Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 3/29/2006 5:00:00 AM EDT

Congress Told of More ATF Abuses, Reforms Suggested



By Jeff Johnson
CNSNews.com Senior Staff Writer
March 29, 2006

(CNSNews.com) - An Arizona police supervisor Tuesday said the federal agency charged with regulating the nation's firearms industry "absolutely devastated" his career and his personal life, all because he gave a gun to a friend as a gift.

Tucson Police Lt. Michael Lara was among a panel of witnesses who told the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is in need of serious reform.

Lara purchased a handgun from a federally licensed firearms dealer (FFL) in 2003, planning to give it to a friend who was licensed by the Arizona State Police to carry a concealed weapon. One of the forms he completed as part of the purchase asked if he was the "actual buyer" of the firearm. The 28-year law enforcement veteran read the definition of "actual buyer" on the form and answered the question "yes."

During a review of the gun dealer's records, ATF noticed Lara's purchase and began investigating it. Lara was placed on administrative leave with pay, but even after an internal affairs investigation cleared him of any wrongdoing, ATF continued to pursue the case for seven additional months.

"ATF indicted me, claiming that I had not purchased the firearm as a gift, but that I had actually bought it for my friend using her money," Lara recalled.

The crime Lara was accused of is typically referred to as a "straw purchase," when one person buys a firearm on behalf of another person who is, usually, legally disqualified from gun ownership.

Lara said he initially believed that ATF would investigate the charges objectively, determine that he was innocent and move on to other cases. He now complains that ATF never interviewed any of the witnesses to the purchase of the firearm or his presentation of it to his friend as a gift. Lara said he is still baffled by the agency's actions.

"It just makes no sense to me why ATF would try to prosecute someone who had dedicated themselves to serving our community and who clearly did nothing wrong," Lara concluded. "It was obvious that there was no intent of wrongdoing."

After he was processed as a federal prisoner, Lara was released on his own recognizance, but now was unemployed and the recipient of intense media scrutiny, awaiting his day in court.

"I lost over $216,000 in saving and earnings. I had to refinance my home to help pay the bills and the attorney's fees," Lara recalled. "Three months after my arrest, my case went to trial. At the end of the trial, the jury deliberated less than one hour before finding me innocent of the charges."

Lara would wait two more months for his badge to be returned to him. But the ATF prosecution did not end when he resumed his police career.

"On my first day back to work I was given a 40-hour suspension without pay for 'criminal activity' because I had been indicted," Lara continued. "My professional career is shot. It's now been three years after the event and I am still a patrol lieutenant. It was made clear to me when I returned to work that I would never see any advancement."

The ATF representative present at the hearing did not address Lara's case, but Kristen Rand, legislative director for the anti-gun Violence Policy Center, did.

"Mr. [sic] Lara's situation sounds extremely unpleasant," Rand said, "but we should be careful not to just legislate based on one anecdote."

Pro-gun attorney says ATF over-reaching extends to dealers, too

Richard Gardiner, a Virginia attorney and an expert in federal firearms laws who often represents FFLs and gun owners under ATF scrutiny, argued that Lara's case is actually closer to being the rule than the exception.

"The ATF tends to focus or has a significant focus on trivial, immaterial violations which are unrelated to public safety," Gardiner said. "And they impose unreasonable standards of perfection which are simply not humanly achievable."

As an example, Gardiner recalled an ATF review of 880 "Firearms Transaction Record Part I - Over-The-Counter" forms collected by one of his gun dealer clients. Of the 34,320 blocks of information collected on those documents, ATF found 19 clerical errors.

"That is a 99.96 percent perfect completion record," Gardiner noted. "Yet ATF took the position that, because the dealer was aware -- based on the fact that he had completed 99.96 percent of the forms accurately -- that he committed a 'willful violation' with regard to the other four one-hundredths of a percent because he knew what his legal obligations were."

The bureau revoked that gun dealer's license and closed his business.

"Essentially, what the ATF position is, is that human beings can make no mistakes," Gardiner complained. "Indeed, in the oral argument in that case one of the judges asked the U.S. attorney what the ATF's position was and he said, 'zero tolerance.'"

