Don't get backdoored

Discussion in 'National Laws, Bills and Politics' started by Foul, Apr 26, 2007.

  1. Foul

    Foul New Member

    780
    0
    0
    Congressional Leaders Moving To Pass Gun Control Without A Vote!
    -- McCarthy bill would treat gun owners even worse than terrorists

    Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
    8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
    Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
    http://www.gunowners.org/ordergoamem.htm

    "Another gun rights group, the Gun Owners of America, is adamantly
    opposed to the [McCarthy-Dingell] legislation. It said the measure
    would allow the government to trample privacy rights by compiling
    reams of personal information and potentially bar mentally stable
    people from buying guns." -- Associated Press, April 24, 2007

    Thursday, April 26, 2007

    This is going to be a knock-down, drag-out fight. GOA continues to
    stand alone in the trenches, defending the rights of gun owners
    around the country. It's not going to be easy.

    Gun control supporters want to pass gun control within the next
    couple of weeks. And that's why, even if you took action earlier
    this week, you need to do so once again.

    All the gun haters (who have been keeping silent for a while) are now
    coming out of the closet and into the open. Take the notoriously
    anti-gun senator from New York -- Chuck Schumer. He has been very,
    very excited this week. Recent events have given him a platform, and
    the excuse, to push legislation that he had sponsored years ago --
    legislation that never got through Congress.

    You see, Senator Chuck Schumer has been, in past years, the Senate
    sponsor of the McCarthy bill (HR 297). And the recent murders at
    Virginia Tech have given Senator Schumer the pretext he has been
    looking for. Appearing on the Bill O'Reilly show earlier this week,
    Schumer did his best to make a reasonable-sounding pitch for more gun
    control.

    He told O'Reilly on Monday that while he and Rep. McCarthy had
    previously worked together on this legislation, he now wants Congress
    to take up HR 297 quickly. "The Brady Law is a reasonable
    limitation," Schumer said. "Some might disagree with me, but I think
    certain kinds of licensing and registration is a reasonable
    limitation. We do it for cars."

    Get the picture? First, he wants the Brady Law strengthened with the
    McCarthy-Dingell-Schumer legislation. Then it's off to pass more gun
    control -- treating guns like cars, where all gun owners are licensed
    and where bureaucrats will have a wonderful confiscation list.

    In the O'Reilly interview, Schumer showed his hand when he revealed
    the strategy for this bill. Because it could become such a hot
    potato -- thanks to your efforts -- Senator Schumer is pushing to get
    this bill passed by Unanimous Consent in the Senate, which basically
    means that the bill would get passed WITHOUT A VOTE.

    This is a perfect way to pass gun control without anyone getting
    blamed... or so they think. We need to tell every Senator that if
    this bill passes without a vote, then we hold ALL OF THEM
    responsible. (Be looking for a future GOA alert aimed at your
    Senators.)

    On the House side, the Associated Press reported this past Monday
    that "House Democratic leaders are working with the National Rifle
    Association to bolster existing laws blocking" certain prohibited
    persons from buying guns. Of course, there are at least three
    problems with this approach:

    1. It's morally and constitutionally wrong to require law-abiding
    citizens to first prove their innocence to the government before they
    can exercise their rights -- whether it's Second Amendment rights,
    First Amendment rights, or any other right. Doing that gives
    bureaucrats the opportunity to abuse their power and illegitimately
    prevent honest gun owners from buying guns.

    2. Bureaucrats have already used the Brady Law to illegitimately deny
    the Second Amendment rights of innocent Americans. Americans have
    been prevented from buying guns because of outstanding traffic
    tickets, because of errors, because the NICS computer system has
    crashed -- and don't forget returning veterans because of
    combat-related stress. You give an anti-gun bureaucrat an inch,
    he'll take a mile -- which we have already seen as GOA has documented
    numerous instances of the abuses mentioned above.

    3. Finally, all the background checks in the world will NOT stop bad
    guys from getting firearms. As we mentioned in the previous alert,
    severe restrictions in Washington, DC, England, Canada, Germany and
    other places have not stopped evil people from using guns to commit
    murder. (Correction: In our previous alert, we incorrectly
    identified Ireland as the location of the infamous schoolyard
    massacre. In fact, it took place in Dunblane, Scotland in 1996 -- a
    country which at the time had even more stringent laws than we have
    here.)

    McCARTHY BILL TREATING GUN OWNERS WORSE THAN TERRORISTS

    HR 297 would require the states to turn over mountains of personal
    data (on people like you) to the FBI -- any information which
    according to the Attorney General, in his or her unilateral
    discretion, would be useful in ascertaining who is or is not a
    "prohibited person."

    Liberal support for this bill points out an interesting hypocrisy in
    their loyalties: For six years, congressional Democrats have
    complained about the Bush administration's efforts to obtain personal
    information on suspected terrorists WITHOUT A COURT ORDER.

    And yet, this bill would allow the FBI to obtain massive amounts of
    information -- information which dwarfs any records obtained from
    warrantless searches (or wiretaps) that have been conducted by the
    Bush Administration on known or suspected terrorists operating in the
    country.

    In fact, HR 297 would allow the FBI to get this information on honest
    Americans (like you) even though the required data is much more
    private and personal than any information obtained thus far by the
    Bush administration on terrorists.

    And all of these personal records would be obtained by the FBI with
    no warrant or judicial or Congressional oversight whatsoever!!!

    Get the picture? Spying on terrorists is bad... but spying on honest
    gun owners is good. After all, this horrific intrusion on the
    private lives of all Americans is presumed to be "okay" because it's
    only being used to bash guns, not to go after terrorists and
    criminals who are trying to kill us.

    As indicated in earlier alerts, this information could include your
    medical, psychological, financial, education, employment, traffic,
    state tax records and more. We don't even know the full extent of
    what could be included because HR 297 -- which can be viewed at
    http://thomas.loc.gov by typing in the bill number -- is so
    open-ended. It requires states to provide the NICS system with ALL
    RECORDS that the Attorney General believes will help the FBI
    determine who is and who is not a prohibited person. Certainly, an
    anti-gun AG like Janet Reno would want as many types of records in
    the system as possible.

    The provision that would probably lead to the greatest number of
    'fishing expeditions' is that related to illegal aliens. Federal law
    prohibits illegal aliens from owning guns. The bill requires all
    "relevant" data related to who is in this country illegally. But
    what records pertaining to illegal aliens from the states would be
    relevant? Perhaps a better question would be, what records are not
    relevant?

    ACTION:

    1. Please take a moment to communicate your opposition to HR 297 --
    even if you already sent your Representative a note earlier this
    week. We have provided a new letter (below) which provides updated
    information relating to the battle we are fighting.

    House leaders are talking about bringing up this bill soon. And Sen.
    Schumer (in his interview with O'Reilly) even hinted at the fact that
    the bill could come up WITHOUT the ability to offer pro-gun
    amendments -- such as a repeal of the DC gun ban or reciprocity for
    concealed carry holders -- provisions that could potentially serve as
    killer amendments.

    Also -- oh yeah, this is going to upset you -- Senator Schumer told
    O'Reilly, "I got to tell you, a lot of NRA people, they support
    this." Can you believe that? Senator Schumer is claiming to speak
    for you! That's why it's so important that you once again tell your
    congressman that Schumer is wrong... that you're a supporter of gun
    rights who OPPOSES the anti-gun McCarthy-Dingell bill.

    2. Please circulate this e-mail and forward it to as many gun owners
    as you can.

    CONTACT INFORMATION: You can visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action
    Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your
    Representative the pre-written e-mail message below. And, you can
    call your Representative toll-free at 1-877-762-8762.

    ----- Pre-written letter -----

    Dear Representative:

    As a supporter of Second Amendment rights, I do NOT support HR 297,
    the NICS Improvement Act. I hope that you will OPPOSE this bill and
    urge your party leadership to either kill it outright or to allow
    other pro-gun amendments to be offered (repeal of the DC gun ban,
    reciprocity for concealed carry holders, etc.).

    In its current form, HR 297 will treat gun owners even worse than
    terrorists, giving the FBI a mountain of private information on
    law-abiding Americans like me.

    How is it that, despite all the criticism over the Bush
    administration's attempts to obtain personal information on suspected
    terrorists without a court order, this bill would allow the FBI to
    obtain massive amounts of information on ME -- information which
    dwarfs any warrantless searches (or wiretaps) that have been
    conducted by the Bush Administration on known or suspected terrorists
    operating in the country.

    And all of this personal information would be obtained by the FBI
    with no warrant or judicial or Congressional oversight whatsoever!!!

    How is it that spying on terrorists is bad, but spying on honest gun
    owners is good?


    Again, I hope that you will oppose HR 297. Gun Owners of America
    will continue to keep me informed on the progress of this bill.
    Thank you.

    Sincerely,
     
  2. ptsmith24

    ptsmith24 New Member

    8,809
    0
    0
    Actually, I kinda do.
     

  3. Rammstein

    Rammstein New Member

    5,798
    0
    0
    When one of the top guys at the NRA says it....I guess it's gotta be true.
     
  4. lsu_nonleg

    lsu_nonleg New Member

    824
    0
    0
    I already dropped a letter to Hank Johnson about it yesterday. He has an open house Saturday which I might attend in order to address this with him. I don't know how realistic that aspiration is, though.

    GFL, where art thou?
     
  5. Rammstein

    Rammstein New Member

    5,798
    0
    0
    Who is Hank Johnson?
     
  6. lsu_nonleg

    lsu_nonleg New Member

    824
    0
    0
    The rep that replaced Cynthia McKinney in Dekalb/Rockdale?... Nevermind, the one that represents Decatur now.
     
