M14 Forum banner
1 - 20 of 150 Posts

·
Inquisitor
Joined
·
11,356 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
WASHINGTON (AP) — In an effort to stem the illicit flow of weapons into Mexico, the Justice Department announced Monday that all gun shops in four Southwest border states will be required to alert the federal government to frequent buyers of high-powered rifles.

The new policy comes amid criticism of a flawed federal probe aimed at dismantling large-scale arms trafficking networks along the Arizona border with Mexico.

In the probe, called Operation Fast and Furious, several agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives say they were inexplicably ordered by superiors to stop tracking some small-time "straw" buyers who purchased large numbers of weapons apparently destined for drug cartels.

Twenty low-level gun buyers have been charged in the operation. In December, two assault rifles that one of the now-indicted small-time buyers under scrutiny in Fast and Furious had purchased from a gun shop in Glendale, Ariz., turned up at the scene of a shootout that killed Brian Terry, an agent of U.S. Customs and Border Protection. In recent congressional testimony, ATF agent John Dodson estimated that 1,800 guns in Fast and Furious were unaccounted for and that about two-thirds are probably in Mexico.

Under the new policy, federal firearms licensees in Texas, California, Arizona and New Mexico must report purchases of two or more of some types of rifles by the same person in a five-day span. The requirement applies to purchases of semi-automatic rifles that have detachable magazines and a caliber of greater than .22.

ATF estimates it will generate 18,000 reports a year.

Deputy Attorney General James Cole said the new reporting measure will improve the ATF's ability to disrupt illegal weapons trafficking networks that funnel firearms to criminal organizations

Rep. Elijah Cummings, the ranking Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, said the new policy "is exactly what ATF agents on the ground told Congress — that reporting multiple sales of military-grade assault weapons is a crucial tool to identify and disrupt Mexican drug cartels engaged in gun trafficking."

One of the critics of Operation Fast and Furious called the new policy "the height of hypocrisy." The Obama administration is restricting the gun rights of border state citizens, "when the administration knowingly and intentionally allowed guns to be trafficked into Mexico," said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas.

"Limiting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens is not going to solve the problem," Smith said.

Mexico's federal security spokesman, Alejandro Poire, praised Obama's action.

ATF estimates the requirement will cover nearly 8,500 gun store operators in the four states, though less than 30 percent of those operators are expected to have multiple sales to report.

ATF will retain the information and if no investigative leads have been realized after two years, it will be purged.

Holders of federal firearms licenses already report multiple sales of handguns. The results go to the National Tracing Center, and ATF says it has led to successful prosecutions for firearms trafficking.
http://news.yahoo.com/atf-require-gun-buyer-information-border-213420855.html

NRA Statement on Obama Administration Decision to Require Rifle Sales Reporting


Monday, July 11, 2011


$40 billion transnational criminal enterprises don't fill out paperwork and are not deterred by paperwork violations. This is a blatant effort by the Obama administration and ATF to divert focus of Congress and the general public from their gross incompetence in the Fast and Furious scandal. This scheme will unjustly burden law-abiding retailers in border states. It will not affect drug cartels and and it won't prevent violence along our borders. ATF and the Administration lacks the statutory authority to do this and the NRA will file suit as soon as ATF sends the first demand letters.
-Chris W. Cox, executive director, NRA-ILA
http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/NewsReleases.aspx?ID=15313
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,385 Posts
Just another case of the government cutting down the tree because of one bad apple.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
OK, I'll bite. What is wrong with this?

It doesn't PREVENT people from buying the guns.. it isn't an infringement of the 2nd amendment. It just reports the situation to the ATF. If I buy 3 M1As in a 5 day period, the ATF gets alerted. So what? They aren't going to come to my house for a single such report; and even if they did - I show them the rifles. They say "sorry for the inconvenience" and that is that.

The worst case I could see for this, for legitimate owners, is if I bought those 3 M1As as gifts, and gave them away. That might pose some issues.. which can be easily avoided by staggering my purchases .. which, frankly, most folks would do that for the money involved anyhow. A slight inconvenience to an EXCEPTIONAL case citizen, and a major inconvenience to criminal networks.

I get that it is a hassle. So is the 20 minute background check, or filling out the handgun paperwork that most states require... but really, how many legit owners is this going to be a minor inconvenience for?

I really fail to see the problem, in principle. Now, if NRA is right and there is no authority to do this (which I find unlikely, since multiple handgun purchases are already reported) then that is a horse of a different color.
 

·
Inquisitor
Joined
·
11,356 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 · (Edited)
( Federal Law 18 U.S.C. 926 (2) (a)) being:

No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary's authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.
mgraffam, registration is illegal, period. And why should law abiding citizens get scrutinized when it's the ATF giving the cartels the guns?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
OK, I'll bite. What is wrong with this?

