ACLU attacked Reid’s gun law, cites privacy and civil liberties


My modem is down, so have not been able to post. keep in mind, the ACLU was opposed to the gun bill. So while everyone is in a tizzy about the NRA… These are the facts. Here is a repost ..trying to do it from my iPad.

While the talking heads seem to blow off any concern about universal background checks as nothing serious and the “at least” we can do, it is a trojan horse according to the ACLU as they looked at the Reid bill that is floating around in the Senate.

Recent surveys indicate the vast majority of Americans appear to be ok with this. The Daily Caller has a post that gives us a heads up. Let’s not fall asleep on this one. Here we go: As Senate Democrats struggle to build support for new gun control legislation, the American Civil Liberties Union now says it’s among those who have “serious concerns” about the bill. The inclusion of universal background checks — the poll-tested lynchpin of most Democratic proposals — “raises two significant concerns,” the ACLU’s Chris Calabrese told TheDC Wednesday

. “The first is that it treats the records for private purchases very differently than purchases made through licensed sellers. Under existing law, most information regarding an approved purchase is destroyed within 24 hours when a licensed seller does a [National Instant Criminal Background Check System] check now,” Calabrese said, “and almost all of it is destroyed within 90 days.” “[U]nfortunately, we have seen in the past that the creation of these types of records leads sometimes to the creation of government databases and collections of personal information on all of us,”

Calabrese warned. “That’s not an inevitable result, but we have seen that happen in the past, certainly.” “As we’ve seen with many large government databases, if you build it, they will come.” “And existing law also bars the use of those records for other purposes,” Calabrese continued, explaining that the government is supposed to be barred by the Privacy Act from transferring database information between agencies without the consent of the individual citizen. “Contrast this with what the existing [Reid] legislation says, which is simply that a record has to be kept of a private transfer,” Calabrese highlighted, “and it doesn’t have any of the protections that we have in current law for existing licensees.” “And they come to use databases for all sorts of different purposes,”

Calabrese said. “For example, the National Counterterrorism Center recently gave itself the authority to collect all kinds of existing federal databases and performed terrorism related searches regarding those databases. They essentially exempted themselves from a lot of existing Privacy Act protections.” “So you just worry that you’re going to see searches of the databases and an expansion for purposes that were not intended when the information was collected.” “

Regulations … shall include a provision requiring a record of transaction of any transfer that occurred between an unlicensed transferor and unlicensed transferee,” according to the bill. The ACLU’s second “significant concern” with Reid’s legislation is that it too broadly defines the term “transfer,” creating complicated criminal law that law-abiding Americans may unwittingly break. “[I]t’s certainly a civil liberties concern,” Calabrese told TheDC. “You worry about, in essence, a criminal justice trap where a lawful gun owner who wants to obey the law inadvertently runs afoul of the criminal law.” “They don’t intend to transfer a gun or they don’t think that’s what they’re doing, but under the law they can be defined as making a transfer. We think it’s important that anything that is tied to a criminal sanction be easy to understand and avoid allowing too much prosecutorial discretion.” “For example, different gun ranges are treated differently,” Calabrese said. “You’re firing a firearm in one geographic location, you’re OK, but in another, you’re not. And those kind things, it’s going to be hard for your average consumer to really internalize and figure out the difference.” “Criminal sanctions shouldn’t hinge on those kinds of differences,” he said. Separate from the ACLU’s concerns with a universal background check system, Calabrese flagged another provision of the legislation invented by Sen. Boxer that the ACLU is “worried about” — school tiplines for the reporting of “potentially dangerous students” “We’re worried about this tip line,” Calabrese admitted. “We think we already have a phone number for reporting dangerous situations — it’s called 9-1-1.” “The tip line doesn’t have any guidance for who should be included, how we should vet these requests, who should be included in the system, what you should do with this information once you get it,” he warned. “It just seems like a dangerously unregulated avenue that’s going to risk pushing more kids into the criminal justice system.” “What’s a school supposed to do if they get an anonymous phone call that some kid is dangerous?” Calabrese went on. “How are they supposed to treat that? Do they have liability if they ignore it? Should this kid be suspended? Or should he be scrutinized by a school safety officer because of an anonymous tip?” Read more: Daily Caller Here is where the information will remain: Filmed from Redwood Road, you can see the progress of the NSA’s Utah Data Center also called the NSA Spy Center FROM:  NSA Spy Center Revealed: 100 years worth of data