Audrey Stucko, deputy assistant director for ATF's enforcement programs and services, defended the agency's actions.

"Under the Gun Control Act, license revocation may be undertaken for any willful violation of the law or regulations," Stucko said. "The term 'willful' is not defined in the law."

Federal courts have often sided with ATF's interpretation that the term "willful" means only that the gun dealer had prior knowledge of a requirement and, subsequent to gaining that knowledge, violated it, with or without intent. Gardiner told of cases where ATF identified customer responses of "Y" or "N" rather than "yes" or "no" in written responses to questions as "willful violations" on the part of gun dealers under investigation. Other dealers lost their licenses, Gardiner said, because customers had accurately listed their street address, city, state and zip code, but failed to include their county of residence.

"This is clearly not what Congress had in mind when it enacted the 'willful' standard in 1986," Gardiner argued. "A Senate Judiciary Committee report stated that the purpose for adding 'willfully' to the license revocation procedure is, and I quote, 'to insure that licenses are not revoked for inadvertent errors or technical mistakes.' But that is precisely what ATF is doing."

Subcommittee Chairman Howard Coble (R-N.C.) expressed concern about how ATF was spending some of the taxpayer dollars used to fund its work.

"ATF should not waste valuable resources worrying about ministerial errors committed by licensees," Coble said. "Rather, they should focus, it seems to me, on those licensees who willfully violate the laws and regulations and pose a threat of significant harm."

Coble also addressed ATF's pursuit of law-abiding gun buyers like Lt. Michael Lara.

"Prosecutions that are aimed at only padding case statistics - and I'm not suggesting that that's done, but if it is done - not only waste government resources but can also tarnish a law-abiding citizen's reputation as well, and cause individuals severe financial distress," Coble said.

His subcommittee is considering legislation that would give ATF other options besides revoking a gun dealer's license for lesser violations and unintentional errors. The proposal also includes a statutory definition of "willful violations" that would force ATF to prove that a gun dealer knowingly and intentionally defied a law or regulation before sanctions could be imposed.

See Previous Related Articles:....



Shok
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 5:02:36 AM EDT
BATFags
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 5:04:24 AM EDT
Pigs.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 5:24:31 AM EDT
Many of the rules of the ATF are arbitrary and capricious.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 5:32:53 AM EDT
I have no I dea what to say, other than good fucking luck!
They are laughing at the GOVT and anyone who opposes them
Resistance is futile!
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 5:45:28 AM EDT
The ATF representative present at the hearing did not address Lara's case, but Kristen Rand, legislative director for the anti-gun Violence Policy Center, did.

"Mr. [sic] Lara's situation sounds extremely unpleasant," Rand said, "but we should be careful not to just legislate based on one anecdote."


You have got to be fucking kidding me, isn't that all VPC does?
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 5:47:26 AM EDT
You dont need to live in WWII germany to see a brown shirt. Just visit any ATF office
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 5:54:29 AM EDT
Cue all BATF apologists to the front please...
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 5:54:51 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 6:06:38 AM EDT

Originally Posted By shotar:
There is no doubt that this agency needs clear guidance, serious reform and alot of common sense. The key problem is that the agency attracts two kinds of cops. Those who are very pro gun and joined because they have a genuine interest in firearms, and those who are very anti gun and will go out of their way to make life difficult for gun dealers and owners because they see it as their duty to make sure guns are not used in crimes. Which one you get on any particular day is luck of the draw.



These three items are never allowed in a goverment organization. The best we can hope for is the agency is eliminated, and it's duties are absorbed by other agencies.

What will probably happen as usually happens in these instances, their powers, and their budget will be increased.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:12:50 AM EDT
Read UQ for advice on dealing with the ATF.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:14:25 AM EDT
BATF reform!?

We're the one's that usually have to reform.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:27:34 AM EDT
The BATFE has been needing a good slap in the head for decades. Their outright harrassment of people needs to stop.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:36:58 AM EDT

Originally Posted By John_Wayne777:
The BATFE has been needing a good slap in the head for decades. Their outright harrassment of people needs to stop.




+1

And here you go...


Gun owners ATF
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:37:06 AM EDT
I seriously doubt the ATF is driven " because they see it as their duty to make sure guns are not used in crimes." They dont want to prevent crimes, they want ALL possesion of firearms banned for anyone except the Military, Law Enforcement or Government.

They are not our friends, they do not serve the public, they are no more than JBT's. They are bullies who hold the 2A in utter contempt and want to TAKE gun, not prevent crimes being committed with them
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:39:16 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:43:12 AM EDT
Fuck the BATFE and everyone involved with it.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:45:47 AM EDT

Originally Posted By shotar:
Actually, if you talk to the BATFE guys themselves, most could care less one way or the other. They are given the job of enforcing the laws. How strictly they are enforced is usually a management level decision, but the agency itself and its agents generally could care less one way or the other.




A congressional report said that 75% of ATF prosecutions were minor technical violations that bordered on entrapment, or paperwork mistakes. This would not be middle management telling people to do things, but front line agents fishing for cases. It wasn't management going through the FFL records and randomly deciding Lt. Lara had made a straw purchase, but a "BATFE guy".
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:49:23 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/29/2006 7:50:03 AM EDT by lippo]

Originally Posted By shotar:

Originally Posted By NonConformist:
I seriously doubt the ATF is driven " because they see it as their duty to make sure guns are not used in crimes." They dont want to prevent crimes, they want ALL possesion of firearms banned for anyone except the Military, Law Enforcement or Government.

They are not our friends, they do not serve the public, they are no more than JBT's. They are bullies who hold the 2A in utter contempt and want to TAKE gun, not prevent crimes being committed with them




Actually, if you talk to the BATFE guys themselves, most could care less one way or the other. They are given the job of enforcing the laws. How strictly they are enforced is usually a management level decision, but the agency itself and its agents generally could care less one way or the other.




"We were just doing our jobs like they told us too..."




Anybody that enforces BLATANTLY UNCONSTUTIONAL laws is no better than the Nazis.

Apologizing for them doesn't make it any better.

Like I said before...ATF = liars, thiefs, control freaks and criminals
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 7:55:53 AM EDT

Originally Posted By lippo:

Originally Posted By shotar:

Originally Posted By NonConformist:
I seriously doubt the ATF is driven " because they see it as their duty to make sure guns are not used in crimes." They dont want to prevent crimes, they want ALL possesion of firearms banned for anyone except the Military, Law Enforcement or Government.

They are not our friends, they do not serve the public, they are no more than JBT's. They are bullies who hold the 2A in utter contempt and want to TAKE gun, not prevent crimes being committed with them




Actually, if you talk to the BATFE guys themselves, most could care less one way or the other. They are given the job of enforcing the laws. How strictly they are enforced is usually a management level decision, but the agency itself and its agents generally could care less one way or the other.




"We were just doing our jobs like they told us too..."

www.geocities.com/haifai1/convoy.jpg


Anybody that enforces BLATANTLY UNCONSTUTIONAL laws is no better than the Nazis.

Apologizing for them doesn't make it any better.

Like I said before...ATF = liars, thiefs, control freaks and criminals



+1
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:13:53 AM EDT
tag for later
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:17:29 AM EDT

Originally Posted By QShok:
Congress Told of More ATF Abuses, Reforms Suggested



Congress "suggests" reforms..............none will ever really happen!

Congress is simply trying to quiet the peasants.........the OverLord ATF will NEVER be reigned in!
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:27:18 AM EDT

Originally Posted By go3:
Fuck the BATFE and everyone involved with it.





Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:35:01 AM EDT
Those guys need a major overhaul. MAJOR.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 8:35:33 AM EDT
How can our tax money support an organization such as the ATF? We have dumped millions, more likely billions of dollars into them, and they still fail to supply and stand stand behind a solid ruling on many key issues for the average firearm owner.

The fact that ten people can request information and get ten extremely different answers (which may have extreme consequences) says volumes itself. The whole organization is a cluster fuck of ignorance and general bias against The Second Amendment and the American firearm owner.

