Noted without comment

By: Gustavus
Published On: 5/4/2007 5:29:48 PM

From today's NY Times: "The National Rifle Association is urging the Bush administration to withdraw its support of a bill that would prohibit suspected terrorists from buying firearms."

Well I can't resist a comment:  How many Democrats will come out in support of this bill, now that the NRA is against it?


Comments



I keep reading this and saying it must be (Lowell - 5/4/2007 5:35:36 PM)
a joke.  Please tell me it's all a bad joke...


God I hate the NRA (mkfox - 5/4/2007 6:16:13 PM)
They don't give a damn about civil liberties or public safety. It's all about money, power and influence.

Now as for this bill, is it someone being investigated for terrorism? People with arrest warrants? People arraigned for crimes? People on some master list suspected of being terrorists?



NRA: Suspected terrorists should have the benefit of the doubt ?. right? (Greg Kane - 5/4/2007 7:25:52 PM)
May 4, 2007; from the Associated Press, "The National Rifle Association is urging the Bush administration to withdraw its support of a bill that would prohibit suspected terrorists from buying firearms.

Backed by the Justice Department, the measure would give the attorney general the discretion to block gun sales, licenses or permits to terror suspects."

Now to be perfectly fair to the NRA, this is the same list that included Ted Kennedy and Cat Stephens. To say that there are some errors on this list is to be very generous to our national security brain trust. In fact, a Canadian on the list was picked up and shipped off to Syria (yes the Pelosi no-fly zone) and tortured for a year before the Canadian's figured out it was a mistake and had the guy returned.

Now the U.S. says there is always the option to appeal a denial. Of course the flip side of that is the fact that the poor Canadian that was tortured for a year is still waiting for the U.S. admission it made a mistake and Cat Stephens still can't come to America. On the bright side, Ted Kennedy is flying again, although, hopefully, not driving again.

The real question is this; "Does the risk of unfairly denying Ted Kennedy the right to purchase weapons outweigh the public's right to be protected from known or suspected terrorists acquiring weapons legally?"

More from the Associated Press, "?A 2005 study by the Government Accountability Office found that 35 of 44 firearm purchase attempts over a five-month period made by known or suspected terrorists were approved by the federal law enforcement officials."

I thought the Bush argument was that we were in Iraq to make sure the terrorists didn't come here. The GAO tells us that, not only are they here, but we're knowingly selling them guns.



Well said! (mkfox - 5/4/2007 8:25:17 PM)
Gotta love logic. I'll take the security measure over the bogus "right" of any of these terror suspects to buy guns.