It doesn't PREVENT people from buying the guns.. it isn't an infringement of the 2nd amendment. It just reports the situation to the ATF. If I buy 3 M1As in a 5 day period, the ATF gets alerted. So what? They aren't going to come to my house for a single such report; and even if they did - I show them the rifles. They say "sorry for the inconvenience" and that is that.

The worst case I could see for this, for legitimate owners, is if I bought those 3 M1As as gifts, and gave them away. That might pose some issues.. which can be easily avoided by staggering my purchases .. which, frankly, most folks would do that for the money involved anyhow. A slight inconvenience to an EXCEPTIONAL case citizen, and a major inconvenience to criminal networks.

I get that it is a hassle. So is the 20 minute background check, or filling out the handgun paperwork that most states require... but really, how many legit owners is this going to inconvenience?

I really fail to see the problem.
u may feel fine now, but when an ATF swat team comes knocking at ur door cus u bought 3 ARs last month, ur opinion will change.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,072 Posts
I've been watching this in the Media and trying to read all sources. And as a concerned citizen, here's my take on it.

ATF's Operation Fast and Furious, on it's surface, looks exactly like an attempt by the Obama Administration to "cook the books" and deliberately CREATE a supply of weapons "To Be FOUND" in order to justify Draconian new Firearms Laws and restrictions on dealers. ATF told the Dealers to "go ahead and complete the sale" even when the Dealers knew something was wrong. Your government is trying to create a case where there is not actually sufficent need to do anything - without a secret Federal "Boost".

The proof of the dishonor here is that the Head of the ATF had to resign, and his assistant, when offered Department of Justice lawyers to help him "sort through things" told DOJ (Erik Holder) "NO THANKS" and got his own civilian attorney to represent him. He knew he would be sacrificed and thrown under the bus by the Administration, otherwise. Four BATF Agents have also bravely come forth and given testimony about the appalling behavior of the higher ups in BATF and DOJ.

That is what is wrong here - an illegal governenment sponsored conspiracy to create a climate for UnConstitutional Legislation. It has already gotten two US Federal Agents and 111 Mexican Law Enforcement people KILLED, by the way. Erik Holder and "Big Sis" should be removed from office, ASAP for this one.

The Cartels have their own globe trotting airlines - with DC-10s and 727s, for gosh sakes. They don't want semiauto AKs at $450 a pop when they can get full auto AKs on the world market for $55 each. And, about those RPGs and Mortars the Cartel has - did they buy Those at WalMart, too?? The small fry crooks, and the beseiged law abiding people of Mexico - they are the market for anything that can be gotten across the border.

Simple CLOSE THE BORDER - end of problems - no need to bother US citizens at all. With Predator drones, Infrared and night vision, and seismic sensors the only things that get accross our Borders are those things that are deliberately allowed across. Think about that, for a while. CC
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
mgraffam, registration is illegal, period. And why should law abiding citizens get scrutinized when it's the ATF giving the cartels the guns?
First of all, this isn't registration.

Second of all, as sickening as the current fiasco with ATF knowingly allowing straw purchases is, it is foolish to believe that those straw purchasers - and others like them - didn't purchase guns which ATF didnt know about or track. If these criminals were able to get guns so easily elsewhere with their DC10s and what not, there would be no straw purchasers looking to make buys for ATF to illegally approve of in the first place.

That means that there ARE guns going over the border to criminals, and other domestic criminals who are getting them too. Would very well financed cartels prefer to get guns elsewhere, for less money? Of course.. and they clearly do.

But smaller gangs don't have that option. It amuses me that people seem to think that every criminal who wants a gun must be a part of some vast underworld enterprise. Most criminals, in fact, are not a part of an enterprise like that. Most criminals operate by themselves, maybe with a partner or two. And there are loads and loads of such people. I'd wager that there are more small time criminals than there are members of widespread organized crime.

To me, this sort of thing is more like how the IRS takes a look at finances and property to determine if you are "living above your means" -- it is an indicator for someone who may be engaged in tax evasion or fraud.

That will mean that, sometimes, law abiding citizens get scrutinized.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
u may feel fine now, but when an ATF swat team comes knocking at ur door cus u bought 3 ARs last month, ur opinion will change.
This is ridiculous. You are being paranoid, and fearful of your government..

You're allowed to buy 3 ARs in a month. Buy one every 5 days and you're fine. You can buy 6 ARs in a month, for that matter.

You'd need to buy 7 ARs in a month to get reported .. think about that.

And it isn't even a crime. You're allowed to buy that 7th AR. You may just get a call from the ATF asking about the guns. They aren't going to show up with SWAT, or likely even get a warrant .. because no crime as been committed.

