Feinstein, Kennedy introduce anti gun bill

[LAR-15]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Monday, May 7, 2007

Senators Feinstein, Durbin and Kennedy Introduce Legislation to Close Loophole in Federal Law and Prevent Foreign Convicts from Possessing Firearms in the United States



Washington, DC – U.S. Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), and Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) today introduced legislation to prevent people convicted of felonies and domestic violence in foreign countries from possessing firearms in the United States.

The Firearms by Foreign Convicts Clarification Act closes a loophole that exists in current federal law. The loophole, created by a 2005 Supreme Court decision, allows foreign convicts to possess firearms in the United States even though current federal law restricts Americans convicted of identical crimes from possessing firearms.

“Most Americans would be surprised – as I was – to learn that foreign felons are allowed to buy firearms in the United States,” Senator Feinstein said. “America cannot continue to give convicted murderers, rapists and even terrorists an unlimited right to buy firearms in the United States – simply because they were convicted of their crimes in another country. We need to close this loophole to ensure that dangerous criminals, no matter where they were convicted of their crimes, are restricted from buying and possessing guns.”

The legislation was drafted to close a loophole created in a 2005 Supreme Court decision, Small v. United States, which declared that a 1968 federal law prohibiting felons from possessing firearms did not apply to foreign felony convictions.

The Supreme Court Justices warned in their dissent that the majority’s decision would allow “those convicted overseas of murder, rape, assault, kidnapping, terrorism and other dangerous crimes to possess firearms freely in the United States.” But the majority said that if Congress wanted to keep people with these foreign convictions from buying firearms, it needed to pass a new law and state that clearly.

Bill Summary

The Firearms by Foreign Convicts Clarification Act would:

Close a loophole created by a 2005 Supreme Court decision, Small v. United States, which declared that the law prohibiting felons from possessing firearms did not apply to foreign felony convictions.
Treat foreign convictions the same as domestic convictions for purposes of purchasing firearms from licensed dealers.
Provide an exemption only if a person can show that their foreign conviction is invalid because:
the defendant was denied fundamental due process, or
the conduct on which the foreign conviction was based would be legal if committed in the United States.

 

[ArmedBear]

Durbin, Feinstein and Kennedy are some of the worst anti-gunners as well as some of the most anti-libertarian Senators in the US Senate.

However, I fail to see how this is "anti-gun," if it contains an exemption for convictions that don't pass muster in the US.

I don't especially care for the bill, and I think gun ownership should not be restricted except to certain kinds of convicted violent felons, but that's a separate issue, from what I can see.

Please elaborate if possible.

 

[30 cal slob]

consider a law-abiding subject in australia or the uk.

he/she uses a firearm for self-defense. by u.s. standards, the shoot is good.

but ... under aussie or uk law, that person has committed murder. or felonious assault, etc.

a person like that should be barred from owning a firearm here?

 

[Mike U.]

It's testing the waters, Armed Bear. They are starting with something like this to see how the pro-gun lobby will react to it. Who wants illegal alien felons buying guns, right? On the surface it looks like this is something even we evil gun-toters would agree to.
They want to see just how far they can go. You know, the journey of a thousand miles begins with that first step kind of thing.

This little "loophole" closing thing is a first step. Rest assured if it goes thru, it will embolden them a little and you'll soon see another bill.

 

[ArmedBear]

.30 cal: I agree, but this is what the original post said was an exemption:

the conduct on which the foreign conviction was based would be legal if committed in the United States.

Mike U: That I can see, and I agree with you.

I see the Lautenberg Amendment to be FAR worse, however.

 

[damien]

Fine. Let's add recoprocity and a repeal to the '86 MG ban to it and pass the bill!

 

[WayneConrad]

Well, it's the usual thing. People think that the set of felons is identical to the set of dangerous people who should not be permitted firearms. Nope.

You probably remember your childhood, when rapists and murderers were what everyone understood was meant by "felons."

Now it's someone who puts too much pesticide on their crop, or fails to file a tax paper on time, or....

You get the picture.

The law has changed the meaning of the word "felon," but nobody noticed. So now, when we keep firearms from felons, we're keeping them from far many more people than we imagined.

 

[rbernie]

Provide an exemption only if a person can show that their foreign conviction is invalid because:
the defendant was denied fundamental due process, or
the conduct on which the foreign conviction was based would be legal if committed in the United States.

Default deny/presumed guilty, and then allow you to 'demonstrate' your innocence?

Hmmm.........

 

[REOIV]

So what is to keep a recognized country trying every united states citizen in absentia as felons because of our involvement with x,y,z there by making all guns banned in the United States?

It sure is nice that another country's laws affect me in the United States.

Gun grabbers really don't understand how dangerous this line of thinking is.

Who cares if they are a felon in another country. What matters is if they are a felon here. Let alone we should be restoring gun rights to felons instead of removing them right and left. If you did your time then you are a full citizen again.

