Get a Medical Marijuana Card, Lose Your Second Amendment Rights

[Ray Keller]

Get a Medical Marijuana Card, Lose Your Second Amendment Rights
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives wants to prohibit
patients from protecting themselves.
Brian Doherty | December 16, 2011

If you are a medical marijuana patient in one of the 16 states (plus the
District of Columbia) that allow for it, you’ve got reason to believe lately
that the government has it in for you.

You’ve got federal raids on the places where you can conveniently buy your
medicine, the governor of Arizona trying to overturn in court her citizens’
choice to institute a medical marijuana system, and Michigan’s attorney
general trying to make life as hard as he can for those using the system his
state’s voters approved by 63 percent in 2008. And while it isn’t directly
the government’s fault, doctors are taking people off liver transplant
waiting lists for using medical pot.

It isn’t just that the government on both the federal and state level doesn’t
want you to be able to legally and conveniently obtain your medicine, if
that medicine is pot. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and
Explosives (BATFE) insists you inherently lose a key constitutional right
merely by letting your state know you might want to take pot medicinally.

Merely having a state medical marijuana card, BATFE insists, means that you
fall afoul of Sect. 922(g) of the federal criminal code (from the 1968
federal Gun Control Act), which says that anyone “who is an unlawful user of
or addicted to any controlled substance” is basically barred from possessing
or receiving guns or ammo (with the bogus assertion that such possession
implicates interstate commerce, which courts will pretty much always claim
it does).

Nevada licenses medical pot users. Rowan Wilson, a Carson City-area woman
who works as a medical technician in residential care homes, believes pot
might be useful for her painful menstrual cramps. After going through a
seven-month process to obtain a medical marijuana card, she attempted in
October to purchase a gun from a gun dealer, Fred Hauseur, who was also a
personal acquaintance.

The Form 4473 that the BATFE requires every gun purchaser to fill out asks,
“Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana…or any other
controlled substance?” Wilson, not considering herself an unlawful user or
addict but aware, as she says in a deposition in the case, that BATFE “has
set down a policy whereby it is presumed that any person holding a medical
marijuana registry card is automatically considered an unlawful user of, or
addicted to marijuana ” left that line blank.

Hauseur, the dealer from whom Wilson was trying to buy a Smith & Wesson .357
Magnum, knew Wilson, and knew she was a card holder. He also knew about the
contents of a September 2011 memo sent out by BATFE to federally licensed
gun dealers.

The memo says that “there are no exceptions in federal law for marijuana
purportedly used for medicinal purposes, even if such use is sanctioned by
State law…any person who uses…regardless of whether his or her state has
passed legislation authorizing marijuana for medicinal purposes, is an
unlawful user…and is prohibited by Federal law from possessing firearms of
ammunition…..if you are aware that the potential transferee is in possession
of a card authorizing the possession and use of marijuana under State law,
then you…may not transfer firearms or ammunition to the person.” And indeed,
Hauseur did not.

Wilson thinks that this BATFE policy violates her Second Amendment rights.
With the help of Nevada lawyer Chaz Rainey of Rainey Devine, she filed suit
in October in federal district court in Nevada against Department of Justice
chief Eric Holder, the BATFE, and its acting director and assistant
director.

As the suit says, “Ms. Wilson has never been charged with or convicted of
any drug-related offense, or any criminal offense….Indeed, no evidence
exists that Ms. Wilson has ever been 'an unlawful user of, or addicted to,
marijuana….’ Ms. Wilson maintains that she is not an unlawful user of or
addiction to marijuana….Nonetheless, Ms. Wilson was denied her Second
Amendment right to keep and bear arms based solely on her possession of a
valid State of Nevada medical marijuana registry card.” The suit argues the
BATFE policy also violated her Fifth Amendment right to due process since it
presumes she is a prohibited drug user arbitrarily.

The federal government is expected to file a reply before the end of the
year, and Wilson’s lawyer Rainey says he hopes the Feds “don’t engage in
long drawn-out lengthy discovery process, deposing everyone involved.”
Rainey notes a case intersecting guns and drugs could roll either way—a
pro-Second Amendment judge could be uncomfortable with the marijuana part,
and a pro-medical marijuana judge uncomfortable with the gun part.

Rainey doesn’t have experience in the gun law field, but he has some civil
rights experience and has found other lawyers and activists in the Second
Amendment field helpful in thinking the case through (although most of the
bigger gun rights organizations don’t like touching this pot-related case).
Wilson had trouble finding a lawyer excited about the case—“some lawyers
didn’t want to touch a cannabis case, period.” She finds the existence of
any state registry of marijuana users troublesome on general medical privacy
grounds. One of her reasons for shouldering the burden of plaintiff is that
patients she encounters in her elderly care field are afraid to get a
medical card and use pot because of the extra problems that arise—like
losing gun possession rights.

While the BATFE has not yet announced any concerted program to go after
people who may have had legally purchased weapons before getting a marijuana
card, Morgan Fox of the Marijuana Policy Project says that it’s common
practice in medical marijuana-related busts that “if weapons are present,
there will be gun charges added on as well.”

Rainey expects the results of the initial trial to be appealed whoever wins,
and is prepared to take it all the way to the Supreme Court. (Montana’s
Attorney General Steve Bullock has informed the BATFE that he thinks the
policy oversteps federal bounds.)

As Independence Institute gun rights scholar David Kopel explains, some
lower courts have decided that while the legal prohibition on felons owning
handguns is not inherently unreasonable or unconstitutional, the application
of that law to felons of certain types—say, nonviolent ones in the distant
past—isn’t always reasonable. While the Wilson case as filed is challenging
the very constitutionality of classifying drug users as outside the pale of
the Second Amendment, Rainey is also prepared, he says, to argue more
narrowly that it is unreasonable to apply that category specifically to
Wilson merely on the basis of her possessing the marijuana card.

"Taking it to the Supreme Court” isn’t just outrageous hubris on Rainey’s
part. Since the 2008 Heller case and the 2010 McDonald case, the Supreme
Court has opened up a new world of Second Amendment jurisprudence. Now we
know that handgun possession in the home is a protected right. But the
legality of other government gun regulations remains uncharted territory. In
his Heller opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia made it explicit: ““The Second
Amendment right is not unlimited.... The Court’s opinion should not be taken
to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by
felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in
sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing
conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”

Many, many cases trying to set those new parameters are moving through the
courts, slowly. As Alan Gura, the star Second Amendment lawyer who won both
Heller and McDonald says, we need to wait to see where the Second Amendment
is going. “We’re just waiting for decisions in District Courts—in some
cases, waiting for a very long time now. These things take a lot longer to
get resolved than people would like.... I disagree with those who say that
the Court is done for a while with the Second Amendment. I have no idea
which case they'll take next, but the issue is not going away.”

One very good district court decision came out this summer, also thanks to
Gura. In Ezell v. Chicago, he challenged the city's ban on gun ranges.
According to Chicago, a legal weapon permit holder needed to have a signed
affidavit from a firearms instructor affirming that he or she completed a
training course, including at least one hour of gun range training. Yet the
city simultaneously banned gun ranges within city limits. The Seventh
Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the range ban, and began laying out a
complicated set of review standards for the Second Amendment that largely
map existing First Amendment doctrine, where “a severe burden on the core
Second Amendment right of armed self-defense will require an extremely
strong public-interest justification and a close fit between the government’s
means and its end.” That leaves plenty of room for, well, judgment on the
part of judges. The fate of any given challenge to gun regulations short of
handgun bans can’t be predicted precisely until we see more federal district
court decisions and eventual Supreme Court rulings.

One case already waiting at the Supreme Court for a decision about
certiorari, however, has staked out the same territory as Wilson’s suit: the
area between the Second Amendment and a state’s medical marijuana licensing
system.

The case is Winters v. Willis, out of Oregon. It involves two consolidated
cases in which Oregon sheriffs tried to deny a state concealed carry permit
for weapons to citizens because they had Oregon medical marijuana cards,
even though state law would otherwise compel issuance of the permit.

The Oregon Supreme Court agreed with the citizens (as did all the lower
courts) that the sheriffs had no good reason to deny the carry permit, even
if the possession of the marijuana card might, as the sheriffs insisted,
mean that the permitted citizens would fall afoul of federal gun possession
law, being (presumptively) drug users.

As the Oregon Supreme Court’s May decision read in part:

it appears that the sheriffs also wish to enforce the federal policy of
keeping guns out of the hands of marijuana users by using the state
licensing mechanism to deny CHLs [concealed handgun licenses] to medical
marijuana users. The problem that the sheriffs have encountered is that
Congress has not enacted a law requiring license denial as a means of
enforcing the policy that underlies the federal law, and the state has
adopted a licensing statute that manifests a policy decision not to use its
gun licensing mechanism for that purpose: State law requires sheriffs to
issue concealed gun licenses without regard to whether the applicants use
medical marijuana.

The sheriffs have appealed the case to the Supreme Court, which has not yet
decided on whether to hear it, but the very fact the Court asked for reply
briefs from both parties means the Court “at least thinks something is worth
looking into there,” says Kopel. While the Wilson suit in Nevada and this
Oregon case both involve medical marijuana and guns, they don’t address the
same issues. Wilson’s is a straight Second Amendment rights case involving
how decisions are properly made as to when a citizen falls under one of the
prohibited categories in Sect. 922; the Oregon case involves whether federal
gun law properly pre-empts a state licensing scheme. The Oregon Supreme
Court thought that the federal law’s purpose regarding possession of
firearms had no direct effect on the state law, which merely involved the
concealment of firearms.

