Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.6.2
Site Design by Sekimori

« Student sent to mental institution for posting photo of himself with shotgun | Main | Guest editorial on Waco & Romania »

"Dangerous Terrorists Act"

Posted by David Hardy · 7 May 2007 10:36 AM

Here's a PDF And Here's an article on it.

As I read it, the bill would allow the Att'y General (in practice, some of his underlings) to find that persons are "appropriately suspected" of aiding terror, and reasonably believed to be likely to use guns in that.

If a person is put on that list, they are not forbidden to own guns, but they are put on the instant check list, so they can't buy from a dealer.

If that sounds pretty strange ... if a dealer is put on the list his license can be revoked. Or if a person responsible for a licensee's policies is on the list, it can be revoked.

In any appeal from any of the above, the government may furnish the court with summaries of its evidence, or redacted versions of it. The court may review the originals only to ensure that the summary is appropriate, but may not rely on the original. (My guess: so the court reads the original, and whether you say it can't rely on it or not, the judge is human and will do so. But the individual challenging only sees the summary).

The questionable nature of giving a person legal status because they are "appropriately suspected" of something (the term is undefined -- presumably it's less than probable cause, since if they have that they could arrest him anyway) is clear to me. But the rest is just plain wierd. A terrorist snapping his fingers in frustration because he can't clear the instant check, and protesting that he has a clean record and something must be wrong here, he's gonna write the FBI....

I wonder if the real target isn't dealers and manufacturers. A gun gets into a terrorist's hands ... or is suspected of the same. The mfr knows nothing of it, but you can "appropriately suspect" that they do. Note also that the list would cover anyone "appropriately suspected" of aiding domestic terrorism, too.

[UPDATE: .416 Rigby's comment is dead on. As I recall, part of the escalation in the Randy Weaver case involved the local US Atty (whom I knew from Interior days) sending Mrs. Weaver's letters to the FBI for a threat assessment. They came back with a completely unjustified assessment of her as extremely dangerous, etc.. I recall reading FBI's psychologists' assessments of David Koresh's letters, sent out during the siege ... the evaluation was positively wacky. Only made sense if you assumed they were writing so as to please their bosses. Among other things they called him a "virulent paranoid" -- meaning they weren't quite in command of English. And leaving me wondering how you could assess paranoid traits in a fellow whose *reality* was that he was surrounded by government tanks, had the government playing music and wierd noises all night to disrupt his sleep, sending in listening devices to spy on him, testing a device to shut down all radio and TV reception, and testing three battlefield robots in his front yard, etc. His reality at that point was far wilder than fifty paranoid schitzs could cook up with a team effort. And the letters focused upon his prediction that, as part of the end times, there was going to be an earthquake, and he was warning FBI not to let their agents camp below the dam nearby, because he figured the dam would breach. Paranoids do not normally show concern for the safety of their supposed persecutors.].

· Gun Control Act of 68

4 Comments | Leave a comment

Letalis | May 7, 2007 11:06 AM | Reply

I deal with HQ DOJ attorneys all the time, and I wouldn't trust most of them know the difference between a dangerous terrorist and a redneck with a bad attitude.

Letalis | May 7, 2007 2:03 PM | Reply

I think David is talking about me when he says ".416 Rigby." It is always nice when someone agrees with you!

Regarding Ms. Weaver's letters, I would remind the readers of this gem from one of history's most ruthless prosecutors:

"Give me six lines written by any man and I can find therein sufficient cause for which to hang him."

Remember what has so often been said about history, its tendency to repeat itself, tragedy, and then farce.

wrangler5 | May 7, 2007 7:51 PM | Reply

This proposal doesn't technically create a bill of attainder (a law passed by the legislature that says Joe Blow is guilty of X crime, for which he is then arrested and simply put in prison, or whatever the punishment is) but it strikes me as moving pretty far in that direction. This is a very scary idea.

Tom Maguire | May 8, 2007 11:27 AM | Reply

Re the "Dangerous Terrorists Act" - I want to see the legislative proposal covering Not-So Dangerous Terrorists. I understand the Department of Redundancy Department is drafting it now.

Leave a comment