What they WILL do is flag your name. And if your name keeps popping up, they are going to put you under surveillance to try to find evidence of a crime.

I'm OK with that. That is a LEO's job, actually.. gather info, ID suspicious activity, look for evidence of a crime.

So again, whats the problem? Other than the fact that we'd all LOVE to have tons of money and be able to afford $7000 a month in rifles, and this puts a crimp in the dream?
 

·
Rest in Peace
Joined
·
2,058 Posts
In a perfect world, I wouldn't care what the Feds did to scrutinize gun sales. But I don't think it's 'paranoid' to be suspicious of the real intent of a government that you know is lying to you on a regular basis.

Just look at this situation. They screwed up and sent almost 2,000 guns into bad hands, and the official response is to increase scrutiny on US. Even if it's just a distraction to get attention off of themselves, it's still a lie. Sorry, but I don't trust the Feds as far as I can throw them. Not the current group, anyway. All things considered, I think it is naive to accept their story at face value.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,683 Posts
Why would anyone be paranoid of our government? Especially concerning anything firearms related, seeing as how they do such a marvelous job with the amount of power they have already.
There is absolutely no limit to the amount of power and control politicians want over our lives, which includes gun ownership. If memory serves me correctly, some of our founders thought it was wise to have a healthy distrust of government.
Big crime doesn't have to worry about this, and small timers can easily get around this. No problem at all for small time criminals to get around this law. Therefor, the law only affects law abiding citizens, as with nearly all gun control laws.
The government is already doing too much of everything, and they get a large part of that disastrously wrong.
There should be no new gun legislation passed, no matter how seemingly minor. In fact, now that these idiots funneled these guns to criminals, maybe it's an opportune time for some families to go ahead and get a gun for each family member, because they are less safe, as a direct result. And, under this proposal, that would make them suspect.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,001 Posts
Frustrated

mgraffam- I think people are just tired and frustrated. It looks like the government tried to "prove" that illegal guns where getting into the wrong hands. And to do this they KNOWINGLY let illegal guns go into the hands of criminals. The odd part was they thought they could track them AFTER they got into the MEX. Now there is alot of dead people. And there answer is brush it off, let a couple of guys take the fall, deny, deny, deny and put "new" laws to protect.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to come to the conclusion that law abiding citizen don't fund the cartels/criminals in mexico with rifles. And are just tired of the politicians passing laws down that REALLY have no effect on the people who don't abide by them anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
In a perfect world, I wouldn't care what the Feds did to scrutinize gun sales. But I don't think it's 'paranoid' to be suspicious of the real intent of a government that you know is lying to you on a regular basis.

Just look at this situation. They screwed up and sent almost 2,000 guns into bad hands, and the official response is to increase scrutiny on US. Even if it's just a distraction to get attention off of themselves, it's still a lie. Sorry, but I don't trust the Feds as far as I can throw them. Not the current group, anyway. All things considered, I think it is naive to accept their story at face value.
Suspicion is one thing. Believing that an ATF SWAT team is at the ready to swoop down into an estimated 18,000 (their estimate of how many reports they expect) homes is paranoia.. and that is what I was responding to.

Let me be clear: I don't trust the government. I don't trust most of my neighbors. Trust needs to be earned, not given.

But I don't think my neighbors are out to kill me, either - and I don't think this deal with the ATF is meant to be any sort of pretext for anything nefarious. It is, at best, a somewhat misguided effort to keep guns out of the hands of criminals - but one that I think won't inconvenience very many legitimate people. At worst, it is as you say - something along the lines of a distraction from their current fiasco. But so what? Just look at the numbers:

Now, lets say they get those 18000 or so reports. And lets say just 5% of them pan out to be straw purchasers. That's 900 purchasers. If those 900 purchasers each bought just 5 guns for criminals - thats 4500 guns that can be kept out of the hands of criminals.. and what does it cost us?

Money wise? Not a heck of a lot, that I can see - those agents are getting paid out of my tax money anyhow. Have them chase down some paperwork -- thats fine by me.

Lose of liberty? No. Again, one is not prevented from buying 1000 rifles in a month if you can afford it... which very, very few people can. The people with the sort of money that could afford enough rifles to get reported, they don't buy rifles. They buy stocks, and bonds.. that's why they have money.

I get that the timing of this whole thing stinks.. I do. But I try to remain objective. And, objectively.. this is a plan which doesn't inconvenience many normal folks, which at least has some potential to bust straw purchasers - who are a notoriously difficult bunch to nab. By definition, they are otherwise law-abiding people with no records (thats why they can buy guns).. and yet they are in the process of breaking the law.