Even if the Supreme Court takes up Winters v. Willis and decides that the
sheriffs can deny the CHLs, that would not settle whether denying gun
possession rights to someone strictly for having a state medical marijuana
card stands up to Second Amendment scrutiny. As Rainey sees it, “it’s only
good for us if Winters goes before the Supreme Court, regardless of the
outcome” since a Winters loss for medical marijuana card holders would not
necessarily guarantee a Wilson loss. One possible connection from this
non-lawyer's perspective: Just as the Oregon CHL does not mean that you are
in possession of a gun, a Nevada medical marijuana card does not mean you
are using marijuana.

Second Amendment scholar Eugene Volokh of UCLA says regarding Wilson's case
that “barring everyone from selling a weapon to her because she has a card
denies her her Second Amendment rights without actually showing she is an
illegal user. That is a plausible claim, but as to whether the Court will
buy it, I’m not at all sure. Courts have been open to some Second Amendment
claims but obviously they’ve been skeptical of most, so it’s not clear to me
how it will come out. But it is a credible claim. What remedy she might get,
I assume, will be [not overturning the prohibition entirely but] a
declaratory judgment that she is entitled to get a gun so long as there is
no other evidence she is a marijuana user.”

Kopel has enough doubts about the way courts react to cases that involve
drugs that he isn’t confident her case will succeed on Second Amendment
merits. He offers instead that “the ideal solution would be, have a
president who keeps his campaign promises. If Obama were keeping his
campaign promises in the first place, he could have had his BATFE not write
this new policy statement, and it is within their discretion to say that we
interpret ‘unlawful user’ to not cover someone regulated and lawful under
state law. But the Barack Obama who ran such a good campaign for president
was apparently kidnapped and replaced with a body double who is a drug war
nut.”

Senior Editor Brian Doherty is author of This is Burning Man (BenBella),
Radicals for Capitalism (PublicAffairs), and Gun Control on Trial (Cato
Institute).

[matt]

Uncle Suckemoff, get the fuck out of our lives. (should persons on
pain medications be denied their rights?)

Does anyone really support the government in Washington?

[Strabo]

1. Those who run it.

2. Those who work for it.

3. Those who are paid by it.

This is probably half the population.

As long as the fiat dollar system controls society, government can
only get worse.

[jigo]

Not only that, but if you've ever even been treated for a mental
illness (depression, eating disorder, anything), you lose your second
amendment rights, even if you've recovered. You have to go through an
expensive, complicated legal process to prove you've recovered even if
you were treated for an eating disorder.

The vast majority of those who are treated for mental illness had
depression, eating disorders, phobias, etc. They are no more violent
or dangerous than anyone else. In fact, they are more likely to be
the targets than the perpetrators of violence. An extensive study
reported in Psychiatric News said "People with mental illness were
eight times more likely to be robbed, 15 times more likely to be
assaulted, and 23 times more likely to be raped than was the general
population. Theft of property from persons, rare in the general
population at 0.2 percent, happens to 21 percent of mentally ill
persons, or 140 times as often. Even theft of minor items from victims
can increase their anxiety and worsen psychiatric symptoms, the
researchers said.

Psychiatric News September 2, 2005
Volume 40 Number 17 Page 16
© American Psychiatric Association
Clinical & Research News
People With Mental Illness More Often Crime Victims
Aaron Levin
Next Section
Comparing national criminal-justice figures with those for an urban
sample of mentally ill persons shows that they are more likely to be
victims of violent crime than is the general population.

More than one-fourth of persons with severe mental illness are victims
of violent crime in the course of a year, a rate 11 times higher than
that of the general population, according to a study by researchers at
Northwestern University.

“The direction of causality is the reverse of common belief: persons
who are seriously mentally ill are far more likely to be the victims
of violence than its initiators,” said Leon Eisenberg, M.D., professor
emeritus of social medicine and health policy at Harvard Medical
School, in an accompanying editorial. “The evidence produced by Linda
Teplin et al. settles the matter beyond question.”
--Aaron Levin, People With Mental Illness More Often Crime Victims,
Psychiatric News September 2, 2005
Volume 40 Number 17 Page 16
http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/content/40/17/16.full


Most people who have a disconnect from reality (virtually anyone
diagnosed with schizophrenia or a psychotic disorder) do not go on to
kill others. And research has shown that barring the abuse of
substances, there is no significant statistical difference between
people with mental illness and people without it when it comes to
violent crimes.
--John M Grohol PsyD, World of Psychology
http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2008/09/04/is-mental-illness-relevant-in-reporting-a-crime/

[jigo]

Strabo wrote:
> On 12/21/2011 6:31 AM, matt wrote:
>> Uncle Suckemoff, get the fuck out of our lives. (should persons on
>> pain medications be denied their rights?)
>>
>> Does anyone really support the government in Washington?
> >
>
> 1. Those who run it.
>
> 2. Those who work for it.
>
> 3. Those who are paid by it.
>
> This is probably half the population.

That's about right. Government, both federal and local, is inefficient
and does more harm than good. But probably half the population either
work for it or are dependent on it. The government doesn't even
perform its basic function of protecting us:
https://sites.google.com/site/thepolicedomoreharmthangood/

In fact, by getting us involved in foreign conflicts like the middle
east, it increases the odds Americans will be killed in a terrorist
attack (as well as wasting trillions of dollars of their tax money).

[Frank]

Gun shop owner found carrying cocaine was tossed into federal prison and
total firearms in shop confiscated. Penalty much harsher than if it
were a state offense. Don't think they ever let him make bail and when
settled in court after maybe 2 years he was released for time served.
He was just a user, not a seller.

Shop was sold to his sisters and reopened after they got FFL. Manager
had kept open with reloading supplies and black powder etc not covered
by need for FFL.

I suspect penalty would have been the same had it been marijuana.

No question, Feds are real pricks.

[Jeff M]

On 12/22/2011 1:53 PM, jigo wrote:
> Ray Keller wrote:
>> Get a Medical Marijuana Card, Lose Your Second Amendment Rights The
>> Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives wants to
>> prohibit patients from protecting themselves.

[snip]

> Not only that, but if you've ever even been treated for a mental
> illness (depression, eating disorder, anything), you lose your second
> amendment rights, even if you've recovered. You have to go through an
> expensive, complicated legal process to prove you've recovered even
> if you were treated for an eating disorder.

Incorrect. Receiving treatment for common mental health issues such as
depression, even if it includes hospitalization, is not a bar to
firearms ownership.

Per the BATFE:

Section 922(g)(4) of 18 U.S.C. makes it unlawful for any person who has
been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a
mental institution to possess firearms or ammunition. This prohibition
covers two classes of persons—those who have either been (1) adjudicated
as a mental defective; or (2) committed to a mental institution.

Each of these terms is defined by Federal regulation at 27 C.F.R. §
478.11 as follows:
ADJUDICATED AS A MENTAL DEFECTIVE

A determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful
authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence,
or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease:
Is a danger to himself or to others; or
Lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs.
The term shall include—
A finding of insanity by a court in a criminal case; and
Those persons found incompetent to stand trial or found not
guilty by reason of lack of mental responsibility pursuant to articles
50a and 72b of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. 850a, 876b.

COMMITTED TO A MENTAL INSTITUTION

This term means a formal commitment of a person to a mental institution
by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority. The term
includes a commitment to a mental institution involuntarily. The term
also includes a commitment for mental defectiveness or mental illness,
and commitments for other reasons such as for drug use. The term does
not include a person in a mental institution for observation or any
voluntary admission to a mental institution.

ATF has historically interpreted these provisions as constituting two
distinct prohibitions. Each prohibition represents a separate
disqualification. For example, a “commitment” means a formal commitment,
not a voluntary stay. Excluded are stays for observation only. Nor does
the term include a stay in a mental institution that never involved any
form of adjudication by a lawful authority. However, a stay that began
as a voluntary stay may be subsequently transformed into a disqualifying
stay if a court, board, or other lawful authority makes a determination
that the person is a danger to self or others. Moreover, a voluntary
stay that is by itself not disabling could be later converted into a
formal commitment and therefore be disabling.

For purposes of a Federal firearms disability, ATF interprets
“adjudicated mental defective” to include anyone adjudicated to be a
“danger to him or herself,” “a danger to others,” or lacking “the mental
capacity to contract or manage their own affairs.” For purposes of
Federal law, “danger” means any danger, not simply “imminent” or
“substantial” danger as is often required to sustain an involuntary
commitment under State law. Thus, for example, adjudication that a
person was mentally ill and a danger to himself or others would result
in Federal firearms disability, whether the court-ordered treatment was
on an inpatient or outpatient basis. This is because the adjudication
itself (a finding of danger due to mental illness) is sufficient to
trigger the disability.
>
>

[jigo]

It's somewhat more complicated than that.
Federal law prohibits the sale of firearms and ammunition to certain
individuals with a history of mental illness.
18 USC 922(d)(4), (t)
See other references below.

A person can be denied a firearm if he was just treated for mental
illness without being in a hospital at all. States have interpreted
the law in different ways. In NJ, for example, you are denied a
permit if you were in a hospital voluntarily or involuntarily. The
person must go through a legal procedure to have his rights restored
(and it's not certain they will be). Many states have similar procedures.

Furthermore, hard as it is to believe, you can be and many people are
involuntarily committed for several weeks just on the word of a
psychiatrist or "screener" without ever seeing a judge. Several
articles and investigations found this. Investigations found that
some screeners and doctors were getting bounties from psychiatry
hospitals and wards for directing patients to them. The hospitals get
paid one way or another--through insurance, by the patient himself if
not insured (and they charge the uninsured much more), or by charity
care paid by the government for impoverished patients. The
psychiatrists just approves whatever the screener recommends since
that's also in their own interest.

