was growing by an average of over 20,000 records per month, according to the ACLU. It currently stands at nearly a million and a half entries.

The No-Fly list is much shorter. It contains from 3,400 names to over 6,000 individuals, according to ABC News. Following the foiled underwear bombing on Christmas Day, 2009, Russell Travers, deputy director of the National Counterterrorism Center, told a hearing of the Senate Homeland Security Committee he expected it to grow. “It’s getting bigger and it will get much bigger,” Travers admitted.

The No-Fly list is a standing joke. In 2004, the late senator Edward Kennedy ended up on the list. So did Muslim peace activist and singer Cat Stevens. Since converting to Islam, Stevens has gone by the name Yusuf Islam. His name included on a passenger list resulted in a United Airlines flight from London to land in Bangor, Maine.

Bloomberg and a bipartisan coalition of 500 mayors support legislation that would allow the U.S. attorney general to deny gun purchases to people included on the lists. He said the group also wants Congress to close another “loophole” (otherwise known as the Second Amendment) that allows people to buy firearms at gun shows without background checks by the government.

The provisions of Bloomberg’s proposed legislation are aimed squarely at gun shows. “The Bloomberg bill would give the U.S. attorney general unlimited power to impose fees and regulations on gun show operators,” writes David Kopel for Denver Post. “An anti-gun attorney general could make the fees so exorbitant that no one could operate a gun show. Extremely complex and time-consuming registration forms that would have to be filled out every week could also drive gun shows out of business.”

In March, Bloomberg sent a letter to Obama demanding the government enforce unconstitutional firearm laws. “Mr. President, the time has come for action,” Bloomberg and Mayors Against Illegal Guns wrote. “Over the past six months, approximately 6,000 Americans have been gunned down in intentional acts of violence. The 40 recommendations in our Blueprint, many of which could be enacted immediately, offer the best hope we have for making our country safer over the next six months — and the years ahead.”

Mayor Bloomberg’s demand that every person on the so-called terrorist watch list be denied the right to purchase and own firearms is a serious affront to the Second Amendment. It would deny more than a million Americans the right of due process as stipulated in the 5th Amendment.

In May 2009, the Inspector General of the Justice Department found that thousands of names were placed on the terror list without predicate. As an example of the sort of “terrorists” included on the list, consider the case of Michael Winston Hicks, an 8 year old Club Scout from Clifton, New Jersey. Hicks is considered a terrorist by the TSA and the Department of Homeland Security.

If Bloomberg has his way, when Mikey Hicks grows up he will not be able to practice his constitutional right to own a firearm.

pandamonium 05-06-2010 05:12 AM

Sad, mayors against illegal guns, yet he's trying to stop legal purchase of guns by people who have not been found guilty of a crime, and have not been given due process.

Bigcountry02 05-06-2010 05:33 AM

I read the message and watched the video, almost puked!

AcidFlashGordon 05-06-2010 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bigcountry02 (Post 281229)

Bloomberg pointed to a new Government Accountability Office report showing that individuals on the terrorist watch list were able to legally buy firearms and explosives from licensed U.S. dealers.

Interesting comment from the Dick of New York City. A coworker recounted a story to me about a friend who tried to buy a gun and was told he couldn't because he was on that watch list. When that friend contacted law enforcement personnel, including the FBI, he was told they couldn't tell him whether or not he was on the list even though he'd been told when his gun purchase was refused. After 4 years of requests, searches and other efforts, the friend still hasn't found any information OR any way to get himself removed from this "secret" list.

Talk about violation of the 5th Amendment and his rights to "due process."

opaww 05-06-2010 01:01 PM

Bumberg is a terrorist, anti-American, anti-Bill of Rights and a democrat, OH wait his name is Bloomberg sorry for the mastake

pandamonium 05-06-2010 02:40 PM

Acidflash, has your friend spoken to a lawyer or maybe a senator or representitive? How about DHS directly, if it was me, I'd be the biggest pain in the a$$ they've ever seen till I got answers and off the list.
These laws and bills are never about trying to reduce crime. It is and always will be only about control, period.

Bigcountry02 05-06-2010 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pandamonium (Post 281445)
Acidflash, has your friend spoken to a lawyer or maybe a senator or representitive? How about DHS directly, if it was me, I'd be the biggest pain in the a$$ they've ever seen till I got answers and off the list.
These laws and bills are never about trying to reduce crime. It is and always will be only about control, period.

I agree with Pandamonium! There has been situations where kids were on the no-fly listing! Parents contacted with representative to assist in removal from the list. That was on CNN and FOX a month back!