Luckily, they have been continuously digging themselves in a hole as of late. The ATF is the type of organization that won't last due to their own faults. I'd be willing to bet the ATF will receive a make over in the next ten years. God knows they need it.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:09:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Bama-Shooter:
Those guys need a major overhaul. MAJOR.



As in..........let the ATF fight their way out of a burning "compound" !!!!!!
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:15:37 AM EDT
Wonder why the FCC never busts down doors for people saying "fuck" on the radio? Hell, you have a mouth and a dirty mind, sounds like "constructive intent" to cuss on the radio to me!

But we have free speech!


<sigh>
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:31:59 AM EDT

Originally Posted By lippo:

Anybody that enforces BLATANTLY UNCONSTUTIONAL laws is no better than the Nazis.




That includes every gun law that came after the Second Amendment came into being.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:44:09 AM EDT

Originally Posted By JIMBEAM:
The ATF representative present at the hearing did not address Lara's case, but Kristen Rand, legislative director for the anti-gun Violence Policy Center, did.

"Mr. [sic] Lara's situation sounds extremely unpleasant," Rand said, "but we should be careful not to just legislate based on one anecdote."


You have got to be fucking kidding me, isn't that all VPC does?

What the hell is anyone representing the VPC doing at this hearing?
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:49:57 AM EDT

"Essentially, what the ATF position is, is that human beings can make no mistakes," Gardiner complained. "Indeed, in the oral argument in that case one of the judges asked the U.S. attorney what the ATF's position was and he said, 'zero tolerance.'"


Very hypocritical considering how badly they have managed the NFA registry
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 10:19:19 AM EDT
In the Federal LEO community, BATFE agents are the bottom of the barrel -- their agents could not make the cut to get in the FBI, USSS, etc. The tales of excesses I read confirm that belief.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 10:27:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jkstexas2001:
In the Federal LEO community, BATFE agents are the bottom of the barrel -- their agents could not make the cut to get in the FBI, USSS, etc. The tales of excesses I read confirm that belief.

Thus the label 'F-troop'. IIRC, the ATF only requires a 60% on the federal LEO exam, everyone else requires at least 70%.

Kharn
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 10:29:51 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/29/2006 10:34:08 AM EDT by Leisure_Shoot]

Originally Posted By shotar:
Actually, if you talk to the BATFE guys themselves, most could care less one way or the other. They are given the job of enforcing the laws. How strictly they are enforced is usually a management level decision, but the agency itself and its agents generally could care less one way or the other.


Re-read the following part, shotar.
It seems to contradict your statement.


Pro-gun attorney says ATF over-reaching extends to dealers, too

Richard Gardiner, a Virginia attorney and an expert in federal firearms laws who often represents FFLs and gun owners under ATF scrutiny, argued that Lara's case is actually closer to being the rule than the exception.

"The ATF tends to focus or has a significant focus on trivial, immaterial violations which are unrelated to public safety," Gardiner said. "And they impose unreasonable standards of perfection which are simply not humanly achievable."

As an example, Gardiner recalled an ATF review of 880 "Firearms Transaction Record Part I - Over-The-Counter" forms collected by one of his gun dealer clients. Of the 34,320 blocks of information collected on those documents, ATF found 19 clerical errors.

"That is a 99.96 percent perfect completion record," Gardiner noted. "Yet ATF took the position that, because the dealer was aware -- based on the fact that he had completed 99.96 percent of the forms accurately -- that he committed a 'willful violation' with regard to the other four one-hundredths of a percent because he knew what his legal obligations were."

The bureau revoked that gun dealer's license and closed his business.


I know that we seem to see conspiracy everywhere when it comes to Gov;'t and firearms, but damn... it's hard not to.

The only thing that gives me hope, is the wave of Castle Doctrin-ology and CCW bills sweeping the nation's state legislatures right now.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 10:33:47 AM EDT

Originally Posted By GoGop:

Originally Posted By lippo:

Anybody that enforces BLATANTLY UNCONSTUTIONAL laws is no better than the Nazis.