"U.S. Representative Patricia Schroeder of Colorado held hearings
investigating the practices of psychiatric hospitals in the United
States. Her committee's summary: "Our investigation has found that
thousands of adolescents, children, and adults have been hospitalized
for psychiatric treatment they didn't need; that hospitals hire bounty
hunters to kidnap patients...that psychiatrists are being pressured by
the hospitals to increase profit; that hospitals 'infiltrate' schools
by paying kickbacks to school counselors who deliver students; that
bonuses are paid to hospital employees, including psychiatrists, for
keeping the hospital beds filled.

"The supposed experts responsible for these "diagnoses" are usually
biased in favor of commitment because of their personal economic
concerns or their affiliation with the psychiatric "hospital" or ward
where the "patient" is or will be confined. Psychiatric "hospitals",
like all businesses, need customers. In the case of psychiatric
"hospitals" [or wards], they need patients. They not only want
patients, they need them to stay in business. ..Keeping all those
psychiatric beds filled is critical, and administrators are
aggressively ensuring that they will be. Some facilities even resort
to paying employees and others bonuses of $500 to $1,000 per referral.
An administrator at a psychiatric "hospital" told me competition
between psychiatric hospitals is "cut throat". Combine this intense
competition with America's poorly written involuntary commitment laws
and judges who refuse to impose protection from unwarranted commitment
that bona-fide due process requires, and the result is a lot of people
being deprived of liberty and suffering psychiatric stigma unjustifiably."

http://www.antipsychiatry.org/unjustif.htm
http://reason.com/archives/2002/05/01/ill-treated
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=26154

"Some psychiatric hospitals made a practice of admitting adolescents
in distress, using the diagnosis of bipolar disorder. The federal
government finally intervened, charging the hospitals with fraud and
assessing fines of millions of dollars. Many of these children did
not have bipolar disorder at all, but were acting inappropriately
because of stresses in their families, with their friends, and at
school." --Edward Drummond, M.D., Associate Medical Director at
Seacoast Mental Health Center, Portsmouth, New Hampshire, in _The
Complete Guide to Psychiatric Drugs_ (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New
York, 2000, pages 13-14.) Dr. Drummond graduated from Tufts
University School of Medicine and was trained in psychiatry at Harvard
University."

http://www.cchr.org/take_action/report_psychiatric_abuse.html
"Vulnerable people who have sought help from psychiatrists and
psychologists have been falsely diagnosed and forced to undergo
unwanted and often harmful psychiatric methods."

While in theory, a patient is entitled to a hearing before a judge
before longer term involuntary commitment, in practice this provides
little protection.
1. In most states, you can be held for 3 days just on the
recommendation of a "screener," who need not even be a psychiatrist.
Psychiatrists just rubber stamp the screener's recommendation.
2. You can be and many people are involuntarily committed if they are
considered a potential danger to themselves, i.e., if they've had
thoughts of suicide. But thoughts of suicide are a common symptom of
depression; indeed, it's one of the standard DSM-IV diagnostic
criteria for clinical depression.
3. For the reasons noted above, it's in the financial interest of both
screeners and psychiatrists to commit people.
4. It often 3 weeks or longer to get even a preliminary hearing before
a judge, during which time the person remains committed and the bills
pile up.
5. Judges usually just follow the recommendation of the
psychiatrist/screener, who have a vested interest in commitment.
Unless you can afford to hire your own lawyer and psychiatrist, you
may stay committed.
6. The person is often released before a hearing can be held, which is
often weeks. That still amounts to tens of thousands of dollars in
hospital and other medical bills. If you don't have insurance, they
can and will charge you for it.
---

NJ 2C:39-7 Certain persons not to have weapons.

6.Certain Persons Not to Have Weapons.

a.Except as provided in subsection b. of this section, any person,
having been convicted in this State or elsewhere of the crime of
aggravated assault, arson, burglary, escape, extortion, homicide,
kidnapping, robbery, aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault, bias
intimidation in violation of N.J.S.2C:16-1 or endangering the welfare
of a child pursuant to N.J.S.2C:24-4, whether or not armed with or
having in his possession any weapon enumerated in subsection r. of
N.J.S.2C:39-1, or any person convicted of a crime pursuant to the
provisions of N.J.S.2C:39-3, N.J.S.2C:39-4 or N.J.S.2C:39-9, or any
person who has ever been committed for a mental disorder to any
hospital, mental institution or sanitarium unless he possesses a
certificate of a medical doctor or psychiatrist licensed to practice
in New Jersey or other satisfactory proof that he is no longer
suffering from a mental disorder which interferes with or handicaps
him in the handling of a firearm, or any person who has been convicted
of other than a disorderly persons or petty disorderly persons offense
for the unlawful use, possession or sale of a controlled dangerous
substance as defined in N.J.S.2C:35-2 who purchases, owns, possesses
or controls any of the said weapons is guilty of a crime of the fourth
degree.

NJ C.30:4-80.8 Application for relief.
1. Any person who has been, or shall be, committed to any institution
or facility providing mental health services, or has been determined
to be a danger to himself, others, or property, or determined to be an
incapacitated individual as defined in N.J.S.3B:1-2, by order of any
court or by voluntary commitment and who was, or shall be, discharged
from such institution or facility as recovered, or whose illness upon
discharge, or subsequent to discharge or determination, is
substantially improved or in substantial remission, may apply to the
court by which such commitment was made, or to the Superior Court by
verified petition setting forth the facts and praying for the relief
provided for in this act. 2. Section 2 of P.L.1953, c.268
(C.30:4-80.9) is amended to read as follows

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/05/gun-rights-and-mental-illness-answering-readers-questions/

Q.Why don’t the courts require a mental health professional to assess
the person’s current condition and likelihood of relapse before
considering requests for restoration of gun rights? I don’t understand
how a judge with no mental health training could be making those
decisions when the person has a history of violence. — Shelley, San
Francisco

A.You ask a good question. I would say that this is actually a
decision that rests more at the level of the legislators in each
state. They would be the ones setting down the statutory requirements
for these petitions.

As I wrote in the article, the National Rifle Association and other
advocacy groups have lobbied in states across the country to keep the
requirements to a minimum, within the confines of the federal law.
Their argument is that this should not be an excessively onerous
process. They would argue, for example, that someone who was
involuntarily committed decades ago and has been fine since then
should not be required to pay for and undergo a psychiatric examination.

I mentioned in the article what happened in Idaho, where a committee
of law enforcement officials initially proposed a law that would have
required a recent psychiatric examination: Without the N.R.A.’s
backing, the bill went nowhere. Eventually the state did pass a bill,
but a different one that the N.R.A. helped to draft — and that did not
contain this requirement.

In Virginia, I found that some judges were asking for notes from
doctors, while others were not. But even these types of personal notes
from doctors can be problematic.

On the other end of the spectrum is the Superior Court in Los Angeles,
which actually has a court-appointed psychiatrist examine each
petitioner at the court’s expense. This is not required under
California law; the court does it on its own initiative. I did not
encounter that practice anywhere else in the country. But even the Los
Angeles approach is not foolproof, of course, as I point out in the
article.

You also touch on the question of who should be handling these
petitions. Most states have entrusted them to judges, but some have
made different choices. New York, for example, handles them through an
executive agency, the Office of Mental Health. In Oregon, a state body
called the Psychiatric Security Review Board deals with them.

Q.What constitutes a mental illness that prevents a person from buying
a gun? — Demo NYC, New York

A.Under federal law, anyone who has been formally committed to a
mental health facility or adjudicated as a “mental defective” is
disqualified from buying and possessing firearms.

The first prong is fairly self-explanatory, describing people who have
been hospitalized by court order. The second is a little more
complicated. It describes someone who has been designated by some
legal authority — usually a court, but it also could be a board or
commission — to be a danger to himself or others, or to lack the
mental capacity to manage his or her own affairs. It also describes
people found by a court to be incompetent to stand trial, or found in
a criminal case to be insane.

In other words, the fact that a psychiatrist has given someone a
diagnosis of mental illness does not, by itself, bar that person from
having a gun. Some sort of legal adjudication is required.

That, in fact, is one reason Jared Loughner, the suspect in the Tucson
shootings, was not prohibited from buying firearms, despite having
some serious mental health issues.

Complicating matters a bit, some states have set their own slightly
different mental health criteria for firearms prohibitions. For
example, in California, anyone who has been placed on an involuntary
psychiatric hold for 72 hours in which they have been deemed a threat
to themselves or others is barred from having a gun for five years.
Virginia bars people who have been the subject of a temporary
detention order and who voluntarily agree to inpatient treatment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/03/us/03guns.html?pagewanted=all
Across the country, states are increasingly allowing people like Mr.
French, who lost their firearm rights because of mental illness, to
petition to have them restored.

A handful of states have had such restoration laws on their books for
some time, but with little notice, more than 20 states have passed
similar measures since 2008.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[RD Sandman]

Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
news:9Jednbwcu_DhD27T...@giganews.com:

> On 12/22/2011 1:53 PM, jigo wrote:
>> Ray Keller wrote:
>>> Get a Medical Marijuana Card, Lose Your Second Amendment Rights The
>>> Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives wants to
>>> prohibit patients from protecting themselves.
> [snip]
>> Not only that, but if you've ever even been treated for a mental
>> illness (depression, eating disorder, anything), you lose your second
>> amendment rights, even if you've recovered. You have to go through an
>> expensive, complicated legal process to prove you've recovered even
>> if you were treated for an eating disorder.
>
> Incorrect. Receiving treatment for common mental health issues such as
> depression, even if it includes hospitalization, is not a bar to
> firearms ownership.
>
> Per the BATFE:
>
> Section 922(g)(4) of 18 U.S.C. makes it unlawful for any person who
> has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed
> to a mental institution to possess firearms or ammunition. This
> prohibition covers two classes of persons—those who have either been
> (1) adjudicated as a mental defective; or (2) committed to a mental
> institution.

