Voting Resources
Your Gun Is In The Government’s Sights!
Rand Paul’s Amendment to Protect the Privacy of Gun Owners under the Patriot Act was Defeated
If you read the July 29th issue of Gun Owners of America, you can read all the bad news relating to gun ownership control and the assault gun owners are under. The latest shocking news involves so-called ‘conservative’ Republican Senators, including not-so-conservative, John Cornyn and Kay Bailey Hutchison, who voted against Senator Rand Paul’s amendment (85-10) which would have exempted gun records—including 4473’s (the form all purchasers fill out when they buy a firearm from a licensed dealer—from the blanket searches by the ATF under the Patriot Act. Without Paul’s exemption, it is possible that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives could go to a secret FISA court and without any defense attorneys present, obtain an order to produce every 4473 in the country, ostensibly because a “terrorism investigation” requires it. If such an action were taken, the government would have a list of every FFL-related gun buyer in the country going back decades.
Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell and his second-in-command Jon Kyl mischaracterized the Paul amendment by spreading misinformation and lies. They falsely claimed that had the FBI been investigating the 2009 Fort Hood shooter under the Paul amendment, authorities would not have had the necessary tools under the Patriot Act to stop the shooting. However, the terrorism legislation was fully in force at the time of the Fort Hood shooting and did nothing to prevent it!
Republican leaders also claimed that there was no evidence that the Patriot Act has been abused on a “wide-spread” basis, either in general or with respect to the Second Amendment. But since all investigations are secret, it is a crime to disclose them. The Obama administration is now pushing to illegally seize 4473-type information through its illegal regulations on multiple semi-auto sales in the Southwest in the name of “national security.” The effort to register gun sales along the border underscores how easily the ATF could use the excuse of “terrorism” to register gun sales across the entire country.
NRA DID NOT TAKE AN OFFICIAL POSITION ON THE PAUL AMENDMENT
Once again, the NRA refused to step up to the plate and take a strong stand for privacy rights for gun owners. The NRA had a letter read from the NRA-ILA head, Chris Cox, encouraging the government to use the McClure-Volkmer provisions in current law that allow access to firearms records under very narrow circumstances (some of us also have a problem with McClure-Volkmer.) At least, Senator Paul’s amendment vote lets us know who we can rely on to block abusive practices and who may actually side with ATF if their leadership “orders” them to violate the law. (Many excerpts from GOA Legislative Attorney, Mike Hammond, from the July 29th issue of The Gun Owners were used in this blog.)
What is reported here is just the tip of the iceberg. Eternal vigilance and citizen response is constantly needed.
Comments
Gun Rights
If the Paul amendment were adopted, the FBI would have used other ways to access whatever firearms records it might need for intelligence or anti-terrorism investigations. This is especially troublesome for gun owners.
This would result in United States Attorneys simply demanding the same records through grand jury subpoenas, which require no judicial approval before issuance. Fighting a subpoena after the fact can be very costly and carries legal risks of its own, including possible charges for obstruction of justice.
Even worse, the government would have used the Gun Control Act's provision that allows the Attorney General to "inspect or examine the inventory and records of [a licensee] without ... reasonable cause or warrant" during a criminal investigation. That means by simply characterizing its activities as a "criminal investigation," it would enter a licensee's premises and demand these records without "reasonable cause or warrant"--in other words, without judicial oversight of any kind, and without any of the procedural limits imposed by the PATRIOT Act.
Therefore, given all of these potential problems for gun owners, the NRA could not support this poorly drafted amendment.
I'm all for gun rights. But if you are gonna write something calling John and Kay "not so conservative", you'd better damn well back it up with facts. By the way, your one-sided argument is full of half-truths which makes it as bad as the liberal B.S. we get from the mainstream media. Remember, lie Ronnie said, speak no ill of a fellow Republican!
Did you ever stop to think
I am a Life member of the NRA but when they are wrong I do not hesitate to say so. There is no mistaking the fact that Obama, Hillary and the rest of the anti-gunners are doing everything they can to illegalize or confiscate the firearms of American citizens. Without the Rand amendment protecting the privacy of gunowners, their job of confiscation is advanced. Cornyn's pro-amnesty and pro-constitutional convention stance places him in the not-so-conservative category. Kay Bailey will soon be non-relevant but her not-so-conservative voting record speaks for itself.