PDA

View Full Version : Report: U.S. Terrorism List Suspects Bought Guns


shooterx10
03-08-2005, 12:07 PM
Oh boy! Look out for more anti-gun bills to defecate from the anti-gun bigots! http://www.calguns.net/banghead.gif Watch them equate gun owners as "terrorists!" Oh I forgot, they already do! http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

------------------------------

Report: U.S. Terrorism List Suspects Bought Guns

By Sue Pleming
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Dozens of terror suspects on U.S. watch lists got government approval to buy guns legally in the United States last year, according to a congressional investigation released Tuesday.

The Government Accountability Office report said people associated with terrorist groups had taken advantage of loopholes in U.S. gun laws that do not automatically bar a person belonging to such a group from buying a gun.

It urged the Federal Bureau of Investigation to "better manage" background checks for people wanting to buy guns and recommended the attorney general clarify procedures for doing this and strengthen oversight of such purchases.

"Proper management of firearm-related background checks involving valid matches with terrorist watch list records is important," said the study by the GAO, a nonpartisan investigative body of Congress.

People in the United States who buy guns from dealers have to have a background check before being allowed to purchase the weapon. Their names are checked to see whether they have disqualifying factors such as felony convictions or mental illness, or are illegal immigrants.

The GAO said it reviewed 44 gun-related background checks done by the FBI and other state agencies from Feb. 3 to June 30, 2004, which had resulted in valid matches with terrorist watch list records.

Of these people on terror lists trying to buy guns, the report said 35 sales were allowed to go ahead because the background checks found no disqualifying information that would bar the purchases.

Authorities got an additional 14 gun applications from terrorism suspects in the four months after the study ended and all but two were cleared to proceed, the report said.

While the report did not name the suspected terrorist groups represented by the gun buyers, al Qaeda and other groups linked to it as well as other militant groups are on the government watch lists.

PRIVACY CONCERNS

FBI officials have long complained they are hindered by laws that restrict the use of gun-buying records due to concerns over gun owners' privacy rights, which are forcefully lobbied by the powerful National Rifle Association.

Gun control advocates argue that current gun laws endanger Americans by giving suspected terrorists an opportunity to evade scrutiny while obtaining weapons.

"We have been trying to warn the public that the policies of the current administration and some of the legislation passed by Congress is going completely 180 degrees in the wrong direction when it comes to preventing terrorists from arming themselves," said Peter Hamm, communications director for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

Hamm said his organization had proposed a number of ways of closing loopholes but these had been ignored in favor of arguments put forward by the NRA.

"They have tried to keep the NRA happy and in doing so are helping the terrorists to arm themselves," said Hamm whose group is named after James Brady, the White House press secretary wounded in the 1981 assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan.

Last year's failure by Congress to renew a 10-year ban on importing or manufacturing certain military-style assault weapons was seen as a victory for the NRA.

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to questions about the report but said in a written response to the GAO that it would revise some of its procedures and was looking into more frequent FBI oversight checks of gun records involving people on terrorism watch lists.

The NRA said it would respond later to the GAO report.

Here is the link. (http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/story.jsp?floc=ne-us-12-l8&flok=FF-RTO-rontz&idq=/ff/story/0002%2F20050308%2F1215664379.htm&sc=rontz)

shooterx10
03-08-2005, 12:07 PM
Oh boy! Look out for more anti-gun bills to defecate from the anti-gun bigots! http://www.calguns.net/banghead.gif Watch them equate gun owners as "terrorists!" Oh I forgot, they already do! http://calguns.net/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

------------------------------

Report: U.S. Terrorism List Suspects Bought Guns

By Sue Pleming
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Dozens of terror suspects on U.S. watch lists got government approval to buy guns legally in the United States last year, according to a congressional investigation released Tuesday.

The Government Accountability Office report said people associated with terrorist groups had taken advantage of loopholes in U.S. gun laws that do not automatically bar a person belonging to such a group from buying a gun.

It urged the Federal Bureau of Investigation to "better manage" background checks for people wanting to buy guns and recommended the attorney general clarify procedures for doing this and strengthen oversight of such purchases.