Bingo!!

> Each of these terms is defined by Federal regulation at 27 C.F.R. §
> 478.11 as follows:
> ADJUDICATED AS A MENTAL DEFECTIVE
>
> A determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful
> authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence,
> or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease:
> Is a danger to himself or to others; or
> Lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own
> affairs.
> The term shall include—
> A finding of insanity by a court in a criminal case; and
> Those persons found incompetent to stand trial or found not
> guilty by reason of lack of mental responsibility pursuant to articles
> 50a and 72b of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. 850a,
> 876b.
>
> COMMITTED TO A MENTAL INSTITUTION
>
> This term means a formal commitment of a person to a mental
> institution by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority.
> The term includes a commitment to a mental institution involuntarily.
> The term also includes a commitment for mental defectiveness or mental
> illness, and commitments for other reasons such as for drug use. The
> term does not include a person in a mental institution for observation

Cho at Virginia Tech....for example. He had an overnight commitment.

> or any voluntary admission to a mental institution.
>
> ATF has historically interpreted these provisions as constituting two
> distinct prohibitions. Each prohibition represents a separate
> disqualification. For example, a “commitment” means a formal
> commitment, not a voluntary stay. Excluded are stays for observation
> only. Nor does the term include a stay in a mental institution that
> never involved any form of adjudication by a lawful authority.
> However, a stay that began as a voluntary stay may be subsequently
> transformed into a disqualifying stay if a court, board, or other
> lawful authority makes a determination that the person is a danger to
> self or others. Moreover, a voluntary stay that is by itself not
> disabling could be later converted into a formal commitment and
> therefore be disabling.

Correct.

> For purposes of a Federal firearms disability, ATF interprets
> “adjudicated mental defective” to include anyone adjudicated to be
> a “danger to him or herself,” “a danger to others,” or lacking
> “the mental capacity to contract or manage their own affairs.”

The examination Loughner would have had to be certified from in order to
be allowed to attend Pima College. Loughner, however, never had that
exam or certification although several entities could have triggered its
occurrance....his parents, Pima County Sheriff's department, Tucson
Police Department (both of who were quite familiar with him) or even Pima
College itself.

For
> purposes of Federal law, “danger” means any danger, not simply
> “imminent” or “substantial” danger as is often required to
> sustain an involuntary commitment under State law. Thus, for example,
> adjudication that a person was mentally ill and a danger to himself or
> others would result in Federal firearms disability, whether the
> court-ordered treatment was on an inpatient or outpatient basis. This
> is because the adjudication itself (a finding of danger due to mental
> illness) is sufficient to trigger the disability.

Yep.....


--
Sleep well, Tonight....

RD, The Sandman

If law school is so hard to get through......why are there so many
lawyers?

[Gunner Asch]

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 15:06:31 -0500, jigo <ret...@home.com> wrote:

>
>In fact, by getting us involved in foreign conflicts like the middle
>east, it increases the odds Americans will be killed in a terrorist
>attack (as well as wasting trillions of dollars of their tax money).
>

So..how many terrorist attacks on Americans since September 2001?

A decade ago? 10 yrs plus?

Gunner

One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
Gunner Asch

[JohnJohnsn]

OMB No. 1140-0020
U.S. Department of Justice

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

On Dec 20, 11:01 pm, "Ray Keller" <LEFTARD TROLLS ARE DESPERATE>
wrote:

The precident was established in 1942 in the SCotUS case `Wickard v.
Filburn'
http://www.lawnix.com/cases/wickard-filburn.html

> Nevada licenses medical pot users. Rowan Wilson, a Carson City-area woman
> who works as a medical technician in residential care homes, believes pot
> might be useful for her painful menstrual cramps. After going through a
> seven-month process to obtain a medical marijuana card, she attempted in
> October to purchase a gun from a gun dealer, Fred Hauseur, who was also a
> personal acquaintance.
>
> The Form 4473 that the BATFE requires every gun purchaser to fill out asks,
> “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana…or any other
> controlled substance?”

ATF Form 4473 (5300.9) Part J
Revised August 2008
Firearms Transaction Record Part I Over-the-Counter
...
II. Answer questions Il.a. (see exceptions) through II.!. and 12 (If
applicable) by checking or marking 'Yes" or "no" in the boxes to the
right ofthe questions.
...
e. Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any
depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any any other controlled
substance? Yes [x] No [ ]

http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-4473-1.pdf

The "x" in the "Yes" box is the "killer."

> Wilson, not considering herself an unlawful user or addict but aware, as she
> says in a deposition in the case, that BATFE “has set down a policy whereby
> it is presumed that any person holding a medical marijuana registry card is
> automatically considered an unlawful user of, or addicted to marijuana ”
> left that line blank.

"I certify that my answers to Section A are true, correct, and
complete. I have read and understand the Notices, Instructions, and
Definitions on ATF Form 4473. I understand that answering "yes" to
question 11.a. if I am not the actual buyer is a crime punishable as a
felony under Federal law, and may also violate State andlor local law.
I understand that a person who answers "yes" to any of the questions
l1.b. through 11.k. is prohibited from purchasing or receiving a
firearm. I understand that a person who answers "yes" to question
11.1. is prohibited from purchasing or receiving a firearm, unless tbe
person also answers "yes" to question 12. I also understand tbat
making any false oral or written statement, or exhibiting any false or
misrepresented identification with respect to tbis transaction, is a
crime punisbable as a felony under Federal law, and may also violate
State and/or local law. I further understand tbat tbe repetitive
purchase of firearms for tbe purpose of resale for livelihood and
profit without a Federal license is a violation of law (See
Instructions for Question 16)."
--Ibid.

There is no provision in the law to leave the question blank.

What we have here is "The Law of Unintended Consequences;" to-wit: a
state law making marijuana usage "legal" does not supercede a federal
making marijuana _illegal_ and establisking disabilities for
"illegal" (under FedLaw) users.

Few people even realize that marijuana was deemed "illegal" by the
Roosevelt administration under an international treaty agreement:

"When the present administration took office, ten countries had
ratified the Geneva Narcotic Limitation Convention. The United States
was one of these ten.... It was my privilege, as President, to
proclaim, on that day, that this treaty had become effective
throughout the jurisdiction of the United States....On Jan. 1, 1933,
only nine nations had registered their ratification of the limitation
treaty. On Jan. 1, 1935, only nine States had adopted the uniform
State statute. As 1933 witnessed ratification of the treaty by thirty-
one additional nations, so may 1935 witness the adoption of the
uniform drug act by at least thirty-one more states, thereby placing
interstate accord abreast of international accord, to the honor of the
legislative bodies of our States and for the promotion of the welfare
of our people and the peoples of other lands."
—Franklin D. Roosevelt, March 1935 in a radio message read by United
States Attorney General, Homer Stille Cummings

So you Looney Liberals can thank FDR for making MJ possession and
usage _illegal_.

[RGrannus]

On Dec 22, 6:13 pm, jigo <reti...@home.com> wrote:
> Jeff M wrote:
> > On 12/22/2011 1:53 PM, jigo wrote:
> >> Ray Keller wrote:
> >>> Get a Medical Marijuana Card, Lose Your Second Amendment Rights The

> >snip>

> http://www.antipsychiatry.org/unjustif.htmhttp://reason.com/archives/2002/05/01/ill-treatedhttp://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=26154

> http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/05/gun-rights-and-mental-ill...

<snip>
.>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­--------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/03/us/03guns.html?pagewanted=all
<snip>

> A handful of states have had such restoration laws on their books for
> some time, but with little notice, more than 20 states have passed
> similar measures since 2008.

Being unfortunate to live in NJ also, I can vouch that that is true.
I know someone who went to a peer support group for depression and was
sent to a "crisis center" by the director. He talked to a "screener",
who is not even a professional BTW, and on the basis of her
recommendations a psychiatrist had him involuntarily committed to a
hospital even though he was being treated by a doctor already. It
cost him about $20,000 and he had to give up his guns. This person
was a scientist with no criminal record, just depression. The
comments on the abuses in psychiatry and the wait for judges are just
what I've posted previously. Actually I posted some of that material
about psychiatric and judicial abuses before and on my Web site. You
can see a fuller discussion at
https://sites.google.com/site/depressionguidesite/

[RGrannus]

On Dec 22, 3:26 pm, Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote:
> On 12/22/2011 1:53 PM, jigo wrote:
>
> > Ray Keller wrote:
> >> Get a Medical Marijuana Card, Lose Your Second Amendment Rights The
> >> Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives wants to
> >> prohibit patients from protecting themselves.
> [snip]
> > Not only that, but if you've ever even been treated for a mental
> > illness (depression, eating disorder, anything), you lose your second
> > amendment rights, even if you've recovered. You have to go through an
> > expensive, complicated legal process to prove you've recovered even
> > if you were treated for an eating disorder.
>
> Incorrect. Receiving treatment for common mental health issues such as
> depression, even if it includes hospitalization, is not a bar to
> firearms ownership.

>

> Section 922(g)(4) of 18 U.S.C. makes it unlawful for any person who has
> been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a
> mental institution to possess firearms or ammunition. This prohibition
> covers two classes of persons—those who have either been (1) adjudicated
> as a mental defective; or (2) committed to a mental institution.

>          Is a danger to himself or to others; or
>          Lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own affairs.
>      The term shall include—
>          A finding of insanity by a court in a criminal case; and
>          Those persons found incompetent to stand trial or found not
> guilty by reason of lack of mental responsibility pursuant to articles
> 50a and 72b of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. 850a, 876b.

<snip>

The ATF can say what it wants, but it's the states who interpret and
pass the laws for qualifications and disqualifications. In NJ you
need two letters of recommendation, have to pay about $100 in fees,
and go through a background check of your medical, including
psychiatric, records. And even then, the local police can deny you a
permit if they decide it's not in the public interest (if they've been
called to your house for a domestic dispute, for example). I know
because I've seen all this happen. I've also seen law-abiding, infact
outstanding people denied permits because they were hospitalized for
depression, and people hospitalized involuntarily for trivial reasons
and forced to pay for it themselves. Check the NJ statutes, but I did
some investigating and found it's a common thing. Psychiatrists have
been found among the worst when it comes to milking the system.

"Recent investigations by the DHHS of the Obamaadministration reported
on the widwespread fraud in mental healthcare"
"Health care fraud to be targeted, especially psychiatrists, DHHS says
Tuesday, May 31, 2011 10:22 ET
By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press
AP/Jacquelyn Martin
Lewis Morris, general counsel for the Department of Health and Human
Services inspector general [said] federal enforcers are targeting
individual executives in health care fraud cases."
...
The feds say they got frustrated with repeat violations and decided to
start using enforcement tools that were already on the books but had
been allowed to languish. By some estimates, health care fraud costs
taxpayers $60 billion a year, galling when Medicare faces insolvency.

"When you look at the history of health care enforcement, we've seen a
number of Fortune 500 companies that have been caught not once, not
twice, but sometimes three times violating the trust of the American
people, submitting false claims, paying kickbacks to doctors,
marketing drugs which have not been tested for safety and efficacy,"
said Lewis Morris, chief counsel for the inspector general of the
Health and Human Services Department.

And the CNN and other investigations showed how hospitals were
charging $1000 for a toothbrush, $140 for one tylenol tablet, $23
for an alcohol swab, $129 for a mucous recovery system? That's a box
of Kleenex. So the fact that psychiatrists and other mental care
workers are getting bounties to force people into hospitals doesn't
surprise me.

Maybe some of this will change with the Supreme Court ruling on gun
rights and the financial crisis, but I doubt it. The people in
government basically just do what they want and what's in their
interest. The courts usually back them up whatever the constitution
says; they're part of the same system. Government is a self-serving
fraud.

[Josh]

True, but if you want to get the case into court without exposing
yourself to the penalties for falsely answering "No", leaving it blank
strikes me as a smart approach.

[RD Sandman]

Josh <us...@nowhere.com> wrote in news:jd233t$p32$1...@josh.motzarella.org:

Why do you think answering it "no" would be a false statement? She is a
*legal* user via state law, and she is not an addict nor a dealer.

[JohnJohnsn]

On Dec 23, 8:26 am, Josh <u...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 12/22/2011 6:59 PM, JohnJohnsn wrote:
>
>>> Nevada licenses medical pot users. Rowan Wilson, a Carson City-area woman
>>> who works as a medical technician in residential care homes, believes pot
>>> might be useful for her painful menstrual cramps. After going through a
>>> seven-month process to obtain a medical marijuana card, she attempted in
>>> October to purchase a gun from a gun dealer, Fred Hauseur, who was also
>>> a personal acquaintance.
>
>>> The Form 4473 that the BATFE requires every gun purchaser to fill out
>>> asks,
>>> “Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana…or any other
>>> controlled substance?”
>
>> ATF Form 4473 (5300.9) Part J
>> Revised August 2008
>> Firearms Transaction Record Part I Over-the-Counter
>> ...
>> II. Answer questions Il.a. (see exceptions) through II.!. and 12 (If
>> applicable) by checking or marking 'Yes" or "no" in the boxes to

>> the right of the questions.

Consider this, though: What happens if you send your Federal Income
Tax Return in without signing it (like some of the "tax protestors"
do)?

[Jeff M]

[snip]

Good point. There is a problem at the state level in some states,
apparently. However, the BATFE has issued "guidance" to state Attorneys
General for interpreting federal law, along the lines I posted above.
It seems the some states are ignoring that and applying their own
interpretation of federal law.

[jigo]

Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 15:06:31 -0500, jigo<ret...@home.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> In fact, by getting us involved in foreign conflicts like the middle
>> east, it increases the odds Americans will be killed in a terrorist
>> attack (as well as wasting trillions of dollars of their tax money).
>>
>
> So..how many terrorist attacks on Americans since September 2001?
>
> A decade ago? 10 yrs plus?
>
> Gunner

3000 killed in one attack can't be discounted, but the ongoing cost of
terrorism and counterterrorism is actually doing much more damage.
It's estimated to have cost the country 1.25 trillion dollars in
recent years. Our involvement in foreign conflicts plus the resultant
terrorism and counterterrorism costs is one of the reasons the country
is going bankrupt.

And the main point still stands: Government does us more harm than good.

[Jeff M]

On 12/22/2011 5:16 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
> news:9Jednbwcu_DhD27T...@giganews.com:
>
>> On 12/22/2011 1:53 PM, jigo wrote:
>>> Ray Keller wrote:
>>>> Get a Medical Marijuana Card, Lose Your Second Amendment Rights The
>>>> Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives wants to
>>>> prohibit patients from protecting themselves.
>> [snip]
>>> Not only that, but if you've ever even been treated for a mental
>>> illness (depression, eating disorder, anything), you lose your second
>>> amendment rights, even if you've recovered. You have to go through an
>>> expensive, complicated legal process to prove you've recovered even
>>> if you were treated for an eating disorder.
>>
>> Incorrect. Receiving treatment for common mental health issues such as
>> depression, even if it includes hospitalization, is not a bar to
>> firearms ownership.
>>
>> Per the BATFE:
>>
>> Section 922(g)(4) of 18 U.S.C. makes it unlawful for any person who
>> has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed
>> to a mental institution to possess firearms or ammunition. This

>> prohibition covers two classes of persons—those who have either been

>> (1) adjudicated as a mental defective; or (2) committed to a mental
>> institution.
>
> Bingo!!
>

>> Each of these terms is defined by Federal regulation at 27 C.F.R. §

>> 478.11 as follows:
>> ADJUDICATED AS A MENTAL DEFECTIVE
>>
>> A determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful
>> authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence,
>> or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease:
>> Is a danger to himself or to others; or
>> Lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own
>> affairs.

>> The term shall include—

>> A finding of insanity by a court in a criminal case; and
>> Those persons found incompetent to stand trial or found not
>> guilty by reason of lack of mental responsibility pursuant to articles
>> 50a and 72b of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. 850a,
>> 876b.
>>
>> COMMITTED TO A MENTAL INSTITUTION
>>
>> This term means a formal commitment of a person to a mental
>> institution by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority.
>> The term includes a commitment to a mental institution involuntarily.
>> The term also includes a commitment for mental defectiveness or mental
>> illness, and commitments for other reasons such as for drug use. The
>> term does not include a person in a mental institution for observation
>
> Cho at Virginia Tech....for example. He had an overnight commitment.

Generally, a person can be involuntarily "held" for observation for a
limited time by, e.g., a physician or law enforcement officer, ex parte,
to determine whether that person needs to be involuntarily "committed"
for treatment. But this is not itself a "commitment," which triggers
certain due process requirements, and can only occur after those
requirements are complied with in a judicial proceeding.

I assume Cho was held but not committed?

[JohnJohnsn]

On Dec 23, 8:55 am, RD Sandman <rdsandman@comcast,net> wrote:
>
>
> Josh <u...@nowhere.com> wrote in

But the question addresses _all_ laws: local, state and federal; and
it's "illegal" to use marijuana under federal law, so answering "No
[x]" would be a "false statement [perjury] in the eyes of the federal
prosecutor.

[BeamMeUpScotty]

On 12/23/2011 12:25 PM, JohnJohnsn wrote:
>> If law school is so hard to get through......why are
>> there so many lawyers?

Another question is; if government is NOT too BIG, why do we need so
many lawyers?





















--
A little Liberalism like a little alcohol, can be a good thing but when
either of them take control, they become self destructive.

[Josh]

I am guessing there is a separate provision in the tax code for non
signers? If so, is there a similar provision for this form?

[RD Sandman]

JohnJohnsn <TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:e37aea33-6ff4-41c4...@l24g2000yqm.googlegroups.com:

While basically true, the courts have not settled the question on that
conflict at this time. Additionally, the feds appear to be after those
who sell the marijuana in those stores, not the ones buying it. Hell,
there are several stores in CA selling hemp.

[RD Sandman]

BeamMeUpScotty <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
news:4EF4C4E5...@blackhole.nebulax.com:

> On 12/23/2011 12:25 PM, JohnJohnsn wrote:
>>> If law school is so hard to get through......why are
>>> there so many lawyers?
>
>
> Another question is; if government is NOT too BIG, why do we need so
> many lawyers?

That's a good question and one for which I have no answer. ;)

--
Sleep well, Tonight....

RD, The Sandman

[RD Sandman]

Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.org> wrote in
news:HqGdnbFGR8zLLGnT...@giganews.com:

> On 12/22/2011 5:16 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
>> news:9Jednbwcu_DhD27T...@giganews.com:
>>
>>> On 12/22/2011 1:53 PM, jigo wrote:
>>>> Ray Keller wrote:
>>>>> Get a Medical Marijuana Card, Lose Your Second Amendment Rights The
>>>>> Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives wants to
>>>>> prohibit patients from protecting themselves.
>>> [snip]
>>>> Not only that, but if you've ever even been treated for a mental
>>>> illness (depression, eating disorder, anything), you lose your
second
>>>> amendment rights, even if you've recovered. You have to go through
an
>>>> expensive, complicated legal process to prove you've recovered even
>>>> if you were treated for an eating disorder.
>>>
>>> Incorrect. Receiving treatment for common mental health issues such
as
>>> depression, even if it includes hospitalization, is not a bar to
>>> firearms ownership.
>>>
>>> Per the BATFE:
>>>
>>> Section 922(g)(4) of 18 U.S.C. makes it unlawful for any person who
>>> has been adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed
>>> to a mental institution to possess firearms or ammunition. This

>>> prohibition covers two classes of persons—those who have either

been
>>> (1) adjudicated as a mental defective; or (2) committed to a mental
>>> institution.
>>
>> Bingo!!
>>

>>> Each of these terms is defined by Federal regulation at 27 C.F.R. §

>>> 478.11 as follows:
>>> ADJUDICATED AS A MENTAL DEFECTIVE
>>>
>>> A determination by a court, board, commission, or other lawful
>>> authority that a person, as a result of marked subnormal
intelligence,
>>> or mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease:
>>> Is a danger to himself or to others; or
>>> Lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his own
>>> affairs.

