"Terror Gap:" Terrorists Can't Get on Planes, Can Buy Guns
By Paul Helmke
It’s getting tougher for suspected terrorists to get on a plane, but their Second Amendment “gun rights” continue to trump our concerns for public safety.
The government is now making the so-called “No-Fly List” more comprehensive, adding an additional three thousand names to the list in response to the attempted Christmas airplane bombing.
It’s great they’re working hard to keep terrorists off planes. But these same people that the government has determined to be too dangerous to get on airplanes are not barred from buying firearms in the United States. Called the “Terror Gap”, the lists of those prohibited from purchasing guns from federally licensed dealers do not include known or suspected terrorists- an obvious loophole in federal law.
This is even more ludicrous when you realize that the only lethal terror attacks on United States soil last year were shootings. As The New York Times summed it up so well this January: “Exactly 14 of the approximately 14,000 murders in the United States last year resulted from allegedly jihadist attacks: 13 people shot at Fort Hood in Texas in November and one at a military recruiting station in Little Rock, Ark., in June.”
The government knew both shooters had some connections to foreign terrorists, yet both easily bought guns in the country with the intent to kill Americans. Let’s try to stop shootings like these before they happen: close the Terror Gap, stop terrorists and suspected terrorists from legally buying guns, and help make this country a safer place.
The bills in Congress dealing with this issue are all pretty reasonable. S.1317, sponsored by Senator Frank Lautenberg, and H.R.2159, sponsored by Representative Peter King, both give the U.S. Attorney General the ability to block specific individuals on the Terrorist Watchlist from securing firearms from a federally licensed gun dealer, while H.R.2401, sponsored by Representative Carolyn McCarthy, prevents anyone on the No-Fly List from purchasing guns from a federally licensed gun dealer.
There’s more we should do to keep dangerous guns out of the hands of dangerous people, but this one should be a no-brainer. I urge readers to call their Senators and Congressmen, and ask them to co-sponsor those bills.
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
Imagine an ultra sophisticated, well funded, well trained, clandestine, international group of radicals with bad intent. Now imagine them running around buying legal guns at stores where their names will be entered into FBI databases.
Assuming any of them are truly that inept, it seems like an absolutely wonderful tool for drawing their attention to authorities.
As usual, Brady has ABSOLUTELY NO INTENT to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Their sole purpose is to disarm anyone likely to oppose criminals.
You liars can twist the second amendment around so hard it makes my head spin. I'd like to see what you scoundrels have to say about these ones.
Amendment 5
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime , unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law ; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
The no fly list is unconstitutional because it takes away rights without a trial by jury of peers. IF there is sufficient evidence to strip away a man's rights, then there is enough evidence for him to be tried before a court.
The no fly list and terror watch list also breaks these amendments.
Amendment 6
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
The people on the no fly list also have the right to a TRIAL. Not only should they be tried, they have the right to it. They have the right to face their accuser and clear their name.
However, they stand forever accused with no source of reconciliation against their accusers on the no fly list. This flies in the face of the sixth amendment.
On top of that, you have still not explained to me in any way how this one does not ensue a right to keep and bear arms.
Amendment 2
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
You can even drop off the first part of it and it still makes sense.
Amendment 2
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
However, the part you claim is important does not stand alone.
Amendment 2
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State.
Geeze. I sure wonder which is the correct interpretation. And which is a dependent clause.