People on the government’s terrorist watch list tried to buy guns nearly 1,000 times in the last five years, and federal authorities cleared the purchases 9 times out of 10 because they had no legal way to stop them, according to a new government report.
In one case, a person on the list was able to buy more than 50 pounds of explosives.
The new statistics, compiled in a report from the Government Accountability Office that is scheduled for public release next week, draw attention to an odd divergence in federal law: people placed on the government’s terrorist watch list can be stopped from getting on a plane or getting a visa, but they cannot be stopped from buying a gun.
Gun purchases must be approved unless federal officials can find some other disqualification of the would-be buyer, like being a felon, an illegal immigrant or a drug addict.
“This is a glaring omission, and it’s a security issue,” Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, the New Jersey Democrat who requested the study, said in an interview.
Mr. Lautenberg plans to introduce legislation on Monday that would give the attorney general the discretion to block gun sales to people on terror watch lists.
Homeland Insecurity will fight to stop anyone who ever uttered a syllable of dissent from climbing aboard one of our overpriced airborne cattle cars. But, the NRA and the nutball Right will battle tooth and claw to protect their heaven-ordained right to kill and maim their fellows. As long as it’s done with firearms.
“Gun purchases must be approved unless federal officials can find some other disqualification of the would-be buyer, like being a felon, an illegal immigrant or a drug addict.”
Right. It’s called The Bill of Rights.
LOL. After reading this I thought it was written by some foreign journalist who never heard of our constitution, etc. It is from the NYT! ROFL. I was almost right.
I agree with #1 Patty Cake and with the NRA!
Criminals and terrorists have every right to purchase weapons to protect themselves from all of those evil government agencies, trying to stop them from carrying out their normal, everyday business activities of killing Americans.
What right does The New York Times have to question something so clearly stated in The Bill of Rights? Of course terrorists have the right to bear arms. What a stupid implication that they should be denied their God Given Rights, right Patty? Right, NRA?
Anyone who says otherwise should be shot, along with all those pansies working at The New York Times, right Patty?
RTFP.
The no fly list has no bearing on reality. It contains names of 70 year old grandma’s and five year old kids. Just because someone is on the list does not disqualify them from any other aspect of daily life. If an American is on this list exactly why are they on the list. Have Homeland Security explain why. If they are on the list simply because they have the same name as someone else they should be removed from the list.
Patrick must have a real problem finding newspapers that support his ideology in America. Or has he already started fundraising to resurrect Der Stürmer?
“Have Homeland Security explain why”
Dude… what are you smoking? First, they will never tell you why. They claim it is a secret. Second, they will never remove you. No one wants to take the career risk that they might be wrong.
Get on the net and you will find horror story after horror story of people that are on the list who can’t even get someone at HSA to admit it or even consider removing them.
My problem with the no fly list, and trying to expand it to remove constitutional rights, is that you can be put on it without ever going to trial or being convicted of anything, or being notified.
Wasn’t Obama suppose to get of the no-fly list, as part of his “change” government idea. I guess he is too busy nationalizing health care to worry about it.
#5
I agree with you 100 percent. We should all be allowed to kill people we don’t like without Miranda or a trial.
🙂
# 8 moss said, “Patrick must have a real problem finding newspapers that support his ideology in America.”
Actually, it is getting harder to find ANY newspapers. They are going BK because they are anti-American liberal rags…
Does this mean Adam Curry wouldn’t be able to buy a gun?
“My problem with the no fly list, and trying to expand it to remove constitutional rights, is that you can be put on it without ever going to trial or being convicted of anything, or being notified.”
Exactly. The no fly list is a very bad joke, its numbers FAR exceeding any reasonable number of possible “terrorists” in the world (i.e. too often just people with political views unpopular with the US government) and to expand that into the area of Constitutional rights is absolutely ignorant. “We have secret evidence which we cannot show you and, as a result, you cannot challenge that allows us to take away your Constitutional right to defend yourself effectively.” Ignorant………
To paraphrase, those who are willing to sacrifice essential rights and liberties for the _illusion_ of safety deserve _neither_.
I agree with #12 Patty again.
It’s certainly true ALL of the newspapers published in the United States are now anti-American liberal rags. It’s obvious.
Like Patty, I read every single paper published in the country, every single morning before breakfast and I can attest, not one of them is pro-American or even neutral-American.
Every single one of them is a Commie, pinko, anti-Christian, anti-democracy, left-leaning, liberal, stinking yellow rag and we should do away with all of them — without exception.
Like Patty, I think Americans should rise up and burn down all of the newspaper offices and then start their very own anti-anti-American, Commie, liberal, yellow rags.
It’s the very least we can do for God and America, right Patty? Repress all those wrong thinking sons of bitches!
Meh. Get what you want, and forget about all the idiots saying you can’t have it. Obama is Gun Salesman of the Year. Literally. In Kalifornia, the politicians are doing everything they can to keep ammunition away from the public. Every current semiautomatic firearm in Kalifornia will be banned as “unsafe” on January 1, 2010. Ammunition will be practically unavailable due to restrictions about to go into effect. So the question is not “Can a terrorist obtain firearms?”, but rather, “Is the 2nd Amendment being seriously infringed?” Of course, the answer is obvious. There is a RIGHT to keep and bear arms. And the government does not GRANT that right, in INSURES (supposedly) that right. If they don’t insure it, the right still exists. Screw them.
Just more poorly framed liberal arguments from weak editors. The only difference these days is that the hit count keeps going down. No shock there: I’m not here to bail them out.
