Support 911Blogger


Holocaust Museum attack, post-Tiller: Does DU think we need another Patriot Act to Protect Us?

(This is not a call for another Patriot Act by DU user, Land Shark. He makes his view clear here. He makes some good points, and this is thoughtful reading along with GW's blog entry below. -rep.)

"If we call Tiller's murder and these other acts domestic terrorism, aren't we inviting the anti-terrorism gun to be pointed at the heads of all Americans, with officials "connecting the dots" and pre-emptively arresting, harassing or spying on people because they FEAR someone might possibly do something because their political rhetoric is passionate or heated?"

Holocaust Museum attack, post-Tiller: Does DU think we need another Patriot Act to Protect Us?

The murder of Dr. Tiller.

The attack on the military recruiters.

White supremacist apparently the one who opened fire at the Holocaust Museum today.

(Post more recent news if you like...)

Does DU think that existing laws are inadequate to deal with this problem, or do we need new tougher legislation AND/OR a "crackdown" in terms of concentrated enforcement of existing laws (which are already fairly draconian)?

This is building up to potentially be the excuse for yet more loss of rights, as I've posted recently, connecting up a very recent US Supreme Court decision as well. Please See http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5767264

Will we be seeing Patriot Act II, -- or would it be III or IV by now?

Does anybody think that any special campaign against domestic right wing terror can be isolated to just one side of the political aisle? Can A Democratic administration and Democratic congress really crack down only on the Right wing side? We've lived through these time periods before, and we always consider it overreaction when we have perspective from history, like the Alien and Sedition Acts of the late 1790s, the Espionage Act, internment of Japanese as "threats" during WWII, etc.

Thomas Paine, 1795, in First Principles of Government: "An avidity to punish is always dangerous to liberty. It leads men to stretch, to misinterpret, and to misapply even the best of laws. He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."

Be careful what you wish for, and reply with your thoughts. I probably won't "defend the thread" -- I'd like to see what DU thinks, since my position's already reasonably clear from the linked post.

Clearly, these acts are crimes, and despicable ones, the question is what is the APPROPRIATE response, and why is the normal criminal justice process insufficient, if it is? Just because it's a despicable crime, does that mean even the sky's no limit?

If we call Tiller's murder and these other acts domestic terrorism, aren't we inviting the anti-terrorism gun to be pointed at the heads of all Americans, with officials "connecting the dots" and pre-emptively arresting, harassing or spying on people because they FEAR someone might possibly do something because their political rhetoric is passionate or heated?

Thoughts?

another "terrorist" attack

another "terrorist" attack would be the Pittsburg, PA police shooting this past April that was attempted to link the 9/11 movement/Alex Jonesians to the demented attacker.

Here is another sort of response to this one

From: CREDO Action
Date: Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 6:01 PM
Subject: If we want to stop the terrorists, we have to stop the guns.

H.R. 2324, a bill before the US House of Representatives, would mandate background checks on gun sales at gun shows. People like Scott Roeder would fail a background check. Gun shops are already mandated to do background checks. Nut cases can buy guns at gun shows.

A great way to drum up support for H.R. 2324 is to spread the word to your friends and family. You can just forward the sample letter below.

Spreading the word is critical, but please only pass this message along to those who know you -- spam hurts our campaign.

Thanks for all you do.

--The CREDO Action Team

Here's a sample message to send to your friends:

Subject: Stop domestic right wing terrorists from getting guns.

Dear Friend,

First the murder of Dr. George Tiller by an anti-choice extremist. Now the murder of a security guard at the Holocaust Museum by a white supremacist. As we all know, these acts of terrorism were carried out with guns. Scott Roeder, who's being held for the murder of Dr. Tiller, has a history of mental illness and threatened violence against abortion providers a week before he allegedly shot Dr. Tiller. James W. von Brunn, who allegedly killed a security guard at the Holocaust Museum, has his own white supremacy website and is a convicted felon (he stormed the Federal Reserve Bank 1981).

Why is it so easy for domestic terrorists to get hold of guns?

Here's one way to make it harder. The Brady Bill requires criminal background checks before the purchasing of guns. But there's a tremendous loophole for gun shows and similar events - a loophole that criminals know only too well how to exploit.

Currently, there's a bill in Congress to close this loophole - H.R. 2234, "To require criminal background checks on all firearms transactions occurring at gun shows." We need this law to reduce future attacks like those on Dr. Tiller and at the Holocaust Museum, but it won't go anywhere without significant support in Congress - and right now it has only seven sponsors.

I just signed a petition to tell my representative to co-sponsor H.R. 2234 - I hope you will, too. Please have a look and take action.

http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/gunshow_loophole/?r_by=4475-1774681-...

Rep

Good points.

We don't need no stinkin' patriot acts!

Normal law enforcement (murder, incitement to violence, etc.) are all that's needed.

No new draconian laws!

Uphold the Constitution and the rule of law!