HR 2159: Attny General to decide who can buy guns

[GeoJAP]

This bill, HR 2159, will give the attorney general the ability to deny anyone the right to purchase a gun.  He also doesn't have to tell you why either, if you ask and challenge it.  The premise is that this will keep guns out of the hands of "terrorists".  But since there have been almost a half-dozen reports released since November 2008 that characterize huge swaths of the American citizenry as potential terrorists or extremists, anyone could be banned from buying a gun.

It seems like all the hype and panic gun buying has not been unwarranted.  It looks like we don't have rights guaranteed by the constitution any more in America, we only get to have things if the government decides to let us have something.  We are looking at having our rights arbitrarily taken from us with no due process and ability to confront our accuser.

Here is the bill:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-2159

Here is Rham Emanuel saying that everyone on the no-fly list will not be able to purchase a gun because they are not part of the American family.  There are over 1,100,000 people on the secret no-fly list right now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJBZZKlvrP4

[Standing Wolf]

We are looking at having our rights arbitrarily taken from us with no due process and ability to confront our accuser.

What's been passing for "due process" the past few decades has been a far cry from real due process.

The nation's civil rights exist on paper and as a topic for politicians' speeches—but we're busy watching TV.

[Waitone]

Lemme see here.

First, listing of rightwing extremist groups along with helpful identification of salient characteristics.  Lots of noise then the report was repudiated.

Second, a lexicon suddenly appears providing definitions of terms used in the previous report.  It too was quickly repudiated and withdrawn.

Third, legislation magically appears purporting to give the AG the right to deny second amendment rights on his own authority to groups previously ID'd.

Fourth, an ongoing criminal enterprise at the behest of the federal government is in the process of GPS tagging every front door in the US.

To quote that Great American Philosopher, Dr. Johnny Fever, "Sometimes paranoia is just clear thinking."

[MechAg94]

So how does this work with individual rights and such.  You can make the case the flying is not a right, but the SC has rules gun ownership is.  I have my doubts this would pass a court test.

But this doesn't surprise me.  I almost hope it passes to give the opposition a bit more ammunition in 2 years.

[Standing Wolf]

I have my doubts this would pass a court test.

It shouldn't, no. Strange things happen in court rooms.

[Balog]

It shouldn't, no. Strange things happen in court rooms.

McCain Feingold anyone?

[tokugawa]

"Fourth, an ongoing criminal enterprise at the behest of the federal government is in the process of GPS tagging every front door in the US."
   So this is what that census worker was doing when she said it was an "address verification".

 
"But this doesn't surprise me.  I almost hope it passes to give the opposition a bit more ammunition in 2 years."
   You think we will still have elections? Look who is going to be counting the votes.

[Matthew Carberry]

The way to tell if this is anything more than vanity legislation is to track how many more cosponsors appear AND if a companion bill is introduced in the Senate.

There are 60 Dem Congressmen alone who are on record as opposing milder gun control (the AWB letter).  This, being a more severe imposition, would require them to reverse course.

Per govtrack:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2159

There are only 7 co-sponsors and the bill has been referred to the Judiciary.

So, it's been 2 weeks and no more sponsors?  This is a dead bill in committee.

We need to keep an eye on it but with only the usual suspects on board this is going nowhere.

Let's keep our eyes open for a REAL threat.

[gunsmith]

The way to tell if this is anything more than vanity legislation is to track how many more cosponsors appear AND if a companion bill is introduced in the Senate.

There are 60 Dem Congressment alone who are on record as opposing milder gun control (the AWB letter).  This, being a more severe imposition would require them to reverse course.

Per govtrack:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2159

There are only 7 co-sponsors and the bill has been referred to the Judiciary.

So, it's been 2 weeks and no more sponsors?  This is a dead bill in committee.

We need to keep an eye on it but with only the usual suspects on board this is going nowhere.

Let's keep our eyes open for a REAL threat.

"It appears, captain, we've been doing what used to be called 'pursuing a wild goose'."

    - Spock

[buzz_knox]

Let's keep our eyes open for a REAL threat.

Is it possible that the political environment that rendered this, apparently, has a nonviable threat is the fact that gunowners call/write/complain/etc about such threats?

It's a good idea to be practical and restrained.  It's a very bad idea to cross the line into complacency.  Plenty of "this will go nowhere" has turned into laws because no one paid attention.  Find a nice balance, but don't get into the habit of counting things out before its actually dead and buried.

[Matthew Carberry]

Nope Buzz, it definitely isn't that the credulous wet their pants that killed it.

It is essentially identical to many other bills over the years that died in committee.  There simply isn't any support for anything this radical, even among the nut job anti's (the one's with half a brain anyway).  There are a couple dozen more F's who would have been all over it for political gain if it had a chance in hell.

Their absence proves the fact it was a non-issue from day one.

Note that I'm not saying "ignore it"; I'm saying there's just no rational basis to fear it and thus it can be merely watched as it dies of neglect like every freaking bill of its type before it.

None of this stuff happens overnight, if it breaks 20 co-sponsors it might be worth re-examining but to bitch about it now merely makes us appear paranoid and downright stupid to those we need on our side when "reasonable sounding" legislation with actual traction and a hope in hell of passing appears.

Do we really want the undecideds and "moderates", both in public and Congress, saying "look at the gun nuts crying wolf again" using this bill and HR 45 and the rest of the recent non-issue vanity legislation as an example of our idiocy as we move against, say, the UN Small Arms Treaty ratification, which, to the uninformed, doesn't sound so bad?