Just wait for a vet of the Iraq war to be denied a gun because he shot some guy's father who didn't obey a road block so they tried and convicted him without his knowledge etc. Real smart.

Using some orgs known for throwing money around to make bad laws in other countries lets say the RIAA or MPAA bribes a small country and passes a law that says playing music or movies on a player they didn't approve is a felony. So that 99.9% of American citizens are felons if they use an iPod etc under that country's laws.

Plus how in the hell to they hope to integrate all the other foreign databases in to NICS to deny gun purchases?

 

[Lone_Gunman]

Why do we let convicted felons enter the country in the first place?

 

[romma]

Why do we let convicted felons enter the country in the first place?

Oh yeah... How did that one slip past The esteemed Senators?

 

[azredhawk44]

That's the first thing I thought, too.

WHY THE HECK DO WE WANT TO ALLOW THESE RAPISTS, MURDERERS, ETC INTO OUR COUNTRY?

If they were convicted of "felonies" in Banana Republics and are in search of political asylum, this stops them from purchasing guns on the "guilty until proven innocent" mantra that libs seem to love.

Argh.:banghead:

 

[jfh]

puh-leeze:

Gun grabbers really don't understand how dangerous this line of thinking is.
​

I disagree. They understand very well how dangerous their thinking is. They really don't care.

Jim H.

 

[battlecry]

This could also be called the "let's make sure any dissident from the hellholes of the world are defenseless if they manage to reach freedom in this country" act.

Or maybe the "dissident death squad protection" act.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

I think this law would only make it illegal for convicted foreign felons to get guns if the crime they committed was also a felony in the US. That should get political dissidents off the hook in most cases.

 

[Erebus]

So what is to keep a recognized country trying every united states citizen in absentia as felons because of our involvement...

Because you are a citizen of this country and their laws can only be enforced on you on their dirt and not ours. so if it was a felony there you would have to commit the violation while in that country for it to apply.

I disagree. They understand very well how dangerous their thinking is. They really don't care.

Oh they care, they care because it directly effects their power over others, and that's what it's all about.

Why do we let convicted felons enter the country in the first place?

Yea no kidding!!!

 

[Beagle-zebub]

So, since laws for self-defence vary wildly from state to state, if someone kills someone during a carjacking in Australia and moves to Texas, where that is legal, do they have the same rights as someone who moves to a state where that is verboten? And exactly how large is the percentage of people who can get citizenship with a felony from their home country on their record?

 

[Fburgtx]

Watch this bill CLOSELY! This will be the one that they decide to tack something on to, like a magazine or gun ban, when no one is looking!! As it stands now, there's nothing that offensive about it, other than as mentioned above---If these immigrants are FELONS, then what the heck are they doing here in the first place????? Personally, I think this bill will be used to prevent thousands of LEGAL immigrants (with no criminal record, mainly Mexican) from purchasing firearms (in a not-so-direct way). "Oh, hey, Juan Ramirez, sure you can buy a gun, but first we have to do a "criminal background check" on you regarding the 20 years you spent growing up in Mexico. Oh, wait, the Mexican government doesn't have good searchable records, soooooo, NO GUN FOR YOU!!"

 

[Nanook]

Why do we let convicted felons enter the country in the first place?

So the grateful felons will vote Democratic, naturally.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

So the grateful felons will vote Democratic, naturally.

And work cheap for Republican business owners.

 

[migoi]

Why...

do we let convicted felons into the country in the first place? Some of them we let (back) in because they are citizens.

The scenario I envision is someone crosses over to Mexico after failing to keep track of a couple of .22LR rounds, gets tossed by the Federales and ends up with a felony conviction. After serving their time they naturally want to post-haste exit that land. Should that person be forever barred from owning firearms after they return to the land of their birth (U.S.)?

I actually wonder if this isn't a solution in search of a problem. Exactly how many foreign convicted felons do we have that are currently legally purchasing firearms in the U.S. and then using those legally purchased firearms in a socially unacceptable way? Any data?

migoi

 

[Lone_Gunman]

The scenario I envision is someone crosses over to Mexico after failing to keep track of a couple of .22LR rounds, gets tossed by the Federales and ends up with a felony conviction.

That scenario is specifically excluded by this bill.

If you are convicted of a felony in a foreign country, it has to also be a felony in the US in order to prevent you from possessing guns.

So, if the Federales find you with some 22 ammo on your person, and convict you of a felony in Mexico for it (I don't know if that would be a felony in Mexico or not, but we will say it is for the sake of discussion), then this law would not apply to you because possession of 22 ammo is not a felony in the US.

 

[LAR-15]

Have you read the specific text of the bill?

 

[HiroProX]

And what about immigrants who have felony convictions for, oh... I don't know... speaking out against the government in their previous country?

Nevermind that there are plenty of nations where additional charges and trial in absentia being made-up by the state is par for the course.

 

[obxned]

I am embarrassed to be of the same species as Feinstein and Kennedy.