>>> The term shall include—

>>> A finding of insanity by a court in a criminal case; and
>>> Those persons found incompetent to stand trial or found not
>>> guilty by reason of lack of mental responsibility pursuant to
articles
>>> 50a and 72b of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. 850a,
>>> 876b.
>>>
>>> COMMITTED TO A MENTAL INSTITUTION
>>>
>>> This term means a formal commitment of a person to a mental
>>> institution by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority.
>>> The term includes a commitment to a mental institution involuntarily.
>>> The term also includes a commitment for mental defectiveness or
mental
>>> illness, and commitments for other reasons such as for drug use. The
>>> term does not include a person in a mental institution for
observation
>>
>> Cho at Virginia Tech....for example. He had an overnight commitment.
>
> Generally, a person can be involuntarily "held" for observation for a
> limited time by, e.g., a physician or law enforcement officer, ex
parte,
> to determine whether that person needs to be involuntarily "committed"
> for treatment. But this is not itself a "commitment," which triggers
> certain due process requirements, and can only occur after those
> requirements are complied with in a judicial proceeding.
>
> I assume Cho was held but not committed?
>

Cho was held and the medical authorities did not put that information
into NICS. A situation that got fixed by the governor.

[Shall not be infringed]

On Dec 22, 6:25 pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:

Actually, there have been quite a few. Some were thwarted by our
gov't. Some were duds caused by ineptness or luck.

[Shall not be infringed]

So when will Obama and Earache Holder intervene like they did with
Arizona's immigration law?

[Shall not be infringed]

On Dec 23, 11:48 am, jigo <reti...@home.com> wrote:
> Gunner Asch wrote:

So when is the next meeting of your anarchist group?

Do they follow Roberts Rules?

Do you hold an elected or appointed position?

Are you the Sgt. at Arms?

Just asking.

[Peter Franks]

On 12/20/2011 9:01 PM, Ray Keller wrote:
> Get a Medical Marijuana Card, Lose Your Second Amendment Rights

>...

> It isn’t just that the government on both the federal and state level
> doesn’t want you to be able to legally and conveniently obtain your
> medicine, if that medicine is pot. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
> Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) insists you inherently lose a key
> constitutional right merely by letting your state know you might want to
> take pot medicinally.

> ...

There are so many things wrong with this, where to start?

1) You don't have Second Amendment rights. You have explicit
/protections/ (refer to the preamble for details) from Congress/government.

2) The only thing that you are 'losing' is buying from an FFL. There
are plenty of other legal ways for a law-abiding citizen to acquire a
firearm.

3) The ATF form actually is the thing that runs afoul of the law. Ref.
Amendment V: "No person shall be ... be deprived of life, liberty, or
*property*, without due process of law...". An otherwise law-abiding
can't be deprived of property, including purchasing or acquiring
property, without due process. A form is not due process.

[Gunner Asch]

Indeed. So there have been only a couple sucessful ones and had very
small kill counts.

The Army Muslim nutball..was that an act of Jihad or an act by a crazy
person?

Ask the current administration......

Count the number of attacks INSIDE the US after 2001

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001454.html

Terrorist Attacks in the U.S. or Against Americans

The following timeline lists terrorist attacks against the United States
and Americans living either in the U.S. or abroad.

1920
Sept. 16, New York City: TNT bomb planted in unattended horse-drawn
wagon exploded on Wall Street opposite House of Morgan, killing 35
people and injuring hundreds more. Bolshevist or anarchist terrorists
believed responsible, but crime never solved.

1975
Jan. 24, New York City: bomb set off in historic Fraunces Tavern
killed 4 and injured more than 50 people. Puerto Rican nationalist group
(FALN) claimed responsibility, and police tied 13 other bombings to the
group.

1979
Nov. 4, Tehran, Iran: Iranian radical students seized the U.S.
embassy, taking 66 hostages. 14 were later released. The remaining 52
were freed after 444 days on the day of President Reagan's inauguration.

1982–1991
Lebanon: Thirty US and other Western hostages kidnapped in Lebanon
by Hezbollah. Some were killed, some died in captivity, and some were
eventually released. Terry Anderson was held for 2,454 days.

1983
April 18, Beirut, Lebanon: U.S. embassy destroyed in suicide
car-bomb attack; 63 dead, including 17 Americans. The Islamic Jihad
claimed responsibility.
Oct. 23, Beirut, Lebanon: Shiite suicide bombers exploded truck near
U.S. military barracks at Beirut airport, killing 241 marines. Minutes
later a second bomb killed 58 French paratroopers in their barracks in
West Beirut.
Dec. 12, Kuwait City, Kuwait: Shiite truck bombers attacked the U.S.
embassy and other targets, killing 5 and injuring 80.

1984
Sept. 20, east Beirut, Lebanon: truck bomb exploded outside the U.S.
embassy annex, killing 24, including 2 U.S. military.
Dec. 3, Beirut, Lebanon: Kuwait Airways Flight 221, from Kuwait to
Pakistan, hijacked and diverted to Tehran. 2 Americans killed.

1985
April 12, Madrid, Spain: Bombing at restaurant frequented by U.S.
soldiers, killed 18 Spaniards and injured 82.
June 14, Beirut, Lebanon: TWA Flight 847 en route from Athens to
Rome hijacked to Beirut by Hezbollah terrorists and held for 17 days. A
U.S. Navy diver executed.
Oct. 7, Mediterranean Sea: gunmen attack Italian cruise ship,
Achille Lauro. One U.S. tourist killed. Hijacking linked to Libya.
Dec. 18, Rome, Italy, and Vienna, Austria: airports in Rome and
Vienna were bombed, killing 20 people, 5 of whom were Americans. Bombing
linked to Libya.

1986
April 2, Athens, Greece:A bomb exploded aboard TWA flight 840 en
route from Rome to Athens, killing 4 Americans and injuring 9.
April 5, West Berlin, Germany: Libyans bombed a disco frequented by
U.S. servicemen, killing 2 and injuring hundreds.

1988
Dec. 21, Lockerbie, Scotland: N.Y.-bound Pan-Am Boeing 747 exploded
in flight from a terrorist bomb and crashed into Scottish village,
killing all 259 aboard and 11 on the ground. Passengers included 35
Syracuse University students and many U.S. military personnel. Libya
formally admitted responsibility 15 years later (Aug. 2003) and offered
$2.7 billion compensation to victims' families.

1993
Feb. 26, New York City: bomb exploded in basement garage of World
Trade Center, killing 6 and injuring at least 1,040 others. In 1995,
militant Islamist Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and 9 others were convicted of
conspiracy charges, and in 1998, Ramzi Yousef, believed to have been the
mastermind, was convicted of the bombing. Al-Qaeda involvement is
suspected.

1995
April 19, Oklahoma City: car bomb exploded outside federal office
building, collapsing wall and floors. 168 people were killed, including
19 children and 1 person who died in rescue effort. Over 220 buildings
sustained damage. Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols later convicted in
the antigovernment plot to avenge the Branch Davidian standoff in Waco,
Tex., exactly 2 years earlier. (See Miscellaneous Disasters.)
Nov. 13, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: car bomb exploded at U.S. military
headquarters, killing 5 U.S. military servicemen.

1996
June 25, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia: truck bomb exploded outside Khobar
Towers military complex, killing 19 American servicemen and injuring
hundreds of others. 13 Saudis and a Lebanese, all alleged members of
Islamic militant group Hezbollah, were indicted on charges relating to
the attack in June 2001.

1998
Aug. 7, Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: truck bombs
exploded almost simultaneously near 2 U.S. embassies, killing 224 (213
in Kenya and 11 in Tanzania) and injuring about 4,500. 4 men connected
with al-Qaeda 2 of whom had received training at al-Qaeda camps inside
Afghanistan, were convicted of the killings in May 2001 and later
sentenced to life in prison. A federal grand jury had indicted 22 men in
connection with the attacks, including Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden,
who remained at large.

2000
Oct. 12, Aden, Yemen: U.S. Navy destroyer USS Cole heavily damaged
when a small boat loaded with explosives blew up alongside it. 17
sailors killed. Linked to Osama bin Laden, or members of al-Qaeda
terrorist network.

2001
Sept. 11, New York City, Arlington, Va., and Shanksville, Pa.:
hijackers crashed 2 commercial jets into twin towers of World Trade
Center; 2 more hijacked jets were crashed into the Pentagon and a field
in rural Pa. Total dead and missing numbered 2,9921: 2,749 in New York
City, 184 at the Pentagon, 40 in Pa., and 19 hijackers. Islamic al-Qaeda
terrorist group blamed. (See September 11, 2001: Timeline of Terrorism.)

2002
June 14, Karachi, Pakistan: bomb explodes outside American consulate
in Karachi, Pakistan, killing 12. Linked to al-Qaeda.

2003 1
May 12, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: suicide bombers kill 34, including 8
Americans, at housing compounds for Westerners. Al-Qaeda suspected.

