Saturday, April 28, 2007

Sounds Nice, But

Sen. Lautenberg [D-NJ], the Democratic Party's write in candidate, is proposing some new gun legislation.

He seeks to deny people who are suspected of being connected to terrorism from purchasing weapons. Here is how the New York Times casts it with their quote:
to be or have been engaged in conduct constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to terrorism.

Sounds pretty good does it not? Except for one thing, the people Lautenberg is seeking to bar from buying a weapon have not been charged in any case relating to terrorism. How can I say this? For lets look later in the article, wll there is the obligatory swipe at a Republican controlled Congress killing Lautenberg's noble idea and the very generic allusion to 'law enforcement officials' which are never named and gun control advocates who are also not named. Not to mention pandering to the recent tragedy at Virginia Tech, so Lautenberg is trying to play on emotions to get something passed that would have had no bearing on Cho's mission of evil if it had been in effect before.
In 2004, the F.B.I. instituted a new system that alerted counterterrorism officials when a terrorism suspect tried to buy a gun, giving them three days to find information to disqualify the suspect under the standard federal prohibitions. If the transaction was successful, details like the type of weapon and the place of purchase could not be shared. But if the purchase was blocked, the information could be turned over.

So we have the FBI trying to plug the loophole without creating any new laws or violating anyone's rights. Yes many suspected terrorists got firearms, but remember they are only suspected. There has been no formal indictments sworn out on these people or convictions. So Sen. Lautenberg is going to close this 'loophole' in which uncharged people will have their Second Amendment rights violated because of their alleged association with people whom intelligence agencies think are terrorists and need to be watched.

Sen. Lautenberg's law is bad law. It presumes that someone is guilty of a crime before a jury of their peers have even heard the case against them.

And here I thought Democrats were all for the presumtive innocence of all people accused, even those gaining weight at Gitmo. Silly me.


Little Miss Chatterbox said...

Yes, where are all the liberals who have been screaming about the patriot act and the wiretapping?

Anna said...

They are probably wondering how to slip someone's name to Valerie Plame so she can get her buddies at the CIA to put that name on a watch list.

Van Helsing said...

Lout-enberg panders to both fear of terrorism and grief over Virginia Tech, but for libs undermining the Second Amendment is an end in itself.

Anna said...

They worry about terrorism when it suits their cause of seizing all weapons. They worry about rogue individuals like Cho when it suits their cause.

People forget Lexington/Concorde was the shot heard around the world because the British dispatched soldiers to seize the Mass. Colony Militia's store of powder and guns. To render these subjects of the King unarmed in a still unsettled and dangerous wilderness.

Lautenberg and others who support such extreme gun control seek to render citizens of the US equally powerless before their central authority. Thus tyranny is imposed.

Unless the voting citizens make thier voices heard loudly. If the voters' servants in government repeatedly fail to heed such voices, then 'when in the course of human events.'