"Proper management of firearm-related background checks involving valid matches with terrorist watch list records is important," said the study by the GAO, a nonpartisan investigative body of Congress.

People in the United States who buy guns from dealers have to have a background check before being allowed to purchase the weapon. Their names are checked to see whether they have disqualifying factors such as felony convictions or mental illness, or are illegal immigrants.

The GAO said it reviewed 44 gun-related background checks done by the FBI and other state agencies from Feb. 3 to June 30, 2004, which had resulted in valid matches with terrorist watch list records.

Of these people on terror lists trying to buy guns, the report said 35 sales were allowed to go ahead because the background checks found no disqualifying information that would bar the purchases.

Authorities got an additional 14 gun applications from terrorism suspects in the four months after the study ended and all but two were cleared to proceed, the report said.

While the report did not name the suspected terrorist groups represented by the gun buyers, al Qaeda and other groups linked to it as well as other militant groups are on the government watch lists.

PRIVACY CONCERNS

FBI officials have long complained they are hindered by laws that restrict the use of gun-buying records due to concerns over gun owners' privacy rights, which are forcefully lobbied by the powerful National Rifle Association.

Gun control advocates argue that current gun laws endanger Americans by giving suspected terrorists an opportunity to evade scrutiny while obtaining weapons.

"We have been trying to warn the public that the policies of the current administration and some of the legislation passed by Congress is going completely 180 degrees in the wrong direction when it comes to preventing terrorists from arming themselves," said Peter Hamm, communications director for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

Hamm said his organization had proposed a number of ways of closing loopholes but these had been ignored in favor of arguments put forward by the NRA.

"They have tried to keep the NRA happy and in doing so are helping the terrorists to arm themselves," said Hamm whose group is named after James Brady, the White House press secretary wounded in the 1981 assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan.

Last year's failure by Congress to renew a 10-year ban on importing or manufacturing certain military-style assault weapons was seen as a victory for the NRA.

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to questions about the report but said in a written response to the GAO that it would revise some of its procedures and was looking into more frequent FBI oversight checks of gun records involving people on terrorism watch lists.

The NRA said it would respond later to the GAO report.

Here is the link. (http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/story.jsp?floc=ne-us-12-l8&flok=FF-RTO-rontz&idq=/ff/story/0002%2F20050308%2F1215664379.htm&sc=rontz)

fastmanusa
03-08-2005, 12:10 PM
Just more ammo for Bradey.

Rascal
03-08-2005, 12:29 PM
This is all BS.
What happens when the average law abiding citizen who happens to have the same name as a supected "terrorist" tries to buy a gun? Just because you have the same name, doesn't mean that you are a terrorist. This could open up a very big can of worms. What happens if they think you are a supected spouse abuser? Are they going to keep you from buying a gun. You haven't comitted any crime.
Even if they are supected terrorist. I thought that you are presummed innocent until proven guilty?

Mesa Tactical
03-08-2005, 2:09 PM
In today's political climate, a person "associated with terrorist organizations" is basically anyone the government knows of who has exercised his First Amendment right to express sympathy for the causes espoused by "terrorists," which could be anything from pan-Islamic nationlism to getting the British out of Northern Ireland.

For example, the singer Cat Stevens has recently been barred from our shores because he has expressed opinions the US State Department does not like. He would be just the sort of person this article references as being "associated with terrorist organizations," though he is no more a terrorist than Bill O'Reilly.

Food for thought.

jmlivingston
03-08-2005, 2:54 PM
This is real scary. The Brady Bunch are finding a new way to take away our right to gun ownership, by saying that if an individual is a "suspected terrorist" that person shouldn't be able to buy firearms. While I agree in concept that terrorists shouldn't be able to buy guns (I mean, who would disagree with that?), the definitions are much too murky and there seems no clear mechanism to determine who is (or is not) a suspect, and what evidence does it take to qualify an individual as a "terrorism suspect"?

