Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bloomberg 'Terror Gap' Argument Shot Down By Pro-Gun GOP Senators

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 04:09 PM
Original message
Bloomberg 'Terror Gap' Argument Shot Down By Pro-Gun GOP Senators

Dan Froomkin


Bloomberg 'Terror Gap' Argument Shot Down By Pro-Gun GOP Senators



New York City Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's appeal to what he called "common sense" at a congressional hearing Wednesday morning failed to sway two Republican senators who said that giving the government the ability to block the purchase of guns by suspected terrorists would undermine the Second Amendment's right to bear arms.

"Shouldn't FBI agents have the authority to block sales of guns and explosives to those on the terror watchlists -- and deemed too dangerous to fly? I actually believe that they should," Bloomberg told senators. Federal law currently only allows the government to block guns sales for a very limited number of reasons, and being on that list is not one of them. (For more background, see Tuesday's article on the subject.)

"This common-sense legislation is not anti-gun -- it's anti-terrorist," chimed in Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), the sponsor of a bill that would close what Bloomberg has called a "terror gap."

But GOP Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Lindsay Graham of South Carolina wouldn't go along.

more...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/05/bloomberg-terror-gap-argu_n_564733.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 04:15 PM
Response to Original message
1. We won't allow them on a plane (de-armed), but we will allow them to buy weapons at will?
The mind boggles.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
virginia mountainman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. The mind boggles..
That liberals, would support, Innocent people, loosing a civil right, and not even KNOW they have lost it...And then when they find out, their is really no way for the average person to get it back..


This is not a liberal belief. Only a Conservative would like the idea of secrete lists, to curtail a civil right....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
virginia mountainman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
2. Just another list to curtail a civil right..
With no way of knowing HOW, you got on it, or HOW to get off it, and having NO RECOURSE while your on it...

Very nice..

Their are babies, on the "No fly list" Hell, even Ted Kennedy was on it at one point...

just more Republicans like that Bloomberg, willing to make everyone BUT THEM, give their civil rights, in the name of "terra"

until they come up with a much simpler way, for the innocent to GET OFF THE DAMNED LIST, for those Americans that mysteriously that get caught up on, their is absolutly no way I can subscribe to this idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. That is a good point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
virginia mountainman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Thank you!!
:toast:

And sorry for the tone in the other post..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ruby the Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. No problem. I wasn't looking at all sides of this.
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
virginia mountainman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. Ruby, A bit more information..
Edited on Wed May-05-10 07:12 PM by virginia mountainman
Eight-year-old Mikey Hicks from New Jersey had his first airport pat down at the age of two and has been dealing with extra airport drama ever since. Sarah Zapolsky's 11-month-old was earmarked for special attention at Dulles. Five-year-old Sam Adams was stopped from boarding a flight in San Diego in 2006. John Anderson of Minnesota found out he was on "a list" when he was three years old. Ingrid Sanden's 23-month-old baby set off security flags at Phoenix Sky Harbor in 2005.

Those incidents happened despite the Transportation Security Administrations' assertions that there are no children on the Selectee Watch List or its more serious companion, the No Fly List, that are compiled by the FBI's Terrorist Screening Center and provided to the TSA for enforcement. The problem stems from the fact that the current lists do not specify gender or date of birth. The agency instructs airlines not to deny boarding to children up to the age of 12, or select them for extra security checks, even if their names match those on a list. But amid parental cries for common sense, it still happens. The TSA states that "Airlines can and should automatically de-select any 8-year-olds out there that appear to be on a watch list." But "de-selecting" isn't always easy. It takes time, multiple phone calls, and intervention by supervisors, and it causes travel delays, not to mention stress for both the kids and the parents.

Najlah Feanny Hicks is all too familiar with such travel stress. Her 8-year-old son Mikey has been faced with aggressive pat downs, difficulty obtaining boarding cards, and lost seat assignments for the past six years. His boarding card is also regularly stamped with "SSSS" (code for Secondary Security Screening Selection). "Mikey couldn't check in online, we always had to talk to a supervisor at the ticket counter who had to override things in the computer to get him a seat," says Feanny Hicks. Ironically, his father, also named Michael Hicks, only received his first additional security screening in January 2010.

When Peter Mosher of Worcester, Massachusetts, was printing out boarding cards for the family spring break vacation to the Grand Canyon in April 2010, he wasn't able to print one for his 6-year-old daughter, Allison. The United agent who answered the concerned parent's call informed Mosher that Allison's name was on a "No Fly List." The software engineer was "flabbergasted." Calls to United and the TSA couldn't clear things up. It took the assistance of Senator Scott Brown and several extra hours at the airport to get the whole family on their early morning flight out of Logan.



About getting OFF the damned list?? You better hope your story gets printed on the front page of the New York Times, otherwise, you will be "SOL"


What else can a parent do if they find their child's name is a false positive for one on the No Fly or Selectee Watch Lists? Some families, like the Andersons, give up air travel entirely and set up a website to draw attention to their efforts. Others travel via Canada whenever they can. The Hicks didn't take the fact that Mikey's name was on the list laying down. "We contacted our congressman numerous times, who then contacted the TSA" says Feanny Hicks. "We then filled out the redress application for both my husband and my son." But things didn't start to right themselves until they went to the press. "To be honest, we've been at this for years and it's not until the New York Times wrote their front page story about Mikey and embarrassed the TSA did they do anything to help,"


http://news.travel.aol.com/2010/04/30/are-these-kids-terrorists/

I REFUSE TO ALLOW ANY CIVIL RIGHT, be restrained by such a list....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 04:32 PM
Response to Original message
7. Terrorists will buy their firearms at gun shows in any case
Their accent will just give them a little less bargaining power when across the table from whitey.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DonP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Why?
Any gun purchased at a gun show from an FFL/dealer still has to go through the full NICS check process just like any gun sold in a brick and mortar store.

Any gun bought from an individual (non-dealer or FFL) could be sold to him a lot more easily at any kitchen table. All the same rules apply at gun shows that apply everywhere else.

Or did you fall for that GOP led Brady gun show loophole propaganda?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
-..__... Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
9. Why people on this list...
are even allowed to buy propane and fireworks is insane.

"Common sense" would dictate closer scrutiny would be in order for purchasing said items

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
X_Digger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. And knives! And cars! And rental trucks!
And fertilizer! And bleach! (When combined with ammonia, it produces either chlorine gas or chloramine)..

and gasoline! and bottles! and...

...

...

:sarcasm:

Never mind that some of the most dangerous people aren't on any list because that might 'tip them off', and that some list entries are as vague as First Initial, Last Name.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 07:16 PM
Response to Original message
12. Honest question do you think there are millions of terrorist in the United States?
There are over a million people on Bush TERRA watchlist.

So if you think the number of terrorist in US is <1,000,000 then you accept most (likely virtually all) people on the TERRA list are not terrorist.

In fact they haven't done anything at all.

There is no due process under the law when it comes to the TERRA list. Once you are on it you are on it. You get no day in court, no method to appeal it, no way to even verify that you are on the list.

So since when is denying millions of people their constitutional rights based on secret lists (that you can't even find out if you are on) a progressive concept?

Weird how many anti-gunners would support a Bush due process bastardization just because it stops THE GUNZ!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
virginia mountainman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Some of these "fair weather" democrats..are more than happy to ..
Continue "Bushco's" polices, in regards to civil rights...


I wonder, just how these same folks, would feel, if they chose to extend the "no fly" list to cover the first amendment?? Basically, make it a crime, for a person on this list, to write a OP Ed, or a book, perhaps even a letter....And don't even think about protesting...

Yea....If it is such a good idea, lets extend it to cover ALL civil rights

After all, a terrorist, might write a book about building car bombs...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Why not take it to the logical conclusion... warrants and trials help terrorists.
If you are on the watchlist you lose all Constitutional protections.

Of course the govt decides in secret who is on the list and you can't appeal that decision. You never know if you are on the list or when you will be put on the list and for what reason.

At any place and any time a govt can put you on a list that strips all your human rights.

Pretty much a complete end run around the entire Constitution.

:puke:

Some people on DU would go down that path because of irrational fear of guns. Sick and weak people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
virginia mountainman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. "anything to get rid of the gunz"....Is their bleating cry....
The don't care one iota about the doors they open in constitutional law in the process.

After all, we should be glad to give up a civil right....snark...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
16. I have re-thunk my position on this issue..
Of course, suspected terrorists should be able to buy guns and dynamite. Our Constitution is too valuable, as witnessed by the last 10 years, to surrender to fear. It doesn't matter if we are at war and some folks want to kill us. We should not interfere with their free speech or their freedom to move from one place to another. However, I get the feeling that some folks care more about the 2nd Amendment than all the others combined.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DefenseLawyer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-05-10 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
17. I have to agree with Mr. Graham. To a point.
I'm on the terror watch list and my now 6 year old son has been on the "do not board" list since he was 3. The idea that we would use that fucked up list as the basis for curtailing anyone's constitutional rights is pretty absurd. If they actually had a meaningful list it would be a different story. Then you could have a discussion about other ways it could be used.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 12:29 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC