November 23, 2009

Attorney General Holder Reveals Aggressive Gun Control In Response to Ft. Hood Terror Attack

WASHINGTON -- Before the Senate Judiciary Committee on November 18, Attorney General Eric Holder revealed a stunningly broad and aggressive anti-gun agenda, according to a release from the Law Enforcement Alliance of America (www.LEAA.org).

"The President of the United States asked that politicians not use the Ft. Hood attack to engage in 'political theater.' It appears those committed to attacking gun owners and the Second Amendment simply can't help themselves and are engaged in blaming guns and gun owners on the heels of this terrorist attack. Sadly it looks like 'politics as usual,'" said LEAA's spokesperson, Ted Deeds.

After explaining and defending his decision to give enemy combatants constitutional protections and the right to public trial in civilian courts, Attorney General Holder revealed his support for a national gun owner registration scheme and authorizing the government to ban firearm possession for any person by merely adding that person's name to the terror watch list.


Attorney General Eric Holder

The LEAA said that Holder wants new federal authority to prohibit any person on the federal watch list (reported to be 400,000 names) from buying guns and supports confiscating guns from those on the list who possess them.

LEAA's Executive Director Jim Fotis said, "Those behind the badge don't believe more restrictions on honest gun owners is a reasonable, practical or constitutional response to acts of terrorism. As a retired officer, I know that America's men and women in blue want to fight terrorism, to stop terrorists; not waste time keeping records on innocent gun owners."











An Important Note for GunReports.Com Readers:

Our goal on this website is to foster a free expression of views while reining in language that crosses the line of civil discourse. Accordingly, the comments areas are intended to expand the knowledge of all users of this site. But site administrators wish to discourage the use of profanity, insults, disrespect, the advocacy of lawlessness, violence or sedition, or attempts to impinge on the rights of others.

While GunReports.Com encourages robust discourse that furthers our understanding of all the issues affecting gun owners, comments that break GunReports.Com’s rules will be removed. In addition, we reserve the right to edit or delete individual comments, and in extreme cases, to ban commenters at our discretion.

--Tim Cole
Publisher, GunReports.Com

Comments (31)

I'll say once again, to everyone in their comments about Obama.
All valid points, many very well-spoken.
All I know is; I'm not bitter, I like my life.
Yes, I will hold my Christian beliefs until I meet my savior in the air, or I stand in judgement before God.
Therefore, I will continue to hang onto my guns, and my religion, until that good day. As will my children.

Posted by: RUSS KELSEY | December 14, 2009 2:07 AM    Report this comment

Wish Ca. cared as much about illegal immigration as they do gun control. BTW, if each illegal brings a gun, who's going to sell them ammo? Masterguide has it right, it's about CONTROL but control costs money they don't have. Semper Fi

Posted by: Sharps | December 2, 2009 10:55 PM    Report this comment

Thumbprint to by ammo in CAL??? It's a tad worse than that. The plan calls for buyer ID/registration + thumbprint + dealer records (more paperwork to record and store) + and this is the real kicker, a limit of 50 ROUNDS of handgun ammo per month!!! No give a box to your buddy at the range (or even a family member) either, that action would make you a criminal.
The bill also halts all mail order/internet purchases of ammunition into CAL.
There is a bill to attempt to neuter and/or eliminate this bill that is to be modified and re-introduced in the legislature in January. If any one wants to help, start contacting the CAL Senate and Assembly members and voice your protest.
Governor Terminator after rejecting it twice, signed the bill believing it will now make CAL a safer place. Maybe, just maybe when this revised bill hits the the legislature and we collectively let the members of the Assembly and Senate know our complete and total objection to this violation of our 2nd Amendment rights will we again be able to have enough ammo to qualify for our CCW renewals, let alone an IDPA match.
Why worry about gun control when you eliminate the ammunition. REMEMBER, it NOT about gun or ammunition control, its about CONTROL!!!

Posted by: MasterGuide | November 30, 2009 7:14 AM    Report this comment

well guns laws are not the only problem as I see california passed a law as of Feb 2010 you have to give your thumb print to buy ammo! This will move to other states if we don't do something

Posted by: alan s | November 30, 2009 5:43 AM    Report this comment

BATFE has gun purchase records from the 70's. What do you mean 24 hrs? LOL Hell, they probably have a better idea of the extent of your collection than you do. Just kidding, why register them ALL?

Posted by: Sharps | November 29, 2009 11:04 PM    Report this comment

It is absolutely mandatory for the left to institute total gun registration in order to accomplish their goals. This is a sentinel event. They are already halfway there with the Form 4473 and the NCIS check, but they haven't quite managed to pull it all together yet because there are still a lot of older guns that aren't in that system, and there's that pesky Tiahart thing. Even so, 15 states keep records permanently even though Federal law requires the FBI to destroy it's gun purchase info within 24 hrs. If you want to believe that.

Gaviota

Posted by: Lee W | November 29, 2009 8:07 PM    Report this comment

May be it's time we controlled the politicians instead of the other way round. Why, why, why, why do we keep re-electing these control-freaks when we KNOW what they 're all about? Are we so complacent that we've given up? We HAVE term limits: it's called electing the other guy(or gal), or using re-call if avaialble. The control-freaks want 'change'? Let's give it to them... change out the bad for the good.

Posted by: Tower gunner | November 29, 2009 2:10 AM    Report this comment

I believe it was "94 or 95" that a guy I was talking to while getting new tires on my pickup, told me, his son who was in the army, told him over the phone that the president sent a memo asking the troops if they would fire on their own people. He got a resounding "NO".
Now, after a few years of media bias and subtle hate reteric plus turning people against anything conservative, blaming everything on anyone who supports fighting against our enemys and keeping our rights, AND, believing that the Constitution belongs to the American people. I think they now have a number of people who will fight for them. They are gangs and those who believe honest citizens "owe" them a living, the common criminal who will stand with them if the price is right.
The gov't is also counting on the fact that most people who own firearms aren't organised. What kind of effect would it cause if the American people began to organise? Would those at the top start thinking about what they are doing, or would they panic and declare Martial Law? Right now they believe they have the upper hand.

Posted by: Vernon R | November 28, 2009 9:42 PM    Report this comment

I enlisted the help of a secret agent to protect me from the tyranny. He was an IRS agent turned CPA. He protecteth me from the Pelosi of the tyrants. Semper Fi

Posted by: Sharps | November 28, 2009 12:05 PM    Report this comment

Sharps.It is my hope that All will resist and dispense justice to the tyrannical government under which we live under.I served the country 1965-1969 in the US Navy.I never thought I would have to protect myself from my fellow Americans.What a complete and utter shame.

Posted by: John F | November 28, 2009 11:03 AM    Report this comment

Truth be told they are probably very interested NOW!.The type of person they fear most is an educated, committed, and knowledgeable firebrand that won't bend to their piles of "Pelosi". Semper Fi.

Posted by: Sharps | November 27, 2009 7:45 PM    Report this comment

John F,
John Wayne said it best: "They will have to pry the gun out of my cold dead fingers" There is no doubt that those of us that are strong enough to fight for our country are strong enough to defend our liberty at home!In MY case, there are no questions. Semper Fi

Posted by: Sharps | November 27, 2009 10:53 AM    Report this comment

Lee W,
Does your tongue ever hurt from being so tightly stuffed into your cheek? Why not tell us how you REALLY feel. Pernicious mental illness? LOL Keep up the thought provoking perspectives. Semper Fi

Posted by: Sharps | November 27, 2009 10:24 AM    Report this comment

The real and only question is:When they come to take our guns, will we give them up or will we resist.This is what all the commenting is about.Strip it down and this we where we get to.What will we do!

Posted by: John F | November 27, 2009 10:23 AM    Report this comment

The true danger is not Holder and his rhetoric, although that is a threat.

The true danger lies in the Health Care Bill. If you can find it, and it's hard to find at the moment, look at all the sections that deal with the government being able to ban "unhealthy substances". Most people will think of alcohol, tobacco, various chemicals. But, the mere act of firing a gun produces health hazards! Not just the impact of bullet into a body (not healthy at all), but the fumes, lead residue, oils, lubricants, you name it.

