I don't know what the dirty lib thinks now days, but a couple of weeks ago he asked me what I thought about the the "Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009" bill. I had already read it and told him it was ridiculous and was dangerous.
Why do I think it is ridiculous? Because this is America.
In America we do not restrict an Americans rights when they have not been convicted of a crime. We as Americans have the right to a trial where we can confront our accuser before we can be found guilty of a crime. Being suspected of a crime is not the same as being convicted of a crime.
What this bill does is give too much power to the Attorney General.
SEC. 2. GRANTING THE ATTORNEY GENERAL THE AUTHORITY TO DENY THE SALE, DELIVERY, OR TRANSFER OF A FIREARM OR THE ISSUANCE OF A FIREARMS OR EXPLOSIVES LICENSE OR PERMIT TO DANGEROUS TERRORISTS.
(a) Standard for Exercising Attorney General Discretion Regarding Transferring Firearms or Issuing Firearms Permits to Dangerous Terrorists- Chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
Here are my questions:
- How is a known terrorist free to buy a gun in the first place and wouldn't the FBI be notified of their location as soon as the background check is performed?
- Why are these people suspected terrorists and not convicted terrorists?
- What criteria is the Attorney General required to follow before adding someone to the list?
- What oversite is there to prevent abuse?
- Shouldn't a judge be needed, to agree that there is probable cause, to add someone to this list just like a warrant?
I don't want to sound like a conspiracy theorist but this sounds like it is more likely to be used against people the Attorney General doesn't like. That could be anyone, including law abiding Americans who do not share his views.