NRA Fights To Let Suspected Terrorists Have Guns

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.


When reasonable, Constitution-abiding people argue that no one–and especially “suspects” and “persons of interest”–should be imprisoned (and denied legal representation) without being charged with a crime, we are often told that we are “unpatriotic” and “weak.” What will our accusers, then, tell members of the National Rifle Association, who are arguing that suspected terrorists should not be denied firearms?

The NRA is lobbying the Bush administration to drop its support of a bill that would prohibit suspected terrorists from buying firearms. In a letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, NRA executive director Chris Cox said that the proposed bill “would allow arbitrary denial of Second Amendment rights based on mere ‘suspicions’ of a terrorist threat.”

Cox went on to say: “As many of our friends in law enforcement have rightly pointed out, the word ‘suspect’ has no legal meaning, particularly when it comes to denying constitutional liberties.”

Are the NRA members “unpatriotic” and “weak”? Stay tuned…literally.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest