Extremists, part II

I wrote about the recently released Department of Homeland Defense report on right wing extremists in the United States in this blog entry below, and it seems I'm not the only one out there who thinks that it's absolutely ridiculous for them to home in on returning veterans as a source for right wing terrorism in the country.

Representative Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, apparently feels the same way about it as do I. He sent Homeland Defense Secretary Janet Napolitano a letter, telling her he was "dumbfounded" this report had been issued.

This report appears to raise significant issues involving the privacy and civil liberties of many Americans -- including war veterans," Mr. Thompson said in the letter sent Tuesday. "As I am certain you agree, freedom of association and freedom of speech are guaranteed to all Americans -- whether a person's beliefs, whatever their political orientation, are 'extremist' or not," Mr. Thompson said. The report "blurred the line," and Mr. Thompson said he is "disappointed and surprised that the department would allow this report to be disseminated" to law enforcement officials nationwide.

The Thomas Moore Law Center, a public interest law firm in Michigan, didn't take any more kindly to the report than Representative Thompson and filed a federal lawsuit against Janet Napolitano, on the grounds that her policy "violates the civil liberties of combat veterans as well as American citizens by targeting them for disfavored treatment on account of the political beliefs." You can read their full complaint here.

Speaking of right wing extremists, one group that is particularly targeted as being "right wing extremists" are folks who feel that we don't need stricter gun laws and oppose bringing back the assault-weapons ban. Folks like me. Folks who are rightly paranoid because they are introducing legislation that will restrict firearms, the right to own them, and the right to carry them.

They may not bring back the assault-weapons ban, now that they've tested the waters a couple of times to see what public reaction will be, but they likely will be introducing other legislation that will make any firearms bans, once they comes, easy to implement and enforce. Legislation such as California's Senate Bill SB 776, which would require all magazines that can hold more than ten rounds to be registered in the State of California. Possession of an unregistered magazine could then be considered a crime, punishable with up to a year in jail. Also in California, SB585 seeks to essentially ban all gun shows. And Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi would like to register all firearms.

Where are we going? And why am I in a hand basket?