« Social Networking Sites With The Largest Number of News Users | Main | Microsoft To Buy Social Networking Site LinkedIn For $26.2 Billion »

Monday, June 13, 2016

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

George

Readers may find this study interesting:

9-in-10 on terror watch list who sought guns were approved in 2015
http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/14/politics/terrorist-watch-list-91-percent-approved-guns/index.html


And, you will hear a lot about the terror gap:

"What is the Terror Gap? The federal government currently has no authority to block firearm sales to international or domestic terror suspects. This gap in our laws is a glaring public safety concern, as DOJ remains powerless to stop individuals on the terror watch lists from getting armed—even though many are considered too dangerous to board a plane."

Source:
http://everytownresearch.org/closing-the-terror-gap-in-gun-background-checks/
Closing the Terror Gap in Gun Background Checks

George
Editor
http://ivebeenmugged.typepad.com

Chanson de Roland

The problem with the so called "Terror Gap" is that it isn't a terror gap at all but is a suspicion gap. And in the United States, we should not and, as a matter of constitutional law, may not abridge a citizen's Second Amendment rights or any other right on merely suspicion. That the government somehow constitutionally becomes aware that a person applying for a firearm detests, for example, African Americas or homosexuals and may evidence that hatred by subscribing to certain racist or anti-homosexual websites and then deems that person suspicious or a potential threat is not grounds to say no his application for a weapon. It takes something more; it takes a manifestation of his hatred in a concrete act that violates criminal law or that at least constitutes a reasonably imminent threat of harm so that a reasonable person would be justified in taking steps to defend himself or law enforcement would be justified in acting to neutralize the threat. But, of course, if the person exhibited such a manifestation, the government would probably be able to indict and try him for committing a crime or have him judge mentally incompetent to own or even possess a firearm. So a suspicion, the so called "Terror Gap," isn't enough and isn't even terror, for, if it were terror, the person would be arrested and tried at trail, because terror is a crime.

So, as matter of law, the government suspecting a citizen of terror isn't enough, nor should it be, because the government's suspicions maybe unreasonable or erroneous. For example, two people visit a Neo-Nazi website. The government somehow constitutionally learns of it and who those two people are and, as a result, puts both on the Terror-Gap list of suspicious people, who it will not let own or possess a firearm based on nothing more than suspicion. Neither has done anything that is criminal, but the government refuses to let either have a gun. It turns out, however, that one of the people is a Jewish, tenured Harvard professor, who is studying groups that hate others based on race, while the other is a member of the Ku Klux Klan.

May the government deny either the right to own or posses a gun? It may not, and the reason does not turn on either person's inclinations or reasons for viewing the Neo-Nazi website; it is because neither person has done anything that is criminally actionable. What both have done is exercise their First Amendment rights: The scholar has exercised his First Amendment right to study what he likes as he likes, provided he does not do so in a way that constitutes a crime; while Neo-Nazi is exercising his First Amendment right to hate who he please, as long as his manifestations of that hatred do not constitute a crime or violate another's rights. In America, one is entitled to one's hates, just as one entitled to one's loves, provided that the manifestations of both are otherwise legal.

So in the U.S., the government's suspicions aren't sufficient to deny someone their constitutionally protected Second-Amendment right to own and/or possess a firearm. And because the Terror Gap is nothing more than suspicion, it is insufficient for the government to abridge of a person's right to own or possess a firearm, unless and until that person commits a crime or manifest some mental disability that would permit a probate court to proscribe his right to bear arms, based on his professionally diagnosed mental disease, which would make him a danger to others or incapable of responsibly owning or possessing a firearm.

George

Roland:

There are a lot of allegedly smart people in Congress. I am hopeful that they can figure out a way to craft legislation that keeps guns out of terrorists' hands without violating the rights of citizens per the U.S. Constitution.

Consider... to fight alleged voting fraud, conservatives in many states, with the help of the U.S. Supreme Court, have enacted laws to restrict the 15th Amendment... the right to vote. No more same day registration, tougher ID laws, and fewer voting locations. So, if they really want to keep guns out of the hands of terrorists, politicians have demonstrated the capability and mastery of the art of enacting restrictions to Constitutional Amendments... and could do so with the 2nd Amendment, too.

George
Editor
http://ivebeenmugged.typepad.com

George

Results from yesterday's voting in the U.S. Senate:

Senate Vote For Gun Background Checks
http://everytown.org/senate-vote-orlando/

George
Editor
http://ivebeenmugged.typepad.com

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Follow

  • Updates via E-mail RSS Feed Updates via Twitter Updates via Facebook

About

  • Bloggers' Rights at EFF
  • George Jenkins, author of the I've Been Mugged Blog

..

  • © 2007 - 2017. George Jenkins. All Rights Reserved.

.

  • <$MTStatsScript$>