So, to take things to the end, the Health Care bill, under the guise of preventing you from being exposed to unhealthy substances, provides a direct, and currently perfectly legal, means of banning firearms merely by making it "unhealthy" to handle and/or shoot them. It does not even attack the 2nd Amendment, but completely side-steps it. It does not attack firearms ownership but can ban everything that goes with it, and makes the whole point of ownership moot. To go one more step, then even owning a gun if proof that you intend to expose yourself or others to hazardous substances/health risks, so you can't own one. As an analogy, think of hookahs and drug use - you may have a hookah because it's really pretty and you bought it as a bring-back from overseas, but the automatic assumption was (and may still be) that you use illegal substances in it.

I already have done all I can to fight this bill to this point, and will continue to do so, and this took me completely by surprise when it was pointed out to me. My friends say I'm a little paranoid- but am I paranoid if I'm right? Please remain aware that the current administration is attacking our rights on all fronts - and that when they come forward with things like Mr. Holder's comments, they are definitely trying to cover for something else.

Posted by: Stephen A | November 26, 2009 4:17 PM    Report this comment

The true danger is not Holder and his rhetoric, although that is a threat.

The true danger lies in the Health Care Bill. If you can find it, and it's hard to find at the moment, look at all the sections that deal with the government being able to ban "unhealthy substances". Most people will think of alcohol, tobacco, various chemicals. But, the mere act of firing a gun produces health hazards! Not just the impact of bullet into a body (not healthy at all), but the fumes, lead residue, oils, lubricants, you name it.

So, to take things to the end, the Health Care bill, under the guise of preventing you from being exposed to unhealthy substances, provides a direct, and currently perfectly legal, means of banning firearms merely by making it "unhealthy" to handle and/or shoot them. It does not even attack the 2nd Amendment, but completely side-steps it. It does not attack firearms ownership but can ban everything that goes with it, and makes the whole point of ownership moot. To go one more step, then even owning a gun if proof that you intend to expose yourself or others to hazardous substances/health risks, so you can't own one. As an analogy, think of hookahs and drug use - you may have a hookah because it's really pretty and you bought it as a bring-back from overseas, but the automatic assumption was (and may still be) that you use illegal substances in it.

I already have done all I can to fight this bill to this point, and will continue to do so, and this took me completely by surprise when it was pointed out to me. My friends say I'm a little paranoid- but am I paranoid if I'm right? Please remain aware that the current administration is attacking our rights on all fronts - and that when they come forward with things like Mr. Holder's comments, they are definitely trying to cover for something else.

Posted by: Stephen A | November 26, 2009 4:17 PM    Report this comment

"Also, please stop accusing "Liberals" of being anti-gun."

Nope, can't do that. Every single liberal I've ever met and talked with about guns has believed in the core of his/her being that other people's liberty is somehow a threat to that individual liberal, the community at large, and liberalism in general. Every single liberal I've ever met with whom I have discussed the issue, old and young, male and female, atheist, Christian or Jew, has told me that both taxes and gun control laws should be increased in both number and severity. Even those liberals who, with some embarrassment, admitted to owning guns, hastened to add that even though they had a rifle, or a shotgun, handguns and/or assault weapons should be banned.

This is why I believe that the classic liberalism of Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and Thomas Paine is dead, and what is left, sometimes called "progressive," is not so much a political philosophy as it is a pernicious mental illness.

But I'm not bitter.

Gaviota

Posted by: Lee W | November 26, 2009 2:10 PM    Report this comment

Don't think Ob. is capable of a n original thought. This clown has been groomedfor this takeover by Soros and his Builderburge Hitler leftovers.

Posted by: knucklehead | November 26, 2009 1:41 PM    Report this comment

I have kept relatively quiet on the Obama anti-gun cabinet and the Holder scenario. I have said many times that the government can't even round up the illegals, how can they round up guns?. Virtually EVERYTHING the government has tried to run,regulate, bail out, re-create, or bolster has been an abysmal failure. The States are absolutely capable of regulating guns and ammo.Canovack is correct, the tune has been heard so many times, we are anesthetised to it's message. If I were called again to protect our country I would do so in a second, but it would be the plight and protection of the REAL Americans and not the government that would spark my patriotism.Our current Congress is the quintessential description of ineptitude.They are so busy trying to justify their existence that they have lost sight of the folks they have to justify their existence to! WHO ARE WE??? I suspect most are the PROUD Americans I enlisted to protect.Congress is yet another dead weight around the Constitution's neck.
We must stick together in great numbers to defeat the governments intervention. No more loss of liberty.I just hope it's NOT TOO LATE!
Turn N' Burn

