Gonzales backs assault weapons ban

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer ^ | January 18, 2005 | JESSE J. HOLLAND

[snowsislander]

WASHINGTON -- Attorney General nominee Alberto Gonzales told the Senate on Tuesday that he supports extending the expired federal assault weapons ban.

Gonzales also said he wants Congress to get rid of a requirement that would eliminate part of the Patriot Act this year, despite complaints that it is too intrusive.

"I believe the USA PATRIOT Act has greatly improved our nation's ability to detect and prevent terrorist attacks," Gonzales told the Senate Judiciary Committee in written answers to questions left over from his confirmation hearing.

Gonzales, who served as President Bush's lawyer during his first term, is expected to be confirmed when the Senate returns after Bush's inauguration on Jan. 20. He would be the nation's first Hispanic attorney general and replace John Ashcroft.

Democrats, including Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., pressed Gonzales for written answers to several of their questions during his daylong confirmation hearing. Those answers were delivered on Tuesday to the committee, which planned a Wednesday meeting to consider nominations.

Congress let the 10-year-old assault weapons ban expire in September. The measure outlawed 19 types of military-style assault weapons, banned certain features on firearms such as bayonet mounts, and limited ammunition magazines to 10 rounds.

Gonzales pointed out that his brother Tony is a SWAT officer in Houston.

"I worry about his safety and the types of weapons he will confront on the street," Gonzales said. "The president has made it clear that he stands ready to sign a reauthorization of the federal assault weapons ban if it is sent to him by Congress. I, of course, support the president on this issue."

Antigun groups criticized Bush during the presidential campaign for failing to press for an extension of the ban.

Gonzales also said he supports the reauthorization of the Patriot Act, the post-Sept. 11 law that expanded the government's surveillance and prosecutorial powers against suspected terrorists, their associates and financiers.

More than a dozen provisions of the law are set to expire by late October 2005 unless renewed by Congress. These include authority for judges to issue search warrants that apply nationwide, authority for FBI and criminal investigators to share information about terrorism cases, and the FBI's power to obtain records in terrorism-related cases from businesses and other entities, including libraries.

"I believe the sunsets that apply to several provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act should be repealed," Gonzales said.

Opponents have called the law intrusive and contend that letting the FBI get library records undermines civil liberties and threatens to let the government snoop into the reading habits of innocent Americans.

Gonzales says people have misunderstood what parts of the Patriot Act does. "I am unaware of abuses under the USA PATRIOT Act," he said. "For this reason, I welcome an honest and real debate."

Gonzales said he is willing to consider tempering that part of the law.

The statute says business and library records must be "sought for" a terrorism investigation. Opponents have claimed that means the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court - the secret court that approves surveillance and wiretaps for espionage and terrorism cases - had no choice about whether to grant the subpoena.

"I would be happy for the statute to be amended to state the investigators may ask the FISA court for an order requesting the production of documents 'relevant to' an ongoing foreign intelligence investigation," Gonzales said.

---

[B4Ranch]

Call today and tell your rep to reject Gonzales. Do not wait until we have a festering boil from his actions!

[Stew Padasso]

The symbolic gun grabbers and Gonzales are the reactionaries you should be concerned with, they actually hold critical positions in government (or did that escape you). Also, you cheerleaders are not to be trusted with securing the 2A due to your blind faith.

[TheBattman]

1)Then Gonzales is an idiot, and
2)Bush is a jerk for pushing him.

I vote "C" - all of the above.

[antiRepublicrat]

Attorney General nominee Alberto Gonzales told the Senate on Tuesday that he supports extending the expired federal assault weapons ban.

Gonzales also said he wants Congress to get rid of a requirement that would eliminate part of the Patriot Act this year, despite complaints that it is too intrusive.

That's two strikes.

"I am unaware of abuses under the USA PATRIOT Act,"

An internal Justice Department investigation cited 34 credible counts of abuse, and is generally deluged with reports. Unaware of this as potential AG? Three strikes.

You're out!

[Dat Mon]

"Now that he and the president are on the record as supporting the ban, they are totally at the whim of the Congress."

IMHO youre right, and see the end game.

This point about political 'strategery' for short term gain is wearing thin. You want to see strategery...wait till the speeches and MSM talking points come up when the next version of the AWB is introduced.

They will feature prominently...Alberto Gonzales, among others of course. Gore and the dems got burned on guns...they know it...so Gonzales comments gives the dems cover with Reagan democrats and some conservatives.

The dems and libs apparently know how to play long term strategery. Never give your opponent a future advantage...by pursuing a short term defensive position. Alberto IMHO is too good a lawyer to do that unintenionally.