2004
May 29–31, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: terrorists attack the offices of a
Saudi oil company in Khobar, Saudi Arabia, take foreign oil workers
hostage in a nearby residential compound, leaving 22 people dead
including one American.
June 11–19, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: terrorists kidnap and execute Paul
Johnson Jr., an American, in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 2 other Americans and
BBC cameraman killed by gun attacks.
Dec. 6, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: terrorists storm the U.S. consulate,
killing 5 consulate employees. 4 terrorists were killed by Saudi
security.

2005
Nov. 9, Amman, Jordan: suicide bombers hit 3 American hotels,
Radisson, Grand Hyatt, and Days Inn, in Amman, Jordan, killing 57.
Al-Qaeda claimed responsibility.

2006
Sept. 13, Damascus, Syria: an attack by four gunman on the American
embassy is foiled.

2007
Jan. 12, Athens, Greece: the U.S. embassy is fired on by an
anti-tank missile causing damage but no injuries.
Dec. 11, Algeria: more than 60 people are killed, including 11
United Nations staff members, when Al Qaeda terrorists detonate two car
bombs near Algeria's Constitutional Council and the United Nations
offices.
2008
May 26, Iraq: a suicide bomber on a motorcycle kills six U.S.
soldiers and wounds 18 others in Tarmiya.
June 24, Iraq: a suicide bomber kills at least 20 people, including
three U.S. Marines, at a meeting between sheiks and Americans in Karmah,
a town west of Baghdad.
June 12, Afghanistan: four American servicemen are killed when a
roadside bomb explodes near a U.S. military vehicle in Farah Province.
July 13, Afghanistan: nine U.S.soldiers and at least 15 NATO troops
die when Taliban militants boldly attack an American base in Kunar
Province, which borders Pakistan. It's the most deadly against U.S.
troops in three years.
Aug. 18 and 19, Afghanistan: as many as 15 suicide bombers backed by
about 30 militants attack a U.S. military base, Camp Salerno, in
Bamiyan. Fighting between U.S. troops and members of the Taliban rages
overnight. No U.S. troops are killed.
Sept. 16, Yemen: a car bomb and a rocket strike the U.S. embassy in
Yemen as staff arrived to work, killing 16 people, including 4
civilians. At least 25 suspected al-Qaeda militants are arrested for the
attack.
Nov. 26, India: in a series of attacks on several of Mumbai's
landmarks and commercial hubs that are popular with Americans and other
foreign tourists, including at least two five-star hotels, a hospital, a
train station, and a cinema. About 300 people are wounded and nearly 190
people die, including at least 5 Americans.
2009
Feb. 9, Iraq: a suicide bomber kills four American soldiers and
their Iraqi translator near a police checkpoint.
April 10, Iraq: a suicide attack kills five American soldiers and
two Iraqi policemen.
June 1, Little Rock, Arkansas: Abdulhakim Muhammed, a Muslim convert
from Memphis, Tennessee, is charged with shooting two soldiers outside a
military recruiting center. One is killed and the other is wounded. In a
January 2010 letter to the judge hearing his case, Muhammed asked to
change his plea from not guilty to guilty, claimed ties to al-Qaeda, and
called the shooting a jihadi attack "to fight those who wage war on
Islam and Muslims."
Dec. 25: A Nigerian man on a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit
attempted to ignite an explosive device hidden in his underwear. The
explosive device that failed to detonate was a mixture of powder and
liquid that did not alert security personnel in the airport. The alleged
bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, told officials later that he was
directed by the terrorist group Al Qaeda. The suspect was already on the
government's watch list when he attempted the bombing; his father, a
respected Nigerian banker, had told the U.S. government that he was
worried about his son's increased extremism.
Dec. 30, Iraq: a suicide bomber kills eight Americans civilians,
seven of them CIA agents, at a base in Afghanistan. It's the deadliest
attack on the agency since 9/11. The attacker is reportedly a double
agent from Jordan who was acting on behalf of al-Qaeda.
2010
May 1, New York City: a car bomb is discovered in Times Square, New
York City after smoke is seen coming from a vehicle. The bomb was
ignited, but failed to detonate and was disarmed before it could cause
any harm. Times Square was evacuated as a safety precaution. Faisal
Shahzad pleads guilty to placing the bomb as well as 10 terrorism and
weapons charges.
May 10, Jacksonville, Florida: a pipe bomb explodes while
approximately 60 Muslims are praying in the mosque. The attack causes no
injuries.
Oct. 29: two packages are found on separate cargo planes. Each
package contains a bomb consisting of 300 to 400 grams (11-14 oz) of
plastic explosives and a detonating mechanism. The bombs are discovered
as a result of intelligence received from Saudi Arabia's security chief.
The packages, bound from Yemen to the United States, are discovered at
en route stop-overs, one in England and one in Dubai in the United Arab
Emirates.
2011
Jan. 17, Spokane, Washington: a pipe bomb is discovered along the
route of the Martin Luther King, Jr. memorial march. The bomb, a "viable
device" set up to spray marchers with shrapnel and to cause multiple
casualties, is defused without any injuries.

See also U.S.-Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations; Suspected
al-Qaeda Terrorist Acts.
1. On Oct. 29, 2003, New York officials reduced the number of people
killed at the World Trade Center in the September 11, 2001, terrorist
attacks on the United States by 40 names. The list of casualties dropped
to 2,752 from 2,792 for a variety of reasons: some people initially
reported missing have been found, there were duplicate names, there was
no proof that a person was at the World Trade Center that day, and
because of fraud. On January 2004, the number was reduced by 3 more to
2,749.

Now count the number of repeated attacks in some countries OUTSIDE of
the US....

Major Terrorist Acts Suspected of or Inspired by al-Qaeda

The following list includes the date, target of attacks, and casualties
of significant attacks by the terrorist goup al-Qaeda.