Posted by: Sharps | November 26, 2009 1:27 PM    Report this comment

Government may currently lack the resources to hunt down millions of gun owners as a previous poster noted, but consider this. With a new push underway to "rewrite" U.S. immigration laws (a/k/a amnesty) 12 million illegal aliens could be legalized with the stroke of a pen. Think of the L/E resources that would free up to come after the millions of newly created lawbreakers - us.

Posted by: Dulrug | November 26, 2009 12:09 PM    Report this comment

Obeyme said he wouldn't come after our guns, but look at what he has surrounded himself with, almost everyone of them are anti gun big time. This was his plan all along, so he would look like he is on the law abiding citizen side. I have noticed that he says one thing and then Holder or one of his other lackies does the other. Now if you think that they are doing this against his wish you are drinking the kool aid big time. He is lies over and over again. Not to say that all liberals are anti gun gun but during my life time every time a lib pres and/or congress gets in power we have to fight for our second amendment rights. What I see with everything going on now the majority in office want us to be a commutist country.
God Bless America and Our Troops Past Present and Future
Keeping to My Oath, Locked, Loaded, and Keeping My Powder Dry
Happy Thanks Giving to All And God Bless

Posted by: bear1 | November 26, 2009 11:50 AM    Report this comment

Well.....No surprise here! In typical fashion, the left-wingers are seizing any and every opportunity to beat the anti-Second Amendment drum. This is getting to be a very old tune played on a very old record broken record. However we cannot afford to just yawn, and take it as business as usual. We just cannot afford to permit the lefties any sort of gains against the Constitution. I am afraid this battle will continue for generations to come, but to fail in our vigilance is to invite defeat.

Posted by: canovack | November 26, 2009 11:17 AM    Report this comment

Ironic how the few can try to take away the rights of the many. Holder's ancestors had their rights abused and it looks like he has a hard on for any person other than black.
Does he not realize that criminal don't buy guns?
They trade their illegal goods or steal them.
His ancestors would not want this, I am sure.
They would want a strong America and not one that is ripe for communist or terrorist take over.

Posted by: Ralph De La Huerta | November 26, 2009 9:00 AM    Report this comment

Mr. Holder, please tells us how restricting citizen rights to firearms will stop someone in our standing army from using his weapons to commit a crime? Ft. Hood is the excuse you're using to propose this, so there MUST LOGICALLY be some relationship.

Posted by: david b | November 26, 2009 8:52 AM    Report this comment

A few observations:
The basis of justice USED to be presumption of innocence. Since the Patriot Act, and you know who proposed that, the we are now presumed guilty if any agency decides to point the finger, and we are ALL under suspicion. Just look at the 'domestic extremist' lists - there's one for the right leaning and one for the left leaning.

Also, please stop accusing "Liberals" of being anti-gun. Anyone who knows me will tell you that I'm a 'card carrying' liberal - but I carry that card in the holster with my gun. Andy true liberal who's sympathies lie with the citizens will despise the idea of a standing army and the tyranny associated with such a powerful government, and therefore support the Second Amendment as written.

Posted by: david b | November 26, 2009 8:37 AM    Report this comment

Anyone remember during last year's election that then candidate Obama stated he was not going to come after our guns? He's not that stupid BUT the Band of Merry Men (and Women) that are his cabinet have NO PROBLEM doing just that. He has distanced himself from the fray especially in this last tragedy but that does not mean his henchmen/women are not up to their collective elbows involved in making political hay out of this incident.
This is just one more opportunity to bash the law abiding citizen because they are the easiest target and will (likely) obey the law.
My former father-in-law preached to me about government control and gun confiscation for years. When I was younger, I thought he was paranoid. Now I think he might have been clairvoyant.
Always remember, it not about guns, its about CONTROL.

Posted by: MasterGuide | November 26, 2009 8:29 AM    Report this comment

Holder's idiotic proposal is definitely political theater, exactly what the Obamination asked not be done in the Fort Hood Massacre matter.

It also reveals the type of tactics - that is to say, sneaky, underhanded, and not subject to the passage of a law and review by the courts regulatory approach I expected the Obama Administration would have tried long before now - that we can expect the Obamist and their fellow-traveling leftists to employ in their stated objective of disarming the American people. The Constitution means nothing to proto-Communists who want the State to control the lives of its people, and the Obama Administration has certainly moved in that direction as demonstrated by the laws they want passed.

I call on the media to demand Holder's resignation for this flagrant advocacy of a proposal that is unconstitutional. We do not need an Attorney General who so little understands the law that he would open his mouth and allow nonsense like this to fall out of it.

Posted by: Cyrano | November 26, 2009 8:05 AM    Report this comment

Have you ever watched a "History Channel" segment on the Nazi party in the Late 30's and told yourself "I wouldnt be like the Jews, I wouldnt let that happen to me and my family"? It all started with "watch lists" and firearm confiscation.Well, its starting to happen in America right now. When they come for your next door neighbor and you see it on the 6 o'clock news, all we'll think is "glad its not me", until they come for you, or me. then it will be too late. Do we really think the Constitution will save us?

Posted by: spike723 | November 26, 2009 8:00 AM    Report this comment

Here's something else to think about. In New York, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Illinois, California, and several other restrictive states, registration of firearms is used to make it more convenient to file lawsuits against any person (and his insurance company) who may even remotely be connected with having a firearm stolen, when the stolen gun is subsequently used in a crime. Many lawsuits involving firearms are against homeowner’s policies and result in out-of-court settlements.

Of course, registration schemes aren't just to make it easy to confiscate guns sometime in the future. A major intermediate goal of registration is to make it impossibly inconvenient, exorbitantly expensive, and prohibitively burdensome for every law-abiding citizen to maintain their 'federal firearm permits,' causing attrition in the population of firearm owners among the citizenry.

Gaviota

Posted by: Lee W | November 24, 2009 5:58 PM    Report this comment

Justice and police departments across this nation, on federal, state, and local levels, are underfunded, underpaid, undermanned, underequipped, and undergunned. There aren't enough cops, lawyers, judges, courtrooms, jails or prisons to handle the load of real criminals out there right now. And now the liberals want to create an entire new class of millions of criminals with the stroke of a pen, subject to vicious, confiscatory penalties, not for violent crime, but for violating the bureaucratic paperwork rules for owning a gun? Where will the resources to make that happen come from? I'll tell you. They will pull cops off of the streets, lawyers out of the prosecutor's offices, and judges off of the circuit court benches in order to deal with those evil (formerly law-abiding) gunowners, and when the crime rate spirals up out of control like an EF-3 tornado, well, that's just another excuse to crack down that much harder on gunowners. They will release rapists and murderers from prison in order to incarcerate an old woman who refused to register her late husband's Garand. Of course, Holder doesn't care about the 2 billion dollar Canadian gun registry that was only supposed to cost 1.5 million, and ended up resulting in an estimated 60-70% non-compliance rate.

Posted by: Lee W | November 24, 2009 5:57 PM    Report this comment

The entire Constitutional basis of justice in the United States of America is the presumption of innocence, due process of law, and the protection from self-incrimination.

Secret government suspect lists are the basis of justice in Moscow, East Berlin, Tehran, Beijing, and Uganda.

Well, now we know: Attorney General Eric Holder wants a national, permanent gun registration system administered by law enforcement. A registration of honest citizens that have cleared the federal background check for gun purchases, with those records permanently retained by and shared among law enforcement agencies.

He also wants new federal authority to prohibit any person on the federal terroist watch list and no-fly list (reported to be somewhere around 1,000,000 names) from buying guns and he supports confiscating guns from those on the lists who possess them. Never mind that the whole process of creating secret government suspect lists is horribly unconstitutional, a trampling of due process of law, and a violation of the human rights of all people on those lists.

Gaviota

Posted by: Lee W | November 24, 2009 5:57 PM    Report this comment

Add your comments ...

New to Gun Tests? Register for Free!

Already Registered? Log In