In the midst of memorial preparations for 9/11 victims, the FBI made public a "credible" threat that appeared timed to further wound our nation.
The information, gleaned from the daring takedown of Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, indicates that at least two people may already be in the United States planning to explode car or truck bombs in New York and Washington, D.C. The FBI also reports that al Qaeda may be considering attacks with small arms or homemade explosive devices.
In response to the horrific tragedy of September 11, 2001, federal officials have taken extraordinary steps to prevent other airliners from being turned into incendiary devices and bombs. Yet, inexplicably, Congress has repeatedly failed to deny suspected or known terrorists easy access to guns and explosives.
As a lasting tribute to the Americans and others who lost their lives on 9/11, Congress should muster the courage to defy the gun lobby and prevent terrorists from purchasing weapons that can then be used on our families and communities.
President Obama told CNN shortly after the Norway massacre that the "lone wolf terrorist" is the biggest threat to our security. But Congress' inaction on closing the terror gap keeps our defenses lowered.
A University of Maryland Global Terrorism study (PDF) indicates that terrorists with guns are the greatest threat. In the 10 years since 9/11, the majority of deaths from terror attacks in the U.S. have come from attacks with guns. Most notable is the Nov. 5, 2009 Fort Hood massacre in which 13 people were killed.
Because of the gap in our laws that allows suspected and known terrorists to buy guns, the accused killer, Army Major Nidal Hasan , was able to walk into the heart of the Fort Hood military base and shoot down the men and women working to protect this nation from such threats.
In June of this year, this brutal irony was insufficient to persuade the House Judiciary Committee to vote for an amendment to the Patriot Act that would have blocked people on the FBI's terrorist watch list from purchasing firearms or explosives. The bill, offered by Illinois Rep. Mike Quigley, was rejected on a party line vote, with 21 Republicans opposed to it.
Recently, Illinois Rep. Robert Dold became one of the few Republicans to publicly support a bill (H.R. 1506), which would close the terror gap. A companion Senate bill (S.34) sponsored by Sen. Frank Lautenberg also awaits action.
In an April 27 letter to Sen. Lautenberg, the Government Accountability Office said more than 1,300 people on the Terrorist Watch List were able to purchase a gun because they were not disqualified under federal law.
An earlier GAO report (PDF) indicated that some on the Terrorist Watch List appeared to be making multiple attempts to purchase guns. Some 1,228 purchase attempts through February 2010 were by just 650 individuals. Nearly 70 percent of the individuals (450 of 650) were involved in multiple transactions and six were involved in 10 or more transactions.
In June, a month after the House Judiciary Committee rejected closing the terror gap in federal gun laws, one of al Qaeda's terrorist recruiters -- American-born Adam Gadahn -- explained how easy it is to acquire assault weapons in the United States:
"America is absolutely awash with easily obtainable firearms. You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle without a background check and most likely without having to show an identification card. So what are you waiting for?"
It should matter to Congress that dangerous individuals, encouraged by al Qaeda, are able to buy as many guns, including assault weapons, as they want. That Congress is willing to allow persons on the terrorist watch list to stockpile military-style firepower suggests an extraordinary lapse of common sense and political will.
For continuing insight and comment on the gun issue, read Dennis Henigan's blog at www.bradycampaign.org/blog/. Visit the Brady Campaign website at www.bradycampaign.org.
Dennis Henigan is Acting President, Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and the author of Lethal Logic: Exploding the Myths that Paralyze American Gun Policy (Potomac Books 2009).
A photo of him is available here. For more information about the Terror Gap, visit this website.
Arianna Huffington: Honouring the Memory of 9/11 by Honouring the Memory of 9/12
NYC Mayor Wants Stricter Federal Gun Control After Rash of ...
Adam Winkler: Did the Wild West Have More Gun Control Than We ...
Has 9-11 Led to Relaxed Gun Laws? - ABC News
Obama calls for agreement on gun reform laws - Political Hotsheet ...
Obama and Eric Holder. They know who the terrorists are.
Henigan is God-like and completely honest. If you were smart, you'd give him your money.
Zach Ragbourne quit the Brady Bunch. Doug Pennington quit the Brady Bunch. Petey Hamm quit the Brady Bunch. Paul Helmke quit the Brady Bunch.
Denny is all that's left of the senior leadership.
The rest were smart enough to recognize a sinking ship and get off.