13 Responses to “ACLU attacked Reid’s gun law, cites privacy and civil liberties”

  1. Brittius Says:

    It opens too many windows of opportunity for opportunists, especially the predatory and rabid political hacks, regardless if whether they are elected or appointed.
    Laws are designed to hinder. Some laws are designed to hobble.
    A thought I have is, what if “numbers” of arrests and not necessarily convictions are low, or if some administrator wants to make a “big splash” and impress someone? All of a sudden, everything becomes reduced into terms that you, violated a law. Not only overtly but, an administrator’s interpretation of a law, which is not their job, it belongs solely to the judicial system. But, “numbers”, are generated. The administrator now takes those figures and demands budget increases. Clauses for “fee for enforcement”, generally become associated to a law in later updating of the established and recognized law. As an example, BATF&E, I bring this up only as an example and not as axe grinding. Alcohol, tobacco and firearms products are not the concern. Veiling morality of not smoking or drinking are always raised as health “concerns”. The root, is taxes. Revenue going into government coffers. Who is responsible for collection of taxes? IRS is not a government agency, it is owned by the International Monetary Fund. Revenue, since 1913, is not printed by the United States government and only overseen by United States Treasury but, Federal reserve Bank, also owned by International Monetary Fund. United States Secret Service has control of enforcement of currency counterfeiting enforcement and the concern is not the good of the People, rather it is protection of what the Dollar note represents, and that goes in the direction of the IMF, not to mention that Secret Service protects, the Executive Branch, who are supposedly working for the People but let’s face facts, they work for the IMF, that is comprised of Banks, and those controlling the banks, contribute to politicians, to further agendas.
    If the US were to close foreign military bases and simply forget about the other nations woes, the issues are not actually security of aggression, the issues are of who, is denied access to commerce within the foreign nations for, profit.
    Disarming the American People, would be castration of Freedom. Liberals would laugh and carry on about how everyone has to surrender their firearms but the actual celebration would be for the Death of Liberty. Again, it is clearly an Agenda. The authoritarian elite, would stand to financially profit, the most, and from that point, would begin a generational heritage of elected rulers that are actually royalty and elites, having zero concerns about the peasants and will only entice serfdom via contractual financial slavery of credit cards, mortgages, something signed or lawfully agreed to, involving banks, and laws.
    If America goes to revolution, a financial collapse is then blamed on the People. Who profits from war? Investors. Who funds reconstruction after wars? Investors.
    We only look at the Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights, but walking this investigation, we are coming up with many different players involved and it all revolves around the destruction of the Second Amendment, as an axis or rotational hub.


  2. Gun Control’s Trojan Horse to be voted on Thursday, April 11 | BUNKERVILLE | God, Guns and Guts Comrades! Says:

    […] we do know, is that the ACLU has found enough to be concerned: ACLU attacks Reid;s Gun Law, cites Privacy and Civil Liberties.  One of the major concerns is the background checks that seem to be the most likely to pass. […]


  3. Teresa Rice Says:

    This is one issue that I can agree with the ACLU. Its good that their bringing up some real and serious concerns on Reid’s bill.


  4. Steve Dennis Says:

    I wanted to get to this story tonight but I didn’t have the time, it isn’t often I agree with the ACLU but they actually got this one right.


  5. Designs by Dianne Says:

    You’d think that these people would have ‘better things to do with their time and brains’ then continue to invade the privacy of others and be so obsessed with obtaining all this info. If it were used for good, that would be comforting, but it isn’t. Goes back to the obamacare chip and how all that info will be accessible in one swipe. I suppose that’s a good name for them “The Swipes” – We ‘swipe everything we can!’


  6. jay352 Says:

    They should also ask themselves how many gun owners will not give one more inch.There is an entire sub section of the population arming for war.


    • Bunkerville Says:

      No doubt trouble is brewing on the state level. With the idiotic state laws they are passing, soon there will be a bridge too far. We will see what happens when local law enforcement is sent to enforce them. IMO.


  7. Conservatives on Fire Says:

    What our Congrss Critters should ask themselves is: Will this law prevent mass murders? If the answer is No, which it is, then they should not vote for this law. The only people who would abide by this law are the law abiding citizens, It would accomplish nothing; but it would be dangerous information for our all powerful government to have.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: