Bill would forbid illegals to bear arms

Status
Not open for further replies.

DorGunR

Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2003
Messages
646
Location
Maryland
Bill would forbid illegals to bear arms

By Christina Bellantoni
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

A Virginia lawmaker is drafting a bill that would prohibit illegal immigrants from carrying a gun, a move that toughens a law that he says allows potential terrorists and drug dealers to roam free.
Delegate Thomas C. Wright Jr., Victoria Republican, said current law allows illegal aliens to carry any guns except assault weapons. He said his bill will give police new authority when trying to crack down on terrorism and drug trafficking.
"If it's only used one time, it's worthwhile," Mr. Wright said.
"I'm not approaching this from a gun-control standpoint. If someone is in this country illegally, there is no basis for granting them rights to a firearm," said Mr. Wright, who describes himself as a "strong Second Amendment supporter."
The number of illegal immigrants trying to buy guns has steadily increased over the past 14 years, according to Virginia State Police Lt. Pete Fagan.
Between 1989 and 1999, there were 54 attempts by illegal immigrants to buy guns, Lt. Fagan said. Between 1999 and last year, there were 157 attempts, he said.
State police do not track how many guns are discovered during traffic stops, said Lt. Gary Payne, a state police spokesman.
Federal law already makes it illegal for an illegal alien to carry a gun, but it's difficult to convict anyone of the offense in a timely manner. A state law like the one Mr. Wright is proposing would help police act quickly against offenders, Lt. Fagan said.
Mr. Wright will present his bill in the upcoming session, which starts Jan. 14. He said he doesn't see how any of his fellow lawmakers could "logically" disagree with the proposal.
Lt. Payne said his department would likely take a stance on Mr. Wright's bill before lawmakers vote on it.
Gun control has long been a hot topic in Virginia.
Last year, a Senate panel rejected a bill that would have imposed tighter controls over gun-show sales by subjecting more buyers to criminal-background checks.
A bill to ban all non-police weapons in the state Capitol and General Assembly office building in Richmond also was rejected.
In 2002, the General Assembly voted to bar localities from banning guns in public facilities. The law was drafted to give the state uniform gun laws, and forbids city managers and local elected bodies from imposing a ban through written regulations or ordinances.
 
How do you enforce this without "papers, please"?

I suspect this isn't the kind of law that is actively enforced i.e. perps wouldn't be investigated and tracked down just for this. Since the person is an illegal alien anyway, I think this charge would just be stacked on top of whatever else. Kind of like seat belt laws are in some states; they won't pull you over for it, but if they catch you for something else and notice that you're not buckled in, they add it to the ticket.
 
If someone is in this country illegally, there is no basis for granting them rights to a firearm," said Mr. Wright, who describes himself as a "strong Second Amendment supporter."
Therein lies the folly. :banghead:
 
I believe Federal law already states that you must be either a citizen or have a certain immigration status (permanet resident, green card, etc?) before you can obtain a firearm.

Kharn
 
That's what we need, a new law!! That'll make us all safer and happier too!

Yeah, like we need another @$$hole-- Oh, wait, we don't need that either. We've got legislators instead.
 
Well, if the state "granted" the right to bear arms... Some 2nd Amendment supporter!
Yes, he is certainly is. He just recognizes that the Constitution is a legal document, not a discourse on political philosophy and his statement is therefore completely correct.
 
While this rocket scientist is on a roll, why doesn't he just make it illegal to COMMIT A CRIME? As a Canadian, I have to have an ATF Form 6 to shoot at matches in the US (or even POSSESS my own firearms there), why does this clown think illegal aliens are exempt from this?

Oops, Tallpine beat me to it :)
 
"If it's only used one time, it's worthwhile," Mr. Wright said.

This is earily familier.

Federal law already makes it illegal for an illegal alien to carry a gun, but it's difficult to convict anyone of the offense in a timely manner. A state law like the one Mr. Wright is proposing would help police act quickly against offenders, Lt. Fagan said.

YES YES! we need another law NOW because the current (identical) law we have just doesnt seem to be working! People are still breaking it!
 
OK, I think I have a plan that beats all the ideas suggested so far :neener: First, we should make it illegal to enter the country illegally and make it illegal to be an illegal "immigrant." Then, when they find someone who illegally entered the country illegally, the law should allow the government to deport them to wherever they illegally entered the country from (illegally).:p :D
 
He just recognizes that the Constitution is a legal document, not a discourse on political philosophy and his statement is therefore completely correct.
rock_jock :)

Yes, the Constitution is a legal document and not a discourse. That does not change the fact that he is wrong, although I suspect it's a matter of ignorance rather than nefarious intent.

His mischaracterization of the legal document is supported by two facts:

1) The founders did not intend for the BoR to bestow special status (grant rights) to certain behaviors. Rather they explicitly said the BoR was designed to recognize and protect pre-existing rights. That is its purpose as a legal document. The fact that Americans regularly make the mistake of using the word grant when discussing these rights does not change this fact.

2) In relation to aliens, legal precedent supports this idea -- non-citizens have the same rights as citizens. The reason: rights are inherent, not simply "granted" to citizens. OTOH, aliens' RKBA was a victim of the 20th century. But the fact the RKBA is not regularly recognized in this way doesn't change this fact. What's new about the RKBA not being fully protected?
 
Why prohibit illegals from bearing arms, just because they -

*Break Federal law by entering the country illegally . . .
*Break Federal law by working illegally . . .
*Break Federal law by not filing 1040 forms or paying Social Security . . .
*Break Federal law by using false documents . . .
*Break State law by driving without a license . . .
*etc etc etc.

So why restrict them as if they were CRIMINALS? :rolleyes:

Seriously, many jurisdictions add "extra" punishment on a bad guy who commits a crime while he has a gun, even if the gun isn't used in a crime. So it would seem to me that there is NO WAY an illegal alien can possess a gun WITHOUT being in the process of committing a crime, since his mere PRESENCE here violates the law.
 
Simple

Once you identify someone as an ILLEGAL alien.

Take their weapons (give them to me)

Send them HOME
 
So why restrict them as if they were CRIMINALS? :rolleyes:
You have a valid point, and I never meant to suggest that criminals (alien or not) should get the same protection of their rights as law abiding folk. My post was meant only to address the concept of "granting" vs. "protecting" rights.

Aliens do have the same rights as U.S. citizens; however, when they break U.S. laws, they can and should be subject to the same curtailing of their rights as would U.S. citizens. Right or wrong, registered immigration is current U.S. law, and by avoiding that process, a person knowingly becomes a criminal.
 
IIRC, the GCA of 1968 already prohibits illegal aliens from having guns. So this guy is basically blowing a bunch of smoke so he can look good for whatever group he's trying to impress.
 
nico.

"OK, I think I have a plan that beats all the ideas suggested so far First, we should make it illegal to enter the country illegally and make it illegal to be an illegal "immigrant." Then, when they find someone who illegally entered the country illegally, the law should allow the government to deport them to wherever they illegally entered the country from (illegally)."

Wouldn't work because:

You would have to first determine what the definition of "illegal" really is. This requires a special committee be put into place at tax payer expense. Plus you must have a good representation of all views on this subject in said committee which results in nothing getting done in the first place.

After the committee is put into place and starts it's deliberation on the definition of a word, you have to research the potential problems with racial profiling. Once you've established that it's illegal to deport illegal aliens on the basis that they are not legal citizens of the Unites States of America and determined that they are definitively of another nationality you have to then take it to the courts where you will be labeled a racist and LULAC and the NAALCP will come down on you using money donated to their cause by other illegal aliens in this country illegally.

Once the racial special intrest groups get into the act you will be sued on the basis that you are a racist to the point that you will end up being sued into oblivion and end up homeless before it's all done. The upside to this is that you will then be elligible for all kinds of government programs and you can live in squaller like the illegal aliens that you were trying to deport due to their illegal status.

Now don't you feel ashamed of yourself for even thinking what you were thinking? :D

Take care,

DRC
 
It already is illegal under 18USC922(g)(5), Prohibited possessors, with enhancements for so called "assault weapons". Must be quite a conundrum for the anti's who all love all the "undocumented workers"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top