  7. Adam5

    Adam5 Atlanta Overwatch

    13,207
    28
    48
    Can they legally do that?

    Besides, what are the chances of all the senators agreeing unanimously on anything let alone a gun bill. I doubt they could come to a unanimous decision on whether or not to wash their hands after wiping their a**es.
     
  8. Rammstein

    Rammstein New Member

    5,798
    0
    0
    Yes they can.

    It basically goes: "Do I hear any objections to _______? No objections heard, the motion carries."

    Boom. Law.

    It is used for stuff like voting in government people into certain offices and the like.
     
  9. S&W 40

    S&W 40 Active Member

    2,202
    0
    36
    OK, wait, would it not also have to go to the congress then Bush?

    Why do they keep saying this, a car is used on the road and registered for taxes and many other reasons not to keep them away from those that should not have them. Also a car is not even mentioned in any of the amendments.
     
  10. lsu_nonleg

    lsu_nonleg New Member

    824
    0
    0
    But all you gun owners are irrational to begin with, which shows a pre-disposition for going crazy! :evil:

    This bill looks like it'll stretch to about 35 pages. If it wasn't for the ILA and GOA I wonder if more than a handful of (R) or blue dog democrats would even read the entire thing, but would vote for it because of the clever name... "NICS Improvement Bill." Assclowns.
     
  11. GeorgiaGlocker

    GeorgiaGlocker Romans 1:16

    4,379
    1
    38
    If it's a gun bill, it's amazing how fast they can get it passed into law. :roll:
     
  12. AV8R

    AV8R Banned

    6,624
    0
    0
    Simple... It is a soundbite that ignorant and uninformed people can quickly process in their sheeple brains. Chuckie is a sneaky MF.
     
  13. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,041
    231
    63
    Entire thing is a quote from Clayton Cramer

    Thursday, April 26, 2007

    HR 297

    This is McCarthy and Dingell's bill concerning improving state reporting of information that might disqualify someone from purchasing a gun because of misdemeanor domestic violence or mental illness problems. Gun Owners of America is sending around an email warning that this is a horrible, dangerous bill:
    As I said on a radio broadcast this morning, I support the concept of improving state reporting of disqualifying mental illness problems, but the devil is in the details. So I have been reading over HR 297, and I am having trouble finding where "this bill would allow the FBI to obtain massive amounts of information" about individuals. The bill doesn't even require states to provide information--it only sets standards for how much money the state can receive for improving its reporting to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System based on its level of data that it reports.

    Now, there might be something that I am missing hidden in the current regulations, but "State records of persons adjudicated mentally defective or committed to a mental institution" and reporting of misdemeanor domestic violence convictions doesn't immediately seem to be a fishing expedition.

    UPDATE: A reader who is concerned about this bill points out that the bill requires states that are receiving federal funds to improve their ability to feed firearms disability information to the NICBCS to provide records. If you don't want to provide those records, you won't get any money to improve your systems for feeding NICBCS. And why is this is a problem? If you don't want to provide data to NICBCS, then you don't need federal funding to improve your ability to feed data to NICBCS.

    The other objection is that one provision requires states to provide information that would allow determination of whether an alien is legally present in the country. Supposedly, this is a truck sized hole--one that allows the FBI to request vast quantities of information:

    Well, no. Birth certificate is about the only item that might be useful for determining whether someone is a citizen--and if they have a U.S. birth certificate, that makes them by law a citizen (with a few very weird exceptions involving diplomatic personnel). The rest of this stuff? I wish that it was different, but illegal aliens have credit card, bank accounts, pay property taxes, and marriage licenses.

    True, there are abuse potentials with information gathering, but I am hard pressed to see that this bill opens any more doors on this than the PATRIOT Act has already opened. Net effect on the powers of the snooping federal government: zero.

    Source
     
  14. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,041
    231
    63
    The disturbing item that I found was this:

    Weston spent 53 days locked up in a mental hospital, and from all accounts, should not have been released.[/quote:2ry9l9qr]

    Source
     
  15. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    63,041
    231
    63
    Common ground: NRA, gun control advocates
     
  16. Rammstein

    Rammstein New Member

    5,798
    0
    0
    Mr. LaPierre is giving aid and comfort to the enemy. If this were war his army would shoot him.
     
  17. AV8R

    AV8R Banned

    6,624
    0
    0
    Yeah, providing tactical vests/jackets are banned. Providing that Levis, Wrangler, and Lee stop selling jeans and pants with pockets. Providing all mag pouches and holders are banned. Oh yeah, no backpacks, bags, totes, duffles, purses, or fannypacks either. Because sooner or later people will figure out that they can carry more than one magazine when the "high capacity" mags are banned. SHHHHH!!!! :-$
     
  18. Foul

    Foul New Member

    780
    0
    0
    Can't have books in schools either.

    [​IMG]

    Can you IMAGINE what could be hidden in here? *GASP*