"Yesterday (12-01-2009), United States Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) announced the introduction of (cue cheesy acronym) the "PROTECT Act." "PROTECT" stands for "Preserving Records of Terrorist & Criminal Transactions."
Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) today introduced the PROTECT Act, legislation to preserve records of gun sales for longer periods of time to aid law enforcement officials in preventing gun crimes and terrorist acts. Under current law, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) must destroy these records in most cases within 24 hours of allowing a gun sale to proceed.
Interesting, isn't it, that Lautenberg's own press release describes the proposed legislation's purpose as being "to preserve records of gun sales for longer periods of time . . . "--but the title of the bill refers only to "terrorist and criminal transactions"? That's pretty clear testimony to what Sen. Lautenberg thinks of gun buyers. Granted, "PROGS (Preserving Records of Gun Sales)" isn't nearly as catchy an acronym, but that's probably not a criterion to which much importance should be attached.
So how, specifically, would Sen. Lautenberg's proposed legislation "PROTECT" us?
Sen. Lautenbergâs legislation, the Preserving Records of Terrorist & Criminal Transactions (PROTECT) Act of 2009, would:
* require the FBI to retain for 10 years all records related to a NICS transaction involving a valid match to federal terrorist watch list records; and
* repeal the requirement that other background check records be destroyed after 24 hours, and instead require that the records of all non-terrorist transactions be maintained for 180 days.
Remember, the "federal terrorist watch list records" are riddled with errors, generated with precious little (if any) concern about due process, and that the appropriateness of one's presence on the list is not easily challenged, because of the lack of transparency.
As to the second point, the National "Instant" Criminal Background Check System (NICS) allows the FBI 3 days to find a reason to infringe on that which shall not be infringed--before the current 24 hour record destruction requirement countdown begins. If the most powerful, sophisticated law enforcement agency in the world can't find a reason to disqualify a purchase within 4 days, giving them 6 months to scrutinize the purchase, in order to invent a reason to declare it illegitimate does not appeal to me. If the FBI's inability to get the job done is to be used as justification to turn the U.S. into a surveillance society, let's just change the name of the country to Oceania.
The "PROTECT Act" is far from Sen. Lautenberg's first attack on gun owners--just this year he has introduced a bill to outlaw private gun sales, and another to allow the Attorney General to unilaterally block a gun purchase based on the prospective purchaser's presence on the terrorist "watch list."
This is just one more example of the use of the public's fear of "terrorism" to goad us into surrendering more of our freedom to the government. Sometimes it's said that the terrorists "hate us because we are free." Perhaps--but does anyone really believe that "they" will stop hating us, if we surrender enough freedom?
Does anyone believe it would be worth it?"
This is an extremely good time for a reminder to our lawmakers and this is the FAX I'm fixing to send:
REMINDER: S.1317 (Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009 (Introduced in Senate) ) and
ď*S.2820 (Preserving Records of Terrorist & Criminal Transactions Act of 2009)ď
Both bills - introduced by Sen. Frank Lautenberg of N.J. - are TOTALLY UN-ACCEPTABLE to American gun ownerâs.
BOTH bills have no other real purpose than to infringe upon the 2nd Amendment rights of legitimate, law-abiding American citizens.
S.1317 is blatantly UN-Constitutional due to the fact that it gives this (or any future) Attorney General the ability â simply on his/her own âsay-soâ â to deny anyone the ability to purchase a weapon, based only on the pathetically-weak âappropriately suspectedâ/âreasonable beliefâ so-called âstandardâ. This âstandard is a JOKE and does NOT measure up to the 4th Amendmentsâ âprobable causeâ clause nor the 5th Amendmentsâ ânor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of lawâ clause. It also flies directly in the face of the 2nd Amendmentsâ âshall not be infringedâ clause.
NO Attorney General of the United States must ever be given the power to supercede the Constitution!
S.2820 would be based on in-accurate databases that have NOT been corrected and which are, indeed, nearly impossible to correct since they are all covered by ânational securityâ and/or âstate secretsâ blankets to conceal their shortcomings and in-accuracies.
The SAME objections apply to H.R. 2401 (No Fly, No Buy Act of 2009) or any similar Senate legislation along those lines.
A vote for, support of or co-sponsoring of ANY of these bills on your part is TOTALLY UN-ACCEPTABLE and will be responded to actively come your next re-election attempt. Likewise, your approval of any of these WILL be broadcast around the Internet and in our local papers and radio broadcasts.
Feel free to use that one or one of your own. You can find your Senator(s) contact info here:
Sure - all three bills are "in committee" - but how fast do you think they could fly out and get voted on if the "conditions" were right? Don't take a chance - contact them
if your Senator is one of the ones who co-sponsored it.