# 16 faxon said, “Every current semiautomatic firearm in Kalifornia will be banned as “unsafe” on January 1, 2010.”
Nevada is a relatively short drive away. Easy to get large capacity clips and plenty of ammo…
“Homeland Insecurity will fight to stop anyone who ever uttered a syllable of dissent from climbing aboard one of our overpriced airborne cattle cars. But, the NRA and the nutball Right will battle tooth and claw to protect their heaven-ordained right to kill and maim their fellows. As long as it’s done with firearms.”
Wow. You are one leftist radical, aren’t you? There is a 2nd Amendment, despite your sissy feelings about it.
Call 911. I don’t need to.
#18. I know how far Nevada is. Thanks. Good luck in the food riots.
I’m relieved to read all you deep-thinking, rational fellow Patriots are on my side when it comes to the right of terrorists to bear American-made arms, which is what this thread is all about, isn’t it?
I don’t know about you guys but I’m pretty sure I’m going to need a LOT more ammunition, large capacity clips and at least a few more semi-automatic weapons for my wife and kids, after we get done selling the terrorists all the ordinance they can possibly afford.
I guess I won’t be moving to Kalifornia anytime soon but Nevada sounds like a nice safe place to hunker down in fear.
#1, Cow-Patty the esteemed Constitutional Expert,
Right. It’s called The Bill of Rights.
LOL. After reading this I thought it was written by some foreign journalist who never heard of our constitution, etc. It is from the NYT! ROFL. I was almost right.
Could you point out in the Constitution where it prohibits the people from purchasing or constructing their own atomic weapons? Or even regulate the traffic of nuclear material to be used in the weapon?
How about, where in the Constitution it prohibits felons from purchasing rapid fire, full auto weapons with armor piercing bullets and 50+ rd mags?
Can you also point out in the Constitution where I am prohibited from owning my very own version of a 155 mm howitzer, complete with high explosive shells?
After all, these are all defensive weapons, very useful to an organized militia, guaranteed to me by the “Bill of Right”.
Who are these “terrorists” that are not considered felons or illegal immigrants… Seems to me that terrorists would easily fit into either or both categories. The fact that somebody is on a watch list, specifically means that there is no evidence against them and you’re just watching them… And what keeps them from putting me on that list?
And NRA has never supported “killing” or “maiming”. And NRA has never supported guns in the hands of criminals or terrorists. They support your right to self-defense, which requires some piece of shit to attack you first. Who would not support your right to defend yourself against attack??? Hear somebody breaking into your house – call the cops, but while you wait for them to show up, be prepared to defend yourself against the piece of dung that has invaded your property….
And then many people forget the most important “last resort” reason for the Second Amendment: “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” — Thomas Jefferson, 1 Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334
Interesting how many liberals are now happy to remove constitutional rights without due process.
Hmm…. Must be a slow news day…. Same old garbage that the left-leaning newspapers get from the Brady Bunch all the time, and pass along as Gospel instead of fish-wrap….
The “watch list” is a joke. Straight out of Kafka or Adolf Hitler…. Osama wanted to let the AG be able to put _anybody_ on it, on just his word.
What nobody seems to realize is that the Criminals and Terrorists will obtain guns or other weapons (note that the Brits are almost ready to ban “unsafe” steak knives) regardless. We can’t keep drugs out of the country – keeping weapons out is also going to be nearly impossible. But us Law Abiding Citizens, well, we won’t be able to protect ourselves…. Makes sense to me, not….
Vote for Gun Control…. A vote for that is a vote for Tyranny…. Oh, forgot, this isn’t Germany….
Sheesh….
#25
“So what is the policy?”
I’d say the policy is one to the head when it’s perfectly legal to do so in international waters and obeying U.S. and other international laws when you can’t get away with just shooting them dead on the spot.
Now, if those poor Somali teens had just done their pirating and kidnapping in the United States, they’d probably be alive today and the captain of the ship they hijacked would likely be dead.
Unfortunately, this is just the sort of conundrum you face when you capture prisoners of war but choose to call them something else for your own convenience. It causes all kinds of confusion the Geneva Conventions were established to eliminate.
Personally, I just remember the US rescue mission to save the starving Somalis – and the results of that mission. I presume the Marines did, too.
I read on this blog that the watch list is just a bunch of innocent people being railroaded by the government. Why do you care about this issue now?
The crux of this issue is that the DHS list has no due process for challenging it. Therefore it could never be used to restrict the purchase of legal firearms, ammunition, etc.
America and guns. Guess what? The British aren’t coming…..duh…
One founding idea of the United States was “Consent of the governed”.
Which is why we have the 2nd amendment.
Meanwhile, today I’m sure the government in Iran is killing at least some civilians who are protesting the election.
Obama very recently mentioned the concept of “consent of the governed” in regard to Iran.
No-Fly List:
Is the end result of an anonymous bureaucrat who doesn’t report to nor can be held accountable to the public they are serving. Funny, this is the same person will be in-charge of determining ‘cost necessity of care’ if the government takes over health care. But that’s a story for a different post.
Curious Observation:
Why would the self professing, law-breaking, low lives like those on the No-Fly list want to ‘legally’ by firearms and knowingly create a government paper trail when there are so many other options available? One could wonder if the intent was not to actually buy the firearms, but rather to just create the paperwork….. for other purposes?
Hmmmm… this smells a bit like a sea-kitten’s week old litter box.
I’m constantly nauseated by all the feeble minded concern about terrorists.
16,000 Americans are murdered every year in the United States by fellow Americans.
That’s 128,000 people murdered since 9/11.
3,000, or so, people have murdered by terrorists in the US in that last 200 years.
What’s the bigger threat to our safety?
OURSELVES!!!
Mr. Fusion, what’s your take on The Anarchist Cookbook? Would you like to curtail the First Amendment to cease publications like it?