[rdb3]

The symbolic gun grabbers and Gonzales are the reactionaries you should be concerned with, they actually hold critical positions in government (or did that escape you). Also, you cheerleaders are not to be trusted with securing the 2A due to your blind faith.

---

Okay. Now you're making it rather personal. Very well.

For the record, I do not accept your premise. But if it floats your boat, go ahead.

Real men don't whine.

[CGTRWK]

You hit it on the head.

Many people seem to see the Republican gains the past 10 years or so as us winning the war, shifting the country the right. We aren't going to the right at all. What's happening is the Dems have gone off the deep end to the left and we're chasing after them to pickup enough of the center to get elected.

With demographics as they are now, this is the only way we can win. The government parasite class is as large as it has ever been and growing. Schools are more lefty than ever. There are more seniors wanting their checks and pills. There are 40 million Latinos too many of whom are poor and have fallen into the trap of voting socialist for social services.

For as long as this persists, a vaguely socially conservative authoritarian like Bush is about as attractive a choice as we're going to get, and the rest of the time it will be socially liberal authoritarians like Giuliani. And as bad as they are, we will donate, volunteer, and vote for them because the alternative will be the Blame America First crowd. Reagan would lose by 12 if not 15 percent today.

An authoritarian for the top federal cop position is exactly what we should expect, and gun grabbing is a big part of that. I didn't like much of what Ashcroft did, but he was alright on guns andhis heart was in the right place. Can't say the same of Gonzalez.

[Czar]

He said it because he believes it.

[junta]

And a LaRaza leader to boot, ain't that special?

[B4Ranch]

The Democrat Party has gone so far to the Left they now are Progressives (communists), Republican Party has gone so far to the Left they have become Democrats (socialists).

It won't be long before they dig some clause out of the Patriot Act that demands that Constitution believers like myself be placed in containment camps for the good of society, of course.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Many people seem to see the Republican gains the past 10 years or so as us winning the war, shifting the country the right. We aren't going to the right at all. What's happening is the Dems have gone off the deep end to the left and we're chasing after them to pickup enough of the center to get elected.

---

Precisely. For instance, the left has spent the past few decades arguing the absurd position that the 2nd amendment is about collective rights. They know it isn't, and 5 years from now when the SCOTUS rules that it is an individual right, most of us will cheer like it is the victory of a lifetime, when it simply affirms what has always been known.

Meanwhile, the left has attacked on other fronts, and we have failed to be fighting back on the unconstitutionality of the acts of 1986, 1968, and 1934. They set the terms, and we bit. We even applaud an AG who says there may be "reasonable restrictions" on firearm ownership. (That happens to be the stated Feinstein/Schumer position.)

[trisham]

Logic and panic are a bit like vinegar and water.

**************

Uh...oil and water. Duh.

I'm an idiot.

[Kornev]

"Meanwhile, the left has attacked on other fronts, and we have failed to be fighting back on the unconstitutionality of the acts of 1986, 1968, and 1934"

We have one a big one against the 94 crime bill. However, I'm really disappointed if Bush pushes this at all. Especially if he sneaks it into some perm patriot act thing. I'd probably quit voting Republican again for life.

[Dat Mon]

"They set the terms, and we bit."

BINGO.

..As opposed to being on offense, and defining the debate so as to educate the American people.

[School of Rational Thought]

He reads no different than any other liberal who legislates from the bench.

[loboinok]

If AWs are outlawed or ALL guns are outlawed...what difference would it make?

[cruiserman]

We succeeded in effectively repealing the AWB, which in itself is astonishing.

But it wasn't repealed. If the sunset provision weren't included, we'd still be paying $100 for G20 15 round mags.

[WhiteGuy]

"I believe the sunsets that apply to several provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act should be repealed," Gonzales said.............

---

Carrying the water for the bush mandate?

[45Auto]

The Brady Room in the West Wing of the White House, which was put in place in the Clinton Administration, is currently occupied by the NRA. This President and this Congress will not pass any gun control legislation over the next four years.

In 2008, if the unthinkable should happen, like President Hillary appoints the new AG, Ted (the swimmer) Kennedy and the Brady Boob moves back into the West Wing (assuming she's not dead from the cancer she has), and the RAT-bastards and their RINO cohorts win back a majority in Congress, we can count on seeing a vote in the Senate and House on Rep. McCarthy's very much expanded weapons ban.

Remember, the original AW ban was passed by a single vote in the Senate; and it would not have passed without the sunset provision. A lot of things have changed since 1994, not the least of which is that the USA is at war, and the nation has already seen a major attack on its own soil. No, disarming the citizenry in light of the changing global geo-political climate would not be a good idea.

[45Auto]

If we are going to see further erosion of the RKBA over the next four years, these attacks will come from the Federal Judiciary, not from the Congress.