Joe sent us:
>http://www.startribune.com/stories/484/5279377.html
>Suspected terrorists still can buy guns
>Eric Lichtblau,  New York Times
>March 8, 2005
>WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Dozens of terrorist suspects on federal watch lists

  My first question is whether being on a federal watch list makes one a
terrorist suspect?

  Next is whether an individual can find out if he/she is on a watch
list, and, if so, is it appealable?  My guess is No, and No - based on
what I've heard about the "No Fly" list.

>were allowed to buy firearms legally in the United States last year,
>according to a congressional investigation that points up major
>vulnerabilities in federal gun laws.
>
>People suspected of being members of terrorist groups are not
>automatically barred from legally buying a gun, and the new
>investigation, conducted by congressional officials at the Government
>Accountability Office (GAO), indicated that people with clear links to
>terrorist groups had taken advantage of this gap on a regular basis.

  "regular basis" appears to mean 9 or less times a month for the entire
country - or perhaps 6 or less - depending on which time period is
counted.

>Since Sept. 11, 2001, law enforcement officials have voiced increasing
>concern about the prospect of having a terrorist walk into a gun shop,

  Whoops - note that "terrorist suspect" is now "terrorist".

>legally buying an assault rifle or other type of weapon.

  I'm sure this means "semiauto rifle".  

  On a priority basis, how much concern should there be about hand-held
firearms vs. weapons capable of more massive destruction?

>The GAO study offers the first full-scale examination of the possible 
>dangers posed by gaps in the law, congressional officials said, and it
>concludes that the FBI could do a better job of matching gun background
>checks against lists of suspected terrorists.
>
>At least 44 times between February and June 2004, people regarded by
>the FBI as known or suspected members of terrorist groups sought
>permission to buy or carry guns, the GAO found.

  Here's the 9/month (44/5 = 8.8) but this includes purchase and
application for a carry permit.  So the purchase could be lower, perhaps
a lot lower, than the total.

>In all but nine cases, the FBI or state authorities who handled the
>requests allowed the gun applications to proceed because a check of the
>would-be buyer found no automatic disqualification, like being a felon,
>an illegal immigrant or a person deemed "mentally defective," the
>report found.
>
>In the four months after the formal study ended, authorities received
>another 14 gun applications from terror suspects, and all but two of

  58/9 = 6.4 per month

>those were cleared to proceed, the investigation found. In all,
>officials approved 47 of 58 gun applications from terror suspects over
>a nine-month period last year, the GAO found.

  That's 11 unapproved in 9 months = 1.2/month.

>The gun buyers came up as positive matches on a classified internal FBI
>watch list that includes thousands of high-risk terrorist suspects,
>many of them being monitored, trailed or sought for questioning as part
>of continuing terrorism investigations, officials said.
>
>GAO investigators were not given access to the identities or histories
>of the gun buyers because of the sensitivity of those terrorism
>investigations.
>
>The report is to be released today; an advance copy was provided to The
>New York Times.
>
>Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., who requested the GAO study, plans to
>introduce legislation to address the problem in part by requiring
>federal officials to keep records of gun purchases by terror suspects
>for a minimum of 10 years.
>
>Such records must now be destroyed within 24 hours as a result of a
>change ordered by Congress last year, but Lautenberg maintains that the
>new policy has hindered terrorism investigations by eliminating the
>paper trail on gun purchases.
>
>"Destroying these records in 24 hours is senseless and will only help 
>terrorists cover their tracks," Lautenberg said Monday. "It's an absurd
>policy."

  Is it reasonable to believe that finding out that someone bought a
firearm 9 years ago will help fight terrorism?  Or is any connection, no
matter how tenuous, sufficient?

> ...
>In response to the GAO report, Lautenberg also plans to ask Attorney
>General Alberto Gonzales, Ashcroft's successor, to assess whether
>people on the FBI's terror watch list should be automatically banned
>from buying guns. Such a policy would require a change in federal law,
>since being a member of a terrorist group is not a banned category.

  This produces the same question of whether one can lose a right by
being on a secret list?

> ...
>Under the new policy, millions of gun applications are run against the
>FBI's internal terrorist watch list, and if there is a match, FBI field
>agents or other counter-terrorism personnel are to be contacted to
>determine whether they have any information about the terror suspect
>that would prohibit the pending sale from being completed.
>
>In some cases, the extra review allowed the FBI to block a gun purchase
>by a suspected terrorist that might otherwise have proceeded because of
>a lag time in putting information into the database, the GAO report
>said.

  This "block" of gun purchases seems to explain some of the 11 cases
over 9 months - not all of the 11 because some of the blocks seem to
have been by State authorities (see above.)  So this seems to reduce to
a situation of blocking about 1 purchase a month in the entire country.

>The GAO report concluded that the Justice Department should clarify
>what information could and could not be shared between gun-purchasing
>administrators and terrorism investigators.

  This is part of a much more general question about sharing of
information between agencies.

--henry schaffer
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Reply via email to