Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: X-Post: "Gun Rights for Terrorists" [View all]benEzra
(12,148 posts)9. Like these terrorists?
ACLU: U.S. Government "No Fly List" Is Unconstitutional and Ineffective
ACLU: Watchlists are bloated and overinclusive
San Francisco Chronicle: No-Fly Blacklist Snares Political Activists
Marshals: Innocent People Placed On 'Watch List' To Meet Quota
Schneier: Infants on the Terrorist Watch List
Funny how the Bush/Cheney Administration's war on civil liberties, as conceived and aggressively advocated by the Bush/Cheney Justice Department, suddenly becomes wonderful and "progressive" when somebody waves the "ZOMG gunz" flag.
ACLU: Watchlists are bloated and overinclusive
San Francisco Chronicle: No-Fly Blacklist Snares Political Activists
Marshals: Innocent People Placed On 'Watch List' To Meet Quota
Schneier: Infants on the Terrorist Watch List
Funny how the Bush/Cheney Administration's war on civil liberties, as conceived and aggressively advocated by the Bush/Cheney Justice Department, suddenly becomes wonderful and "progressive" when somebody waves the "ZOMG gunz" flag.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RL33011.pdf
CRS Report for Congress
Order Code RL33011
Terrorist Screening and Brady Background Checks for Firearms
July 25, 2005
William J. Krouse
Specialist in Domestic Security
Domestic Social Policy Division
Summary
Historically, terrorist watch list checks were not part of the firearms background check process implemented pursuant to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act. Such watch lists were not checked, because being a known or suspected terrorist is not a disqualifying factor for firearm transfer/possession eligibility under current federal or state law. Nevertheless, if a person is a known or suspected terrorist, it suggests that there may be an underlying factor (e.g., illegal immigration or fugitive status) that could bar him from legal firearms possession. For a time, moreover, all Brady background check records for approved firearm transfers were destroyed almost immediately, precluding the opportunity to used the background check system to screen for known and suspected terrorists.
Consequently, three issues emerged regarding Brady background checks following the 9/11 attacks. First, should approved firearm transfer records be maintained on a temporary basis to determine whether persons of interest in counterterrorism investigations had previously obtained firearms improperly? Second, should terrorist watch list checks be incorporated statutorily into the Brady background check process? Third, should persons watch-listed as known or suspected terrorists be prohibited statutorily from possessing firearms?
In February 2004, the FBI reportedly modified its National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) operating procedures to retain NICS records temporarily for approved transfers that result in terrorist watch list hits, and to pass that information on to FBI investigators on the Joint Terrorism Task Forces. In addition, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has directed the DOJ Office of Legal Policy to form a working group to review federal gun laws---particularly in regard to Brady background checks---to determine whether additional authority should be sought to prevent firearms transfers to known and suspected terrorists.
In the 109th Congress, several related pieces of legislation have been introduced that are related to NICS procedures and terrorist watch lists. The Terrorist Apprehension and Record Retention Act of 2005 (S. 578/H.R. 1225), introduced by Senator Frank Lautenberg and Representative John Conyers, would authorize the retention of all related records for at least 10 years, among other things. In addition, Representative Peter King introduced H.R. 1168, a bill that would require the Attorney General to promulgate regulations to preserve records of terrorist- and gangrelated record hits during such background checks until they were provided to the FBI. Representative Carolyn McCarthy introduced H.R. 1195, a bill that would make it unlawful for anyone to transfer a firearm to a person who was on the No Fly lists maintained by the Transportation Security Administration.
...
Prior to HSPD-6, DOJ initiated, in February 2002, a NICS transaction audit to determine whether prohibited aliens (noncitizens) were being improperly transferred firearms.21 As part of this audit, NICS procedures were changed, so that NICS examiners were informed of VGTOF hits. Effective February 2004, the FBI reportedly changed its NICS operating procedures to inform NICS examiners of VGTOF hits for known and suspected terrorists.22 In non-Point of Contact (non- POC) states, NICS staff validate terrorism-related VGTOF hits by contacting TSC staff. The latter have greater access to identifiers in terrorist files, with which known and suspected terrorists can be more positively identified. In full and partial POC states, the law enforcement officials who conduct firearms-related background checks under the Brady Act contact TSC staff directly. In the case of valid hits, NICS staff delay the transactions for up to three business days and contact the FBI Counterterrorism Division to allow field agents to check for prohibiting factors.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
52 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The Constitution is obviously important, but it's OK to ignore it if we're dealing
petronius
Feb 2015
#1
"our default position should be to maximize protection & preservation of those rights and liberties"
Nuclear Unicorn
Feb 2015
#2
Gun grabbers are running around, pointing their fingers and yelling, "TERRORISTS!" at anyone they
Nuclear Unicorn
Mar 2015
#32
Explain how one person owning a gun constitutes supporting another person threatening others.
Nuclear Unicorn
Mar 2015
#42
Heh, I suspect the answer to your question would vary depending on whether the
petronius
Feb 2015
#23
Despite your lurid fantasies, guns are not the only means by which people are killed.
Nuclear Unicorn
Feb 2015
#6
"Because some folks here support Hicks 'right' to terrorize his neighbors with his gun."
Nuclear Unicorn
Mar 2015
#36
What if 90% on the list are terrorists, and half of those pose a danger to us?
Neon Gods
Feb 2015
#20
'Lists' are fine. Law enforcement is supposed to investigate crimes and potential dangers,
petronius
Feb 2015
#21
The WH is a specific, defined, limited area. The grabbers are trying to exploit the GWoT
Nuclear Unicorn
Mar 2015
#31
"Grabbers want to use a law designed for war to control their own citizens..."
Neon Gods
Mar 2015
#46
I find it fucking disgusting to read on DU that 'they're not inherently a bad idea'...
friendly_iconoclast
Mar 2015
#50