Posted on 01/18/2005 12:33:16 PM PST by 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.
---
I understand the premise, but it would be nice if the Bush administration would grow a pair and stand up for what is right instead of making us come in through the back door.
"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"
No we're not. The AWB is dead. Tom DeLay has promised to keep it dead.
That's right -- we need to seize the momentum, not back-pedal and lose ground.
The debate has turned our way: we have passed CCW all over the place, we have already defeated this stupid AWB, and now we have real discussions about the most important one of all, repealing wholesale acts such as the GCA, the NFA, and the FFA. Now is not the time to give a single foot to the gungrabbers -- now is the time to push forward.
I heard Mort Kondracke on Fox even admit to the "symbolic" meaning of the AWB, and the effort of going after the cosmetics of these weapons as only a stepping stone for further restrictions. Truly pathetic.
I agree the same folks were surprised when Bush stated that he'd sign CFR if it reached his desk--it did and he did. Next up, amnesty...
"You fellas are whistling in the dark.
Congress is chomping at the bit, just waiting for the next 'assault weapons' incident to make them look like heros to the Brady Bun"
And Kerry was supposed to be worse? How?
"Next up, amnesty...
"
Yup. Then the AWB. And then...who knows?
With respect to #21, it seems to me that AWB, CFR, and amnesty can only weaken the Constitution and thereby weaken the USA and all of its people, well, except for the ruling elite. Isn't that always the case?
There is wisdom in your words.
They should be worried. That ensures they won't harass people who aren't otherwise dangerous. Isn't that the point of the second amendment?
The AWB is gone. Dead. Gonzales is not a congressman, and has no power to resurrect it.
His own personal opinion, as Attorney General, is of no consequence.
You fellas are whistling in the dark.
Congress is chomping at the bit, just waiting for the next 'assault weapons' incident to make them look like hero's to the Brady Bunch.
No we're not. The AWB is dead. Tom DeLay has promised to keep it dead.
You think Tom Delay controls Congress?
Keep whistling, -- & dreaming.
Now I get.
He is defusing the entire issue exactly like Dubya did.
It is Congress's job to keep an AWB renewal from hitting the President's desk.
This treatment of the issue makes it impossible for the MSM to demagague Gonzales.
Politically speaking, this was a masterstroke.
You do realize that, once a law gets passed, it is essentially impossible to repeal it.
List the laws that were repealed last session.
We succeeded in effectively repealing the AWB, which in itself is astonishing.
Couple that with the fact that the Republican Revolution of 1994 was a direct result of AWB passage, and I don't see the AWB coming back as long as Bush is in office.
After that, who knows what President Hitlery will do? </sarcasm>
Do I dare say it?
Between our wide open borders, this massive government spending, bad trade policies, and now this, I can only say I am glad this president wont be running again.
Sheesh!
Surely you know that.
You're bordering on paranoia.
Were he to say that he was opposed to the ban, it would be something the dems would use against him, possibly deny him confirmation.
Albert may well support the ban, but based only on this event, it would be hard to say for sure.
On the other hand, if he has past history or paper trail indicating support for the ban, you would say that the statement to the senators is confirmation.
Have you ever been in a job interview and told the man what he wanted to hear?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.