This a tool - and really, a not very powerful one - that ATF can use to try and bust some of these guys. I don't have a problem with the Feds, or any LEOs trying to enforce the law. Backgrounds checks are a good example. It isn't a very big deal for me to wait for the check, and it IS a tool to help keep guns out of the hands of criminals, mental defectives, and so on. Is it perfect? Of course not..

But I don't see anyone coming up with anything better..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
mgraffam- I think people are just tired and frustrated.
Hey, I'm with ya on that. I'm tired and frustrated with a lot of crap that the government is passing off these days too. Maybe my frustration just causes me to fall on the other side of the table.. but really, this thing seems so inconsequential. It just seems like it is going to affect so few people, that I can't find myself even caring about it..

Not when so much garbage is going around that affects EVERYONE.

You know, I'm much more upset about how ATF dodged Congress. CONGRESS. I donated a few bills that I can't really spare to NRA to fight that fight..THAT is a blow against the future of the republic that I won't abide.

This.. mandatory reporting for buying loads of guns when everyone is out of work and broke? It doesn't bother me.. maybe you're right.. maybe I just don't have the energy to swat that fly..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,839 Posts
Ah, the slow erosion.

As for the apple metaphor?
More like the Fed planted the tree, found that the apples is not what they wanted so they burn the whole farm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: adrbe

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,988 Posts
.. but really, this thing seems so inconsequential. It just seems like it is going to affect so few people, that I can't find myself even caring about it..
It is intended to seem inconsequential and to elicit the very response with which you have replied. The politicians implement this rule this time, and the next time they do it they go a little further, and the next time after that they have gone farther than you said they ever could. This is the very scenario we all have been warning against for many years. It is happening now and you choose to stand as the "voice of reason?"

If for no other reason, simply ask, "Why are firearms dealers in only these four states affected?" Are not laws and regulations to be applied uniformly? Does not just that aspect of this make you uneasy? If this goes unchallenged and their next "regulation" applies only to males residing in Vero Beach, Florida will you then say it "seems so inconsequential. It just seems like it is going to affect so few people, that I can't find myself even caring about it.." I doubt it, because then it will be your ox being gored.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,252 Posts
OK, I'll bite. What is wrong with this?

It doesn't PREVENT people from buying the guns.. it isn't an infringement of the 2nd amendment. It just reports the situation to the ATF. If I buy 3 M1As in a 5 day period, the ATF gets alerted. So what? They aren't going to come to my house for a single such report; and even if they did - I show them the rifles. They say "sorry for the inconvenience" and that is that.

The worst case I could see for this, for legitimate owners, is if I bought those 3 M1As as gifts, and gave them away. That might pose some issues.. which can be easily avoided by staggering my purchases .. which, frankly, most folks would do that for the money involved anyhow. A slight inconvenience to an EXCEPTIONAL case citizen, and a major inconvenience to criminal networks.

I get that it is a hassle. So is the 20 minute background check, or filling out the handgun paperwork that most states require... but really, how many legit owners is this going to be a minor inconvenience for?

I really fail to see the problem, in principle. Now, if NRA is right and there is no authority to do this (which I find unlikely, since multiple handgun purchases are already reported) then that is a horse of a different color.
Domino theory. Acquiesce to one infringement and then the door is open to keep coming in. Kind of like our southern border along Mexico. Give them nothing, IMHO. The attack is a war of attrition against our rights. Little by little. Secure the [email protected] out of the border. Lock it down. That is how we responsibly stem the flow of drugs and weapons to and from Mexico. IMHO
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
896 Posts
This is ridiculous. You are being paranoid, and fearful of your government..

You're allowed to buy 3 ARs in a month. Buy one every 5 days and you're fine. You can buy 6 ARs in a month, for that matter.

You'd need to buy 7 ARs in a month to get reported .. think about that.

And it isn't even a crime. You're allowed to buy that 7th AR. You may just get a call from the ATF asking about the guns. They aren't going to show up with SWAT, or likely even get a warrant .. because no crime as been committed.

What they WILL do is flag your name. And if your name keeps popping up, they are going to put you under surveillance to try to find evidence of a crime.

I'm OK with that. That is a LEO's job, actually.. gather info, ID suspicious activity, look for evidence of a crime.

So again, whats the problem? Other than the fact that we'd all LOVE to have tons of money and be able to afford $7000 a month in rifles, and this puts a crimp in the dream?
So, they flag your name for legal behavior and you become a suspect and all of a sudden they're watching you and your family. That's the problem.

Maybe they'll just decide to watch everyone on a whim. After all, it's clear that they can just make up any nonsense as a justifiable reason to impose surveillance on you and your family. Buying guns is not a crime, but now that behavior could make you look, and be treated, as a criminal in the eyes of the government.

The government does not have a right to spy on whoever they wish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kmcintosh78
1 - 20 of 150 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top