LEGISLATIVE ALERT

[underdog]

Battle Resumes Over FBI Fishing Expeditions Into Gun Records
-- Please contact your Rep. and Senators immediately Gun Owners of America
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102
Springfield, VA 22151
(703)321-8585 Tuesday, December 6, 2005
House and Senate negotiators are reportedly close to hammering out differences on legislation that could greatly impact gun owners.
You will remember that before the Thanksgiving break, legislators were trying to ram PATRIOT Act revisions through the Congress and onto the Presidents desk.
Some of these revisions would improve the PATRIOT Act... some would not.
Of greatest concern to gun owners is a provision in H.R. 3199 that would allow the FBI to obtain "firearms sales records."
The bill extends Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act and allows agents of the federal government to get "firearms sales records" which, in their opinion, are relevant to investigating terrorism.
These records would be obtained from gun dealers, who are required by law to keep the gun purchase records (4473 forms). Thus, an anti-gun administration could then easily compile gun owner registration lists -- an enterprise which has often been a prelude to gun confiscation.
Of course, more than just your gun purchase records are at stake. Financial and medical records, library records and much more are also open to FBI fishing expeditions. They don't have to get any prior approval from any court.
This has led to concerns that the FBI is already infringing upon the rights of law-abiding Americans.
Consider that the FBI -- because of a Freedom of Information Act request -- recently revealed that the amount of information that the agency has gleaned on private citizens has exploded since the passage of the original PATRIOT Act in 2001.
The FBI has issued about 30,000 "national security letters" (NSLs) per year since the Act passed -- NSLs referring to a kind of administrative subpoena power where the FBI can get private records on individuals without a court order.
Such power has led to tremendous violations already. According to The Washington Post, there have been several violations that are "serious enough that the FBI itself determined they must be reported to an executive branch agency called the Intelligence Oversight Board."
Clearly, there is a thirst in Washington for obtaining records on private individuals. And that is why we do NOT want the FBI soliciting information on gun owners from 4473 forms. The stakes are high in regard to passage of H.R. 3199.
The House-Senate agreement on the bill seemed to be a done deal last month, until outside groups (including GOA) and Republican Senators (like Larry Craig of Idaho) issued statements of opposition to the latest version of the bill.
The several dozen organizations that have expressed concern over the bill span the political spectrum, and include groups such as the American Conservative Union, Gun Owners of America and Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances (which is headed by former Rep. Bob Barr).
In all, there are six Senators who have threatened to lead a filibuster on the bill. Three are Democrats; three are Republicans.
Right now, this is an issue that is of utmost priority in the Congress. "The Patriot Act is something that we are spending a lot of time on right now," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist last week. "Our objective is to complete that... as soon as possible."
This bill is clearly on the fast track. It is rumored on Capitol Hill that negotiators are nearing a deal on H.R. 3199. You can greatly help by making them aware that gun owners are closely watching what they do on the subject of "firearms sales records."
ACTION: Please ask your Representative and Senators to ensure that the words "firearms sales records" are deleted from the warrantless records provisions of H.R. 3199.
You can visit the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Representative and Senators a pre-written e-mail message such as the one below.
-----Pre-written letter----- Dear Representative / Senator:
Gun owners are very concerned about a specific provision in the PATRIOT Act expansion bill (H.R. 3199), as it would allow the United States government to seize every lawful gun sale record in the country... solely on the basis of a bureaucrat's determination that a national registry of gun owners would be useful in an anti-terrorism investigation.
H.R. 3199 extends Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act, which allows agents of the federal government to get "firearms sales records" which, in their opinion, are relevant to investigating terrorism. FFL holders must retain copies of the 4473 forms (yellow sheets) filled out on every gun sale. Thus, an anti-gun administration could easily determine that such records would be useful in the fight against terrorism, and demand them all.
Even more ominous, the gun dealers would be required NOT to disclose the existence of the investigation to their customers, meaning that the dealer (rather than the gun purchaser) would be the only person who could contest this action. And why should he risk his livelihood on my behalf? This is massive gun control by simple executive fiat.
There is an illusory right to challenge the secrecy of the court orders, but it's just that... an illusion. If the government claims there is a national security issue at stake or that there's an ongoing criminal investigation, then the FBI's fishing expedition could remain a secret and remain unchallenged.
Right now, there is debate over whether to sunset the provisions in Section 215 -- and how soon that sunset should "kick in." Regardless, "firearms sales records" need to be deleted from the warrantless records provisions of H.R. 3199, as they are an unconstitutional infringement upon the privacy of America's gun owners.
I believe that a national gun registry is a step this country cannot afford to take, and one that the citizenry will not abide.
I would ask you, in the strongest terms, to ensure that "firearms sales records" are deleted from the warrantless records provisions of H.R. 3199. Thank you.
Sincerely,