But what can we expect from a guy who has spent more than half his life dealing with 2A issues and still can't even quote it correctly?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1cYzATHcqA
We know that you believe that American citizens on one of the 13 different TWL's should not be allowed to BUY guns.
Do you also believe that those individuals should not be allowed to OWN guns.
Does the Brady Campaign support confiscation of arms possesed by these people before they were placed on "the List?"
If you choose not to answer, I will have to assume that you do.
The tough guys are always preening around here.
Poster "fender bender" is active and soooo smart!
We could use more like him around this joint.
F&F
Have a great day.
If you give them an inch, they'll want a mile.
Really? This proposed law would have stopped an active-duty Army officer from buying a gun? There was enough evidence against him prior to his crime to bar him from owning a firearm, but not to discharge him from the military? This claim seems incredible.
Don't forget that part Guffie.
Now what kind of scrutiny would even come up with such information about Hasan. Just for a moment, allow that mere suspicion were enough to treat someone like a felon for mere rumors (it is not, but just pretend). What kind of investigation would it take to even find such rumors? Who would pay for ti? How long would it take? .
It’s come to my attention that gun owners belong to the NRA and are FETISHISTS. It’s also notable that they will often SPOUT DRIVEL to compensate for some other shortcoming.
Again, this is not personal conjecture but consensus among the public as verified in the Comments sections of several web sites.
http://tinyurl.com/4k346he
PASS H.R. 822 NOW ! ! !
Mmmmm.
Agreed. This has much more to do with a clear violation of Due Process than it does with guns.
The government can do so without resorting to violations of due process, secret "watch lists," or chipping away at our Constitution.
Since I've answered your question, can you do the same for me? If someone on one of the watch lists sends a bunch of emails to Karachi, do you think the government should be required to obtain a warrant before intercepting and reading those emails?
http://www.adl.org/learn/ext_us/militia_m.asp?xpicked=4&item=19
Did you know, that in New York and Virginia, during Colonial times, those excused from militia service were still required, by law, to maintain firearms and shot and powder, in their homes?
"That all persons though ffreed from Training by the Law yet that they be obliged to Keep Convenient armes and ammunition in Their houses as the Law directs To others." 1 The Colonial Laws of New York.
"Persons exempted from enrollment and service in the militia were "required and enjoyned to provide and keep at their respective places of abode ... arms and ammunition." 3 Laws of Virginia.
So, if these people were excused from militia service, why would they be required to maintain firearms in their homes?
If the 2A was meant to be restrictive, why would at least 3 of the founders have stated the following?
St. George Tucker - "The right of self defence is the first law of nature."
William Rawle - "The prohibition is general."
Joseph Story - "The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic."
If you decide to respond, how about actually addressing the points, instead of just willy nilly claiming 30,000 and militia rights (militia don't have rights, by the way).
Easy
ST is an intern of the Brady Bunch.
He doesn't get paid unless his vitriol buys denny a new yacht.
I'm not saying an explanation of due process compatibility doesn't exist, just that Dennis nor anyone else has given one. Surely, no matter your view on Dennis' suggestion, due process matters to any reasonable person and it must be addressed.
Of course not. They attempt to deflect and evade, rather than tell you the truth.
The truth is, they have no problem with due process when it doesn't conflict with their agenda to deny rights that they don't personally like.
Sadly, that's what 'liberalism' means to these people.
If both of us are missing those posts, I would be obliged if someone would point them out to us.
And people are defending this.
--bunnieman
The right to keep and bear arms is the right that protects all other rights. Therefore, focusing on defending it, by default, defends all other rights.
"..... You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle without a background check and most likely without having to show an identification card.......... "
Untrue but then the author knows this.
A fully automatic weapon is a Class III weapon and requires a Class III dealer for the transfer of such a weapon.
The private owner of a Class III weapon cannot legally sell it in any state to anyone except a Class III dealer or through a Class III dealer to a private individual.
Assuming a private individual owner of a Class III weapon wanted to break federal law and sell it the price tag would be extreme. A full automatic MP5 retails for roughly $8000.00, some version for as much as $10,000.00
I have attended several hundred gun shows and have never seen a private seller trying to sell a Class III weapon but then in the author's limited mentality it happens all the time.
This kind of continued lying about firearms is exactly why the anti-gun freaks never gain any real footing to keep them moving forward. Lies from the anti-gun freaks are like dog crap on the sidewalk. It stinks up the place for a while then dries up and gets blown away by the winds of truth.
The right to keep and bear arms CLEARLY has direct effect on securing or achieving all other rights.