It seems like we are in a precarious situation that might eventually see the retun of Sedition laws to our country. Look at what Yahoo! Education (http://education.yahoo.com/reference/encyclopedia/entry?id=1358) says about sedition:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> 1798, four laws enacted by the Federalist-controlled U.S. Congress, allegedly in response to the hostile actions of the French Revolutionary government on the seas and in the councils of diplomacy (see XYZ Affair), but actually designed to destroy Thomas Jefferson's Republican party, which had openly expressed its sympathies for the French Revolutionaries. Depending on recent arrivals from Europe for much of their voting strength, the Republicans were adversely affected by the Naturalization Act, which postponed citizenship, and thus voting privileges, until the completion of 14 (rather than 5) years of residence, and by the Alien Act and the Alien Enemies Act, which gave the President the power to imprison or deport aliens suspected of activities posing a threat to the national government. President John Adams made no use of the alien acts. Most controversial, however, was the Sedition Act, devised to silence Republican criticism of the Federalists. Its broad proscription of spoken or written criticism of the government, the Congress, or the President virtually nullified the First Amendment freedoms of speech and the press. Prominent Jeffersonians, most of them journalists, such as John Daly Burk, James T. Callender, Thomas Cooper, William Duane (1760—1835), and Matthew Lyon were tried, and some were convicted, in sedition proceedings. The Alien and Sedition Acts provoked the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and did much to unify the Republican party and to foster Republican victory in the election of 1800. The Republican-controlled Congress repealed the Naturalization Act in 1802; the others were allowed to expire (1800—1801).

See J. C. Miller, Crisis in Freedom (1951, repr. 1964); J. M. Smith, Freedom's Fetters (1956); L. Levy, Legacy of Suppression (1960). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Doesn't that sound amazingly similiar to what the Brady Bunch are proposing?

John

Charliegone
03-08-2005, 9:06 PM
Isn't this the way it starts? Suspected terrorist, people who are against the Federal government, soon we'll be walking into "showers." I don't know about you guys, but this scares the hell out of me, to think that we have given them so much power...

fastmanusa
03-08-2005, 9:12 PM
I saw a law enforement officer on TV and he said the system we have now is just fine. Of course this was the last 10 secounds of a ten minute interview.
I was wrong earlyer.

Mesa Tactical
03-09-2005, 7:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jmlivingston:
While I agree in concept that terrorists shouldn't be able to buy guns (I mean, who would disagree with that?), </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I disagree with that. Until someone spells out specifically what a terrorist is, I think it's a bit early to be proscribing people's fundamental rights.

jmlivingston
03-09-2005, 8:04 AM
Mesa, I'm sure we agree much more than we disagree. That's why I referred to it as a concept, said that "terrorists" not suspects should be disallowed to buy firearms, and why the second half of my sentence was

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">the definitions are much too murky and there seems no clear mechanism to determine who is (or is not) a suspect, and what evidence does it take to qualify an individual as a "terrorism suspect"?" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


We need clear guidelines made available to us, the general public, as to how people are being put on these lists and who's doing it. It's much too behind-the-scenes and invisible to us. Our government right now is not being open with its constituants, and that's why I'm concerned that we'll continue to see new laws similiar to the Alien and Sedition Acts that take away our rights and freedoms.

Once we know the process, methods, the evidence requirements, and the decision-makers, we can then effectively go to the ballot box with our votes and say "these people can (can not) buy firearms", or even "we don't agree with you, we want these changes put in place to the system". Or whatever else we want/need to vote on as a democratic republic.

We definately need a better definition of what a terrorist and a terrorist suspect is. And those two definitions must be different. A terrorist should be somebody we know has committed acts of terror; while a terrorist suspect should be just that, somebody who we believe might be a terrorist but we haven't collected enough evidence to say that person has/hasn't committed acts of terror yet. Or a suspect might be somebody who is plotting an act of terror, has the means to execute the plan, and started making clear preparations to execute the plan. An American citizen on U.S. soil, as a suspect only, should not have any of his rights removed from him. We're all innocent until proven guilty, a basic foundation of our government and legal system, and something

But a bin Laden type, already convicted of terrorism in the U.S. for the original WTC bombing, then a suspect for the attack on the WTC by the hijacked jets, and who later publicly confessed to orchestrating those attacks, should be able to buy firearms here? Heck no!