[North Texan]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,178104,00.html

"I will do everything I can, including a filibuster, to stop this Patriot Act conference report, which does not include adequate safeguards to protect our constitutional freedoms," said Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., the only senator to vote against the original version of the Patriot Act.

"The conference report, in its current form, is unacceptable. ... If further changes are not made, we will work to stop this bill from becoming law," wrote Sens. Feingold, Republicans Larry Craig of Idaho, John Sununu of New Hampshire and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Democrats Dick Durbin of Illinois and Ken Salazar of Colorado.

[underdog]

So far, I've only seen a couple of honest Dems on this site ...Deleted by CalHunter...

You come back touting Russ Feingold as a friend of gun owners. Absolutely laughable.

Here is Feingold's report card on gun issues from Project Vote Smart:

Gun Issues
(Back to top)

2004Senator Feingold supported the interests of the National Rifle Association 17 percent during their legislative career up until 2004.
2003-2004Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Gun Owners of America 10 percent in 2003-2004.
2003Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence 75 percent from 1988-2003 (Senate) or 1991-2003 (House).
2003Based on the results of a questionnaire the Gun Owners of America assigned Senator Feingold a grade of 10 (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F-).
2002On the votes that the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence considered to be the most important as of 2002, Senator Feingold voted their preferred position 75 percent of the time. These scores are cumulative for each representative's time in their current office. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence considered votes from 1988-2002 in the House and 1991-2002 in the Senate when determining these scores.
2001-2002Based on the results of a questionnaire the Gun Owners of America assigned Senator Feingold a grade of F (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F-).
1999-2000Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence 100 percent in 1999-2000.
1999-2000Based on the results of a questionnaire the Gun Owners of America assigned Senator Feingold a grade of F (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F-).


Here is his record on animal rights issues:

Animal Rights and Wildlife Issues
(Back to top)

2004In 2004 Humane USA PAC endorsed Senator Feingold.
2004Senator Feingold supported the interests of the The Humane Society of the United States 80 percent in 2004.
2004Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Fund for Animals 80 percent in 2004.
2004Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Doris Day Animal League 80 percent in 2004.
2004Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Society for Animal Protective Legislation 80 percent in 2004.
2004Senator Feingold supported the interests of the American Humane Association 80 percent in 2004.
2004Senator Feingold supported the interests of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals 80 percent in 2004.
2004Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Animal Protection Institute 80 percent in 2004.
2004Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund 100 percent in 2004.
2003Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Fund for Animals 80 percent in 2003.
2003Senator Feingold supported the interests of the The Humane Society of the United States 80 percent in 2003.
2003Senator Feingold supported the interests of the American Humane Association 80 percent in 2003.
2003Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Animal Protection Institute 80 percent in 2003.
2003Senator Feingold supported the interests of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals 80 percent in 2003.
2003Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Society for Animal Protective Legislation 80 percent in 2003.
2003Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Doris Day Animal League 80 percent in 2003.
2003Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund 91 percent in 2003.
2001-2002Senator Feingold supported the interests of the American Humane Association 100 percent in 2001-2002.
2001-2002Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Animal Protection Institute 100 percent in 2001-2002.
2001-2002Senator Feingold supported the interests of the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals 100 percent in 2001-2002.
2001-2002Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Society for Animal Protective Legislation 100 percent in 2001-2002.
2001-2002Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Doris Day Animal League 100 percent in 2001-2002.
2001-2002Senator Feingold supported the interests of the Fund for Animals 100 percent in 2001-2002.
2001-2002Senator Feingold supported the interests of the The Humane Society of the United States 100 percent in 2001-2002.
2000Senator Feingold supported the interests of the The Humane Society of the United States 60 percent in 2000.
2000On the votes that the Society for Animal Protective Legislation considered to be the most important in 2000, Senator Feingold voted their preferred position 75 percent of the time.