1993 (Feb.): Bombing of World Trade Center (WTC); 6 killed.
1993 (Oct.): Killing of U.S. soldiers in Somalia.
1996 (June): Truck bombing at Khobar Towers barracks in Dhahran,
Saudi Arabia, killed 19 Americans.
1998 (Aug.): Bombing of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania; 224
killed, including 12 Americans.
1999 (Dec.): Plot to bomb millennium celebrations in Seattle foiled
when customs agents arrest an Algerian smuggling explosives into the
U.S.
2000 (Oct.): Bombing of the USS Cole in port in Yemen; 17 U.S.
sailors killed.
2001 (Sept.): Destruction of WTC; attack on Pentagon. Total dead
2,992.
2001 (Dec.): Man tried to denote shoe bomb on flight from Paris to
Miami.
2002 (April): Explosion at historic synagogue in Tunisia left 21
dead, including 11 German tourists.
2002 (May): Car exploded outside hotel in Karachi, Pakistan, killing
14, including 11 French citizens.
2002 (June): Bomb exploded outside American consulate in Karachi,
Pakistan, killing 12.
2002 (Oct.): Boat crashed into oil tanker off Yemen coast, killing
1.
2002 (Oct.): Nightclub bombings in Bali, Indonesia, killed 202,
mostly Australian citizens.
2002 (Nov.): Suicide attack on a hotel in Mombasa, Kenya, killed 16.
2003 (May): Suicide bombers killed 34, including 8 Americans, at
housing compounds for Westerners in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
2003 (May): 4 bombs killed 33 people targeting Jewish, Spanish, and
Belgian sites in Casablanca, Morocco.
2003 (Aug.): Suicide car-bomb killed 12, injured 150 at Marriott
Hotel in Jakarta, Indonesia.
2003 (Nov.): Explosions rocked a Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, housing
compound, killing 17.
2003 (Nov.): Suicide car-bombers simultaneously attacked 2
synagogues in Istanbul, Turkey, killing 25 and injuring hundreds.
2003 (Nov.): Truck bombs detonated at London bank and British
consulate in Istanbul, Turkey, killing 26.
2004 (March): 10 bombs on 4 trains exploded almost simultaneously
during the morning rush hour in Madrid, Spain, killing 191 and injuring
more than 1,500.
2004 (May): Terrorists attacked Saudi oil company offices in Khobar,
Saudi Arabia, killing 22.
2004 (June): Terrorists kidnapped and executed American Paul
Johnson, Jr., in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
2004 (Sept.): Car bomb outside the Australian embassy in Jakarta,
Indonesia, killed 9.
2004 (Dec.): Terrorists entered the U.S. Consulate in Jeddah, Saudi
Arabia, killing 9 (including 4 attackers).
2005 (July): Bombs exploded on 3 trains and a bus in London,
England, killing 52.
2005 (Oct.): 22 killed by 3 suicide bombs in Bali, Indonesia.
2005 (Nov.): 57 killed at 3 American hotels in Amman, Jordan.
2006 (Jan.): Two suicide bombers carrying police badges blow
themselves up near a celebration at the Police Academy in Baghdad,
killing nearly 20 police officers. Al-Qaeda in Iraq takes
responsibility.
2006 (Aug.): Police arrest 24 British-born Muslims, most of whom
have ties to Pakistan, who had allegedly plotted to blow up as many as
10 planes using liquid explosives. Officials say details of the plan
were similar to other schemes devised by al-Qaeda.
2007 (April): Suicide bombers attack a government building in
Algeria's capital, Algiers, killing 35 and wounding hundreds more.
Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb claims responsibility.
2007 (April): Eight people, including two Iraqi legislators, die
when a suicide bomber strikes inside the Parliament building in Baghdad.
An organization that includes al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia claims
responsibility. In another attack, the Sarafiya Bridge that spans the
Tigris River is destroyed.
2007 (June): British police find car bombs in two vehicles in
London. The attackers reportedly tried to detonate the bombs using cell
phones but failed. Government officials say al-Qaeda is linked to the
attempted attack. The following day, an SUV carrying bombs bursts into
flames after it slams into an entrance to Glasgow Airport. Officials say
the attacks are connected.
2007 (Dec.): As many as 60 people are killed in two suicide attacks
near United Nations offices and government buildings in Algiers,
Algeria. The bombings occur within minutes of each other. Al-Qaeda in
the Islamic Maghreb, formerly called the Salafist Group for Preaching,
claims responsibility. It's the worst attack in the Algeria in more than
10 years.
2007 (Dec.): Benazir Bhutto, former Pakistani prime minister, is
assassinated in a suicide attack on Dec. 27, 2007, at a campaign rally
in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. President Pervez Musharraf blames al Qaeda for
the attack, which kills 23 other people. Baitullah Mehsud, a Taliban
leader with close ties to al Qaeda is later cited as the assassin.
2008 (Jan.): In the worst attack in Iraq in months, a suicide bomber
kills 30 people at a home where mourners were paying their respects to
the family of a man killed in a car bomb. The Iraqi military blames the
attack on al-Qaeda in Iraq.
2008 (Feb.): Nearly 100 people die when two women suicide bombers,
who are believed to be mentally impaired, attack crowded pet markets in
eastern Baghdad. The U.S. military says al-Qaeda in Iraq has been
recruiting female patients at psychiatric hospitals to become suicide
bombers.
2008 (April): A suicide bomber attacks the funeral for two nephews
of a prominent Sunni tribal leader, Sheik Kareem Kamil al-Azawi, killing
30 people in Iraq's Diyala Province.
2008 (April): A suicide car bomber kills 40 people in Baquba, the
capital of Diyala Province in Iraq.
2008 (April): Thirty-five people die and 62 are injured when a woman
detonates explosives that she was carrying under her dress in a busy
shopping district in Iraq’s Diyala Province.
2008 (May): At least 12 worshipers are killed and 44 more injured
when a bomb explodes in the Bin Salman mosque near Sana, Yemen.
2008 (May): An al-Qaeda suicide bomber detonates explosives in Hit,
a city in the Anbar Province of Iraq, killing six policemen and four
civilians, and injuring 12 other people.
2008 (June): A car bomb explodes outside the Danish Embassy in
Pakistan, killing six people and injuring dozens. Al-Qaeda claims
responsibility, saying the attack was retaliation for the 2006
publication of political cartoons in the Danish newspaper
Jyllands-Posten that depicted the Islamic prophet Muhammad.
2008 (June): A female suicide bomber kills 15 and wounds 40 others,
including seven Iraqi policemen, near a courthouse in Baquba, Iraq.
2008 (June): A suicide bomber kills at least 20 people at a meeting
between sheiks and Americans in Karmah, a town west of Baghdad.
2008 (Aug.): About two dozens worshippers are killed in three
separate attacks as they make their way toward Karbala to celebrate the
birthday of 9th-century imam Muhammad al-Mahdi. Iraqi officials blame
al-Qaeda in Iraq for the attacks.
2008 (Aug.): A bomb left on the street explodes and tears through a
bus carrying Lebanese troops, killing 15 people, nine of them soldiers.
No one claims responsibility for the attack, but in 2007, the army
fought an al-Qaeda linked Islamist group in Tripoli.
2008 (Aug.): At least 43 people are killed when a suicide bomber
drives an explosives-laden car into a police academy in Issers, a town
in northern Algeria.
2008 (Aug.): Two car bombs explode at a military command and a hotel
in Bouira, killing a dozen people. No group takes responsibility for
either attack, Algerian officials said they suspect al-Qaeda in the
Islamic Maghreb is behind the bombings.
2008 (Sept.): In its first acknowledged ground attack inside
Pakistan, U.S. commandos raid a village that is home to al-Qaeda
militants in the tribal region near the border with Afghanistan. The
number of casualties is unclear.
2008 (Sept.): A car bomb and a rocket strike the U.S. embassy in
Yemen as staff arrived to work, killing 16 people, including 4
civilians. At least 25 suspected al-Qaeda militants are arrested for the
attack.
2008 (Nov.): at least 28 people die and over 60 more are injured
when three bombs explode minutes apart in Baghdad, Iraq. Officials
suspect the explosions are linked to al-Qaeda.
2009 (April): on April 6 in Baghdad, a series of six attacks kills
36 people and injure more than 100 in Shiite neighborhoods; April 23: at
least 80 people are killed in three separate suicide bombings in
Baghdad. This is the largest single-day death toll due to attacks since
February 2008. One of the bombings is reportedly set off by a female,
who was standing among a group of women and children receiving food aid.
2009 (Dec.): A Nigerian man on a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit
attempted to ignite an explosive device hidden in his underwear. The
explosive device that failed to detonate was a mixture of powder and
liquid that did not alert security personnel in the airport. The alleged
bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, told officials later that he was
directed by the terrorist group al-Qaeda. The suspect was already on the
government's watch list when he attempted the bombing; his father, a
respected Nigerian banker, had told the U.S. government that he was
worried about his son's increased extremism.
2009 (Dec.): A suicide bomber kills eight Americans civilians, seven
of them CIA agents, at a base in Afghanistan. It's the deadliest attack
on the agency since 9/11. The attacker is reportedly a double agent from
Jordan who was acting on behalf of al-Qaeda.
2010 (Oct.): Two packages are found on separate cargo planes. Each
package contains a bomb consisting of 300 to 400 grams (11-14 oz) of
plastic explosives and a detonating mechanism. The bombs are discovered
as a result of intelligence received from Saudi Arabia's security chief.
The packages, bound from Yemen to the United States, are discovered at
en route stop-overs, one in England and one in Dubai in the United Arab
Emirates. A week after the packages are found, al-Qaeda in the Arabian
Peninsula (AQAP) takes responsibility for the plot.
2011 (Jan.): Two Frenchmen are killed in Niger. France highly
suspects the al-Qaeda Organization in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM).
2011 (April): Men claiming to be Moroccan members of AQIM appear on
the internet and threaten to attack Moroccan interests. The following
week a bomb killing 15 people, including 10 foreigners, explodes in
Marrakesh, Morocco.

[pyotr filipivich]

Let the Record show that Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> on or
about Sat, 24 Dec 2011 07:23:26 -0800 did write, type or otherwise
cause to appear in talk.politics.guns the following:

>On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 16:41:53 -0800 (PST), Shall not be infringed
><hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Dec 22, 6:25 pm, Gunner Asch <gunnera...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 15:06:31 -0500, jigo <reti...@home.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >In fact, by getting us involved in foreign conflicts like the middle
>>> >east, it increases the odds Americans will be killed in a terrorist
>>> >attack (as well as wasting trillions of dollars of their tax money).
>>>
>>> So..how many terrorist attacks on Americans since September 2001?
>>>
>>> A decade ago?  10 yrs plus?
>>>
>>> Gunner
>>>
>>> One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
>>> in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
>>> and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
>>> not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
>>>                                    Gunner Asch
>>
>>Actually, there have been quite a few. Some were thwarted by our
>>gov't. Some were duds caused by ineptness or luck.
>
>Indeed. So there have been only a couple sucessful ones and had very
>small kill counts.
>
>The Army Muslim nutball..was that an act of Jihad or an act by a crazy
>person?
>
>Ask the current administration......

According to the Progressive Democrats, it was just a random act
of workplace violence. Like someone going "postal". It has nothing
to do with the Religion of Peace, and everything to do with the
intolerance of the Religious Reich, and their imposed Theocracy.

--
pyotr filipivich
Watergate didn’t have a body count. Gunwalker has hundreds.

[Strabo]

Add to your list...

The United States Capitol shooting incident of 1954 was an attack on
March 1, 1954 by four Puerto Rican nationalists who shot 30 rounds from
semi-automatic pistols from the Ladies' Gallery (a balcony for visitors)
of the House of Representatives chamber in the United States Capitol.

The attackers, Lolita Lebrón, Rafael Cancel Miranda, Andres Figueroa
Cordero, and Irving Flores Rodríguez, unfurled a Puerto Rican flag and
began shooting at the 240 Representatives of the 83rd Congress who were
on the floor during debate over an immigration bill.

<snipped>

[JohnJohnsn]

On Dec 23, 5:19 pm, RD Sandman <rdsandman@comcast,net> wrote:
>
>
> JohnJohnsn <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote in

Maybe they're selling it to "Make your own rope at home" buyers. <g>;)

[JohnJohnsn]

AFAIK, "Non-signers" are given the opportunity to sign the 1040, and
it they fail and/or refuse, they are treated as "Non-filers."

[RD Sandman]

JohnJohnsn <TopCo...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:30186667-ae0b-4996-bfd5-
5c9ce0...@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com:

> On Dec 23, 5:19 pm, RD Sandman <rdsandman@comcast,net> wrote:
>>
>>
>> JohnJohnsn <TopCop1...@yahoo.com> wrote in

>> news:e37aea33-6ff4-41c4-868e-d228882ba265

Possibly.

[jigo]

There was an interesting documentary on the other day on how it's not
hard to build an atomic bomb if you just get enough plutonium, and no
one has accounted for all the weapons grade material that became
available when the USSR broke up. If we continue our involvement in
the middle east and other conflicts around the world, as all the
candidates intend to, sooner or later one side in some conflict will
have the means of nuking an American city. Then you'll see not 3000
dead but tens of thousands.

As I said, the government does not protect us and even increases some
dangers to us.

[Shall not be infringed]

On Dec 26, 9:50 pm, Strabo <str...@flashlight.net> wrote:
> On 12/24/2011 10:23 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 16:41:53 -0800 (PST), Shall not be infringed

> > <hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com>  wrote:

Curls would just hate you pointing out hispanic terrorists.