I would have him work with a lawyer to resolve the issue, going directly might cause DHS to become very nasty! Big Government tends to do!

Unless, your friend has hidden issues, just a thought!

KalashnikovJosh 05-07-2010 12:06 AM

Hi.
I actually found this board by seeing a decal on some dudes' truck today.
I was gonna just lurk for a bit....but I have to make a comment here.
Sorry for its length.
But this has to be said-and repeated.


This law,the 'Denying Firearms and Explosives To Terrorists Bill' is not new,and this isnt the first time theyve tried to exploit a tragedy to enact it.
Eric Holder was spouting off about it when the Tragedy At Fort Hood was perpetrated.Its been 'stuck in committee' for a few years.

Anyone with half a brain should know what this legislation is all about,but to put it out in open air-

Its about the 'fundamental transformation' of an inalienable right -as specified in the Second Amendment- from the government administered privilege that previous 'gun control' has reduced it to,all the way down to a totally undermined 'dead letter',a null and void aspect of the Constitution which has no weight.

In the name of 'national security',all firearms owners will be subject to secret lists of approval.

It seems like with every new tragedy -even when a firearm wasnt even involved,like this New York Plot- this law gets air time from the looney left.

And thats intentional.
They want this bill to pass.
Its very important to them to have a monopoly on the use of force.
What was it Mao said-something about all political power coming from the barrel of a gun;so Mao made sure HE had ALL the guns!

And just the same way they pushed and prodded till they got the Gun Control Act of 1968 passed over the dead bodies of MLK and JFK,they'll keep on going till they get the response they want from the public.

This law is pretty much the end of anything resembling 'gun rights' in this country.

The GCA 68 was close,with its sole inspiration coming pretty much from pre-Nazi Wiemar German 'gun control' and Nazi amendments of such-
But this law,there isnt even the pretext of 'due process'.
GCA 68 might seem 'ok' to some folks,after all,theres due process(if you can AFFORD due process),but since when did the federal government get to enact 'gun control' anyway?
The government sure as hell didn't even try it for the first 200 or so years of its existence..at least not on the level of the totally foreign to American law GCA68...and just what part of the Second Amendment allows for government to make any 'gun control laws' anyway?

The part about how the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed?

Anyway-
This is the logical progression of big government control.
They get their way and violate the law that restricts them-you know,the law that says they cant 'infringe' on it,and they get their foot in the door-and whammo.

First they get their foot in the door with the GCA 68,now they want to expand the 'prohibited possessors' list to include people they single out for whatever reason they want,even political reasons (who knows,its not like these SECRET lists are public)-
And that might be YOU.

“He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.”
Thomas Paine

The federal government is out of bounds with any form of 'gun control'.
And as the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution places The Constitution and Bill of Rights(all amendments to the Constitution) as the Highest Law of The Land,including declaring state laws made contrary to it null and void-'gun control' is ILLEGAL for all government finding themselves within the jurisdiction of the American Republic.
Period.

But this is what happens when we fool ourselves into believing we should allow government to restrict rights rather than do its job and remove criminals from society.

I'm not arguing for 'criminal rights'-in my opinion,if you use force against an innocent person you should never see the light of a free day-but when government tells us it needs to restrict our freedoms to protect us,then we must seriously question government.

And when they start pushing for secret lists to deny rights?

Were in a world of hurt then.

The silly bureaucratic foibles of children on that list aside-do we really want government to have the authority to empower itself to deny us our rights based on SECRET LISTS?!

And this all started when they got away with GCA68.

AcidFlashGordon 05-07-2010 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pandamonium (Post 281445)
Acidflash, has your friend spoken to a lawyer or maybe a senator or representitive? How about DHS directly, if it was me, I'd be the biggest pain in the a$$ they've ever seen till I got answers and off the list.
These laws and bills are never about trying to reduce crime. It is and always will be only about control, period.

He has been going through the courts and other legal means for the last 4 years. The case is still ongoing. When these kinds of things come up, it makes you wonder just what other secret lists are floating around that could pop up and bite you in the ass.

DrumJunkie 05-07-2010 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AcidFlashGordon (Post 281927)
He has been going through the courts and other legal means for the last 4 years. The case is still ongoing. When these kinds of things come up, it makes you wonder just what other secret lists are floating around that could pop up and bite you in the ass.

I don't like thinking like a tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist but I have been wondering a,bout things like that for a while. Every time I am buying a new toy from an FFL I wonder if something will pop up this time. Even though I have nothing on my record that would cause such a thing. It's strange to me to have that anxiety but there's always that little twinge when I wait for the call. For the last year or so anyway.:o


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:00 AM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.