What a friend of sportmen!

[boysda]

ORIGINAL: underdog

So far, I've only seen a couple of honest Dems on this site ...Deleted by CalHunter...

where's the love, UD?
NT's a pretty thoughtful guy, and hardly a "lightweight".

as far as partisan, that label could apply to many of us, yourself included.

and by the way, when the time comes for you to denigrate me or one of my posts, I prefer the terms "political hack" "partisan whore" or "party shill"

[underdog]

Maybe Tex will explain why he chose to frame this issue with the comments of one of the most anti-gun, anti-hunting people in Congress. I'll look forward to his comments.

Actually, boysda, you're one I put in the honest Dem camp. It torques me when people try to misrepresent things here.

Sometimes politics make for strange bedfellows. At least they have in the past when Congress was more bipartisan. I contacted my reps long ago about opposing adminstrative subpoena power for federal agencies and making Patriot permanent.

[boysda]

ORIGINAL: underdog

Actually, boysda, you're one I put in the honest Dem camp.

honest...why, I, I, I've never been so insulted in my life!!!!

do you realize what an allegation like that could do to me professionally?

I DEMAND A RETRACTION!

[underdog]

You noticed I did not use 'lawyer' and 'honest' in the same sentence.

[North Texan]

So far, I've only seen a couple of honest Dems on this site ...Deleted by CalHunter...

You come back touting Russ Feingold as a friend of gun owners. Absolutely laughable.

Where did I tout Feingold as a friend of the gun owner? All I did was point out he was the lone opposition to the first version of the Patriot Acts, and is one of six opposing the renewal. The article you posted said:

In all, there are six Senators who have threatened to lead a filibuster on the bill. Three are Democrats; three are Republicans.

I posted a follow up article naming them, lettingpeople know where their senators stand. Apparently this causes me to rate as a dishonest lightweight?[&:]

[underdog]

Perhaps I over-reacted, Tex. I shouldn't have called you a lightweight. Maybe I gave you too much credit for keeping up with politics. But, I understand that school probably doesn't allow for a whole lot of extraneous reading. Your example of Feinstein opposing the onerous aspects of PA, nonetheless, is a poor one.

Feingold was the ONLY senator to vote against PA following 9-11 and he opposes the whole banana for all the wrong reasons. Perhaps the media found Feingold's immediate shouts of "Filibuster!" more sensational than calmer heads' comments.

The second time around on PA lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are more willing to express their opposition to sections of the bill that fail to protect privacy rights.

Three Republican and three Democratic senators also issued a statement calling for revisions to give law enforcement "the tools they need while providing safeguards to protect the constitutional rights of all Americans." The six included Republicans John Sununu of New Hampshire, Larry Craig of Idaho and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, plus Feingold and fellow Democrats Richard Durbin of Illinois and Ken Salazar of Colorado.

I've contacted my reps a second time about denying FBI adminstrative subpoena power and keeping a sunset on the entire PA.

[North Texan]

Feingold was the ONLY senator to vote against PA following 9-11 and he opposes the whole banana for all the wrong reasons. Perhaps the media found Feingold's immediate shouts of "Filibuster!" more sensational than calmer heads' comments.

He opposed it because he didn't like the intrusion it made on individual liberties. I can't say I disagree, as I have never and will never support the Patriot Acts. I refuse to support legislation created from highly emotional current events. The Patriot Acts were passed in response to 9/11, much like the Assault Weapons Ban was passed in response to the North Hollywood bank robbery. Maybe heis the calmer head?

I'm not saying a longtime supporter of Feingold or I agree with him to any extent philisophically. I am saying that I agree with him on THIS ISSUE.

I hear the NRA and GOA constantly throwing out random pro-gun sayings. One of them I beleive one of them goes something like this "Those who would give up liberty for a little temporarysecurity deserve neither." That is exactly what the Patriot Acts do, forfeit liberty for "security".