That includes every gun law that came after the Second Amendment came into being.



I'm not sure I agree 100%. Do biological weapons count as "arms"?
Is it reasonable for the governmet to restrict accest to calibers over .50?
IF they imposed restrictions on caliber greater than .50, but left everything smaller unrestricted, I would think it would be hard to say the gov't is infringing on the "right".

And is it all a moot point anyhow? When lasers/phasers, whatever, become the weapon of choice, will the government decide they are not "arms", so they can be infringed completely?
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 11:05:58 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jkstexas2001:
In the Federal LEO community, BATFE agents are the bottom of the barrel -- their agents could not make the cut to get in the FBI,..........



Maybe not........but when the ATF screwed up at Waco the FBI and all the other Feds did EVERYTHING in their power to come to their rescue.

The ATF may be "bottom of the LEO barrel" but they still rank better than any peasant on the FedGov scale!
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 11:13:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/29/2006 11:14:08 AM EDT by The_Gooch]

Originally Posted By Leisure_Shoot:

Originally Posted By GoGop:

Originally Posted By lippo:

Anybody that enforces BLATANTLY UNCONSTUTIONAL laws is no better than the Nazis.




That includes every gun law that came after the Second Amendment came into being.



I'm not sure I agree 100%. Do biological weapons count as "arms"?
Is it reasonable for the governmet to restrict accest to calibers over .50?
IF they imposed restrictions on caliber greater than .50, but left everything smaller unrestricted, I would think it would be hard to say the gov't is infringing on the "right".

And is it all a moot point anyhow? When lasers/phasers, whatever, become the weapon of choice, will the government decide they are not "arms", so they can be infringed completely?



Why .50? Why not .4999999 or .50000001? A caliber criteria will always be arbitrary and unjust.

I think it is cut and dry what the 2A allows us to own. As long as a person can 'bear' the arm, it is our right to own it. That would include all small-arms and some medium and heavy weapons that are man-portable. Once something is no longer operable by one or two people, but crew-served/towed or requires a fixed mounting; it no longer falls under the 2A.

Things like light machine guns, medium/GPMG's and heavy, but man portable MG's are our right to own. I even feel things like RPG's, light mortars, and small caliber recoil-less rifles fall under the 2A. A Flame-thrower is really not a 'fire'arm, and biological/chemical weapons are really not 'arms' in the sense of the 2A as they are usually delivered in the form of large rockets/missles or bombs. It is debatable if a handgrenade falls under the 2A, as it is an explosive device and not an 'arm'.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 11:16:51 AM EDT
Tagged. This one's gonna go for a while.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 11:41:28 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/29/2006 11:44:35 AM EDT by markmars]

Originally Posted By NonConformist:
I seriously doubt the ATF is driven " because they see it as their duty to make sure guns are not used in crimes." They dont want to prevent crimes, they want ALL possesion of firearms banned for anyone except the Military, Law Enforcement or Government.

They are not our friends, they do not serve the public, they are no more than JBT's. They are bullies who hold the 2A in utter contempt and want to TAKE gun, not prevent crimes being committed with them



Apparently the ATF doesn’t want the police to be able to own firearms; this guy was a police officer! His life is ruined, he’s in debit, and has no career. How long will it be before the ATF knocks on some ones door and charges then with machinegun charges because they have an AR 15, a drill, and the knowledge to drill a hole? No auto sear, nothing, and your still going to court. I’ve never heard of the ATF saying "sorry we screw your life up".
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 2:17:07 PM EDT
Why did they start the investigation to begin with? It says they were looking through records, but what exactly would have caused them to home in on this one individual?
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 2:28:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By shotar:
There is no doubt that this agency needs clear guidance, serious reform and alot of common sense. The key problem is that the agency attracts two kinds of cops. Those who are very pro gun and joined because they have a genuine interest in firearms, and those who are very anti gun and will go out of their way to make life difficult for gun dealers and owners because they see it as their duty to make sure guns are not used in crimes. Which one you get on any particular day is luck of the draw.





Originally Posted By shotar:

Actually, if you talk to the BATFE guys themselves, most could care less one way or the other. They are given the job of enforcing the laws. How strictly they are enforced is usually a management level decision, but the agency itself and its agents generally could care less one way or the other.



That's a little bit of double talk there.



Link Posted: 3/29/2006 2:35:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ShadowCompany:
Why did they start the investigation to begin with? It says they were looking through records, but what exactly would have caused them to home in on this one individual?



Something stupid in the paperwork.

At one FFL I used to work at, the agents picked up on the same shit mentioned in the article during an audit. 'Y' or 'N' instead of 'Yes' and 'No.' The fact that someone forgot to write their county in the address box on the old 4473. Simple clerical errors that anyone on Firday afternoon after a 60 hour week can make. Simple oversights you can make when checking over your 50th form for the day.

They went through five years of 4473s while they were there, and when all was said and done, out of the several thousand of forms they pawed through, the incidents they brought to our attention were still well within only one percent. The place wasn't shut down, but was threatened with it, etc., et al.

Like the example in the article, this particular FFL had a better than 99 percent accuracy rating.

I jump on the bandwagon with whomever cried 'hypocrisy' a few posts up when they mentioned the NFA Registry.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 2:37:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mattimeo:

Originally Posted By ShadowCompany:
Why did they start the investigation to begin with? It says they were looking through records, but what exactly would have caused them to home in on this one individual?



Something stupid in the paperwork.

At one FFL I used to work at, the agents picked up on the same shit mentioned in the article during an audit. 'Y' or 'N' instead of 'Yes' and 'No.' The fact that someone forgot to write their county in the address box on the old 4473. Simple clerical errors that anyone on Firday afternoon after a 60 hour week can make. Simple oversights you can make when checking over your 50th form for the day.

They went through five years of 4473s while they were there, and when all was said and done, out of the several thousand of forms they pawed through, the incidents they brought to our attention were still well within only one percent. The place wasn't shut down, but was threatened with it, etc., et al.

Like the example in the article, this particular FFL had a better than 99 percent accuracy rating.

I jump on the bandwagon with whomever cried 'hypocrisy' a few posts up when they mentioned the NFA Registry.



Well now I know why FFL's are so anal about that paperwork.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 2:42:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By krpind:

Originally Posted By mattimeo:
SNIP



Well now I know why FFL's are so anal about that paperwork.



Yep. Because the dipshit bean-counters that ATF sends out to do these audits are dumbasses. A lot of the ones that i've seen and talked to aren't even gun people. The ones we dealt with sure weren't. We had to hold their hands through the whole thing, and prove that the inventory was what it was. Most people on this board can be shown an 870, and tell what it is without needing the verify the make and model. You had to physically point out where 'Remington 870' was engraved on the receiver to these people, much less the serial number. They sat at a table with the bound book in front of them, while we all played 'servant to the master' and had to bring every damned thing to them, and show them how to identify it.

I was not impressed.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 2:52:31 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mattimeo:

Originally Posted By krpind:

Originally Posted By mattimeo:
SNIP



Well now I know why FFL's are so anal about that paperwork.



Yep. Because the dipshit bean-counters that ATF sends out to do these audits are dumbasses. A lot of the ones that i've seen and talked to aren't even gun people. The ones we dealt with sure weren't. We had to hold their hands through the whole thing, and prove that the inventory was what it was. Most people on this board can be shown an 870, and tell what it is without needing the verify the make and model. You had to physically point out where 'Remington 870' was engraved on the receiver to these people, much less the serial number. They sat at a table with the bound book in front of them, while we all played 'servant to the master' and had to bring every damned thing to them, and show them how to identify it.

I was not impressed.



Dang.

One would think a BATFE firearms inspector was a pro or anti gun person.

Link Posted: 3/29/2006 3:23:39 PM EDT

Originally Posted By The_Gooch:

Originally Posted By Leisure_Shoot:

Originally Posted By GoGop:

Originally Posted By lippo:

Anybody that enforces BLATANTLY UNCONSTUTIONAL laws is no better than the Nazis.




That includes every gun law that came after the Second Amendment came into being.



I'm not sure I agree 100%. Do biological weapons count as "arms"?
Is it reasonable for the governmet to restrict accest to calibers over .50?
IF they imposed restrictions on caliber greater than .50, but left everything smaller unrestricted, I would think it would be hard to say the gov't is infringing on the "right".

And is it all a moot point anyhow? When lasers/phasers, whatever, become the weapon of choice, will the government decide they are not "arms", so they can be infringed completely?



Why .50? Why not .4999999 or .50000001? A caliber criteria will always be arbitrary and unjust.

I think it is cut and dry what the 2A allows us to own. As long as a person can 'bear' the arm, it is our right to own it. That would include all small-arms and some medium and heavy weapons that are man-portable. Once something is no longer operable by one or two people, but crew-served/towed or requires a fixed mounting; it no longer falls under the 2A.

Things like light machine guns, medium/GPMG's and heavy, but man portable MG's are our right to own. I even feel things like RPG's, light mortars, and small caliber recoil-less rifles fall under the 2A. A Flame-thrower is really not a 'fire'arm, and biological/chemical weapons are really not 'arms' in the sense of the 2A as they are usually delivered in the form of large rockets/missles or bombs. It is debatable if a handgrenade falls under the 2A, as it is an explosive device and not an 'arm'.



1) The second amendment says arms, not firearms. Do you know what arms are? Weapons. Before guns came out, swords, spears, crossbows, bows, knives, maces, clubs, basically every fricking weapon is an arm. So your arbitrary definition of arms as only including firearms is pretty frickin' retarded.


2) A flamethrower definitely counts as an arm. It's a weapon. Actually, it only counts as a weapon in California; in every other state they're unrestricted (though the ignitors for certain models are counted as destructive devices).

3) Bear does not mean "I can carry this in my arms" either. It means "possess", "use", etc. Dear gosh, buy a fucking dictionary. Why can I use an M-60, a grenade launcher, or USAS-12, but I can't use anything that comes with a tripod or wheels attached? What is the reasoning behind this? Why arbitrarily restrict what we can use? Civilians were allowed to own cannons and were in fact GIVEN cannons by the very men who signed the second amendment into existence. I'm pretty sure cannons count as heavy weapons that require a crew to operate.

4) A hand grenade is an arm. It's a weapon, numbnuts. The ATF counts gun powder as an explosive, so does that fall under the second amendment or should we not include it since it's an explosive and not an arm?

5) It doesn't matter what the delivery system is, if it's a weapon it falls under the second amendment. "Oh, chemical/biological weapons don't count because they're usually delivered on target as bombs or rockets". Right after you said RPG's and mortars are included. Congratulations, you win the "I'm A Fucking Moron" award for the day.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 3:37:25 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:

Originally Posted By mattimeo:

Originally Posted By krpind:

Originally Posted By mattimeo:
SNIP



Well now I know why FFL's are so anal about that paperwork.



Yep. Because the dipshit bean-counters that ATF sends out to do these audits are dumbasses. A lot of the ones that i've seen and talked to aren't even gun people. The ones we dealt with sure weren't. We had to hold their hands through the whole thing, and prove that the inventory was what it was. Most people on this board can be shown an 870, and tell what it is without needing the verify the make and model. You had to physically point out where 'Remington 870' was engraved on the receiver to these people, much less the serial number. They sat at a table with the bound book in front of them, while we all played 'servant to the master' and had to bring every damned thing to them, and show them how to identify it.

I was not impressed.



Dang.

One would think a BATFE firearms inspector was a pro or anti gun person.




You'd think it would be one side of the fence or the other, wouldn't you? And a number of them are.

This was good and bad, mind you. Good, because these folks had no real agenda. They were just there, doing a job. No (visible) anti-gun bias.

Bad, because they damned sure were clueless. And that bothered me. You should at least know the damned industry and its product if you're going to police it.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 3:40:02 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Swindle1984:
SNIP totally on-point list for space.

Congratulations, you win the "I'm A Fucking Moron" award for the day.




Holy shit, dude.

That's...Pretty damned funny.

Top Top