the ATF has some 'splaining' to do

[Taichiliberal]

Morton Rosenberg, a specialist in American public law, formerly with the Congressional Research Service, told Congress, "the Department of Justice has the power to string out your investigation, refuse to obey it, and then when it's time for contempt...say all you can do is bring a civil action which will extend and delay your constitutional ability to enforce your" legislative powers.

Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_16...#ixzz1POHIEPh0

real simple solution to that stonewalling. zero funding.

Nah, just roll some heads and replace them with bipartisan appointees.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

Nah, just roll some heads and replace them with bipartisan appointees.[/QUOTE} No, the complete elimination of the ATF is the very least that should be done.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

 

[Taichiliberal]

Nah, just roll some heads and replace them with bipartisan appointees.[/QUOTE} No, the complete elimination of the ATF is the very least that should be done.

You don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. This insane notion of replacing the federal gov't with a corporatocracy that oversees 50 different and independent State gov'ts is just that....insane. People who advocate this nonsense really don't think it through regarding just how this would effect their ability to function or utilize ANY resource outside their state.

To date, any law abiding citizen can obtain a weapon(s) within their state for either home defense or hunting. Gunners that want total autonomy regarding weapons purchase and possession essentially want a return to the Wild West. Been there, done that.

Yes this latest ATF screw-up should be thoroughly investigated, and heads should roll and a revamping/review should be done....but to shut down an agency that DOES have a vital part or our national law enforcement is just excessive.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

You don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. This insane notion of replacing the federal gov't with a corporatocracy that oversees 50 different and independent State gov'ts is just that....insane. People who advocate this nonsense really don't think it through regarding just how this would effect their ability to function or utilize ANY resource outside their state.

To date, any law abiding citizen can obtain a weapon(s) within their state for either home defense or hunting. Gunners that want total autonomy regarding weapons purchase and possession essentially want a return to the Wild West. Been there, done that.

Yes this latest ATF screw-up should be thoroughly investigated, and heads should roll and a revamping/review should be done....but to shut down an agency that DOES have a vital part or our national law enforcement is just excessive.

Yeah except the very idea of the ATF is stupid beyond recognition. The FBI can easily handle all FFL matters, the only plausible reason to retain the ATF. Get rid of it.

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

Why regulate guns at all?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

To date, any law abiding citizen can obtain a weapon(s) within their state for either home defense or hunting. Gunners that want total autonomy regarding weapons purchase and possession essentially want a return to the Wild West. Been there, done that.

there are varying degrees of difficulty, depending upon the state, that makes it virtually impossible to purchase a weapon for home defense and some states it is prohibited to carry that weapon for self defense when out in public.

The 2nd Amendment was written to prevent the federal government from being more powerful than 'we the people', in order to maintain our security and freedom. The ATF and nearly all of the 20,000+ gun laws have reduced the 2nd Amendment to a meaningless clump of text that is largely ignored now.

Yes this latest ATF screw-up should be thoroughly investigated, and heads should roll and a revamping/review should be done....but to shut down an agency that DOES have a vital part or our national law enforcement is just excessive.

Other than increasing the cost of purchasing a weapon and enforcing unconstitutional prohibitions on the sale, manufacture, and possession of certain weapons, what do they do?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

two more gunwalker guns involved in murder of mexican lawyer

seems the atf is responsible for another murdered civilian.

Two AK-47s Used to Murder Mexican Lawyer Were 'Fast and Furious' Guns From U.S., Sources Say

Fast and Furious, which was supposed to trace and stop the trafficking of illegal guns, instead allowed thousands of guns get into the hand of Mexican cartel members.

The program is now the focus of an investigation by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

On Wednesday, ATF Special Agent John Dodson testified that the operation facilitated the sale of about 2,500 firearms. About 700 have been recovered by police at crime scenes in Mexico and the U.S., but he said that there could be as many as 1,800 of them still out.

Until now, the most high-profile crime allegedly committed with these guns was the murder in December of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. Two guns found near his body in Mexico were traced to the ATF program, though it is unclear if they were the guns that killed Terry.

President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder have tried to distance themselves from the failed program, saying it was running without their approval.

On Friday, White House broke its silence for the first time since the hearings exposed the extent of the failed program.

When asked about Operation Fast and Furious and the contention that the administration deliberately sent these guns south, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said the president did not know who authorized the program.

“I can tell you that, as the president has already said, he did not know ... about or authorize this operation. But the Department of Justice has said repeatedly that fighting criminal activity along the Southwest border, including the illegal trafficking of guns to Mexico, has been and is a priority of the department,” Carney said.

if the bolded part is true, does that make Obama ignorant or incompetent?

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
To date, any law abiding citizen can obtain a weapon(s) within their state for either home defense or hunting. Gunners that want total autonomy regarding weapons purchase and possession essentially want a return to the Wild West. Been there, done that.

there are varying degrees of difficulty, depending upon the state, that makes it virtually impossible to purchase a weapon for home defense and some states it is prohibited to carry that weapon for self defense when out in public.

Difficult does not equate impossible....never has. Essentially people are bitching about paperwork and time frames...so please spare us all the exaggeration of "virtually impossible", because if you meet the criteria, you'll get the gun. Just because you want a gun doesn't automatically mean you get one, or should get one. And there have been state, city, town bans on carrying weapons in public since the frontier days. Like I said, gunners want autonomy in this regard...but in a democracy where people vote, they are not always going to get it. My previous statement stands valid.

The 2nd Amendment was written to prevent the federal government from being more powerful than 'we the people', in order to maintain our security and freedom. The ATF and nearly all of the 20,000+ gun laws have reduced the 2nd Amendment to a meaningless clump of text that is largely ignored now.

Again, spare me all the gunner propaganda, exaggerations and substitution of supposition and conjecture for FACTS. Bottom line: any law abiding citizen can buy a gun for home protection providing they meet state requirements. It varies from state to state regarding types of weapons, concealed or open carry, etc. The ATF works dealing with state to state transport, federal regulations as to type of weapons available to the civilian population, etc. Like I said, gunners want autonomy with regards to weapons, so the ATF is a mortal enemy.

And for the umpteenth time, the 2nd amendment refers to "we the people" having the right to form armed MILITIAS....that means you officially form one...that prevents any yahoos from suddenly jumping up, grabbing guns and claiming 2nd amendment rights to do whatever the hell they want via the 2nd amendment.

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Yes this latest ATF screw-up should be thoroughly investigated, and heads should roll and a revamping/review should be done....but to shut down an agency that DOES have a vital part or our national law enforcement is just excessive.

Other than increasing the cost of purchasing a weapon and enforcing unconstitutional prohibitions on the sale, manufacture, and possession of certain weapons, what do they do?

They can tell you better than I....

http://www.atf.gov/about/

 

[Taichiliberal]

two more gunwalker guns involved in murder of mexican lawyer

seems the atf is responsible for another murdered civilian.

Two AK-47s Used to Murder Mexican Lawyer Were 'Fast and Furious' Guns From U.S., Sources Say

Fast and Furious, which was supposed to trace and stop the trafficking of illegal guns, instead allowed thousands of guns get into the hand of Mexican cartel members.

The program is now the focus of an investigation by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

On Wednesday, ATF Special Agent John Dodson testified that the operation facilitated the sale of about 2,500 firearms. About 700 have been recovered by police at crime scenes in Mexico and the U.S., but he said that there could be as many as 1,800 of them still out.

Until now, the most high-profile crime allegedly committed with these guns was the murder in December of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. Two guns found near his body in Mexico were traced to the ATF program, though it is unclear if they were the guns that killed Terry.

President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder have tried to distance themselves from the failed program, saying it was running without their approval.

On Friday, White House broke its silence for the first time since the hearings exposed the extent of the failed program.

When asked about Operation Fast and Furious and the contention that the administration deliberately sent these guns south, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said the president did not know who authorized the program.

“I can tell you that, as the president has already said, he did not know ... about or authorize this operation. But the Department of Justice has said repeatedly that fighting criminal activity along the Southwest border, including the illegal trafficking of guns to Mexico, has been and is a priority of the department,” Carney said.

if the bolded part is true, does that make Obama ignorant or incompetent?

Are you saying that this is the FIRST time in history that an organization has taken actions that they did NOT put in their official report to the White House? Are you saying that the President MUST give approval to ALL operations of EVERY faucet of EVERY federal law enforcement agency on a DAILY basis?

Like I said, let's see how this shakes out BEFORE doing the Limbaugh/Hannity/O'Reilly/Maulkin/Beck/Levin/Savage/Newsbusters/WND/Murdock/Koch shuffle, shall we?

 

[NOVA]

That's pure supposition and conjecture on your part, STY. I have no problem in laying blame where it's deserved, but I'll wait for what actually happens as a result of investigations, etc.

We'll get no satisfaction or justice from an investigation.....we didn't for the Ruby Ridge incident or the Waco incident and the same whitewash will be applied here.....

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Difficult does not equate impossible....never has. Essentially people are bitching about paperwork and time frames...so please spare us all the exaggeration of "virtually impossible", because if you meet the criteria, you'll get the gun. Just because you want a gun doesn't automatically mean you get one, or should get one.

400 dollar plus license fees makes it impossible for a person of lesser financial means to obtain a gun that they have a right to. How many other rights would you like to see exorbitant and extortionist polices implemented on?

And there have been state, city, town bans on carrying weapons in public since the frontier days. Like I said, gunners want autonomy in this regard...but in a democracy where people vote, they are not always going to get it. My previous statement stands valid.

so what used to be a government to protect the rights of the minority should now be turned in to a government that lets tyranny of the majority rule the day?

Again, spare me all the gunner propaganda, exaggerations and substitution of supposition and conjecture for FACTS. Bottom line: any law abiding citizen can buy a gun for home protection providing they meet state requirements. It varies from state to state regarding types of weapons, concealed or open carry, etc. The ATF works dealing with state to state transport, federal regulations as to type of weapons available to the civilian population, etc. Like I said, gunners want autonomy with regards to weapons, so the ATF is a mortal enemy.

when the amendment says 'shall not be infringed', ANY hoops or ladders in the way is infringement.

And for the umpteenth time, the 2nd amendment refers to "we the people" having the right to form armed MILITIAS....that means you officially form one...that prevents any yahoos from suddenly jumping up, grabbing guns and claiming 2nd amendment rights to do whatever the hell they want via the 2nd amendment.

and for the umpteenth time, your interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is totally and completely wrong.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
That's pure supposition and conjecture on your part, STY. I have no problem in laying blame where it's deserved, but I'll wait for what actually happens as a result of investigations, etc.

We'll get no satisfaction or justice from an investigation.....we didn't for the Ruby Ridge incident or the Waco incident and the same whitewash will be applied here.....

Who is this "we" you refer to? Surviving Branch Dividians? Were you a member? Or a supporter or racist extremist Weaver (who got $3 mil as a court settlement as result of Ruby Ridge...hardly a "whitewash")? Or just some anti-gov't crank who grasps any straw thats a failure of the federal gov't? Or just another anti-Obama crank?

Bottom line: this ATF thing ain't over yet, and yes, the MSM has reported the story. I'll wait for the updates.

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

Who is this "we" you refer to? Surviving Branch Dividians? Were you a member? Or a supporter or racist extremist Weaver (who got $3 mil as a court settlement as result of Ruby Ridge...hardly a "whitewash")? Or just some anti-gov't crank who grasps any straw thats a failure of the federal gov't? Or just another anti-Obama crank?

Bottom line: this ATF thing ain't over yet, and yes, the MSM has reported the story. I'll wait for the updates.

And support the government every step of the way.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Difficult does not equate impossible....never has. Essentially people are bitching about paperwork and time frames...so please spare us all the exaggeration of "virtually impossible", because if you meet the criteria, you'll get the gun. Just because you want a gun doesn't automatically mean you get one, or should get one.

400 dollar plus license fees makes it impossible for a person of lesser financial means to obtain a gun that they have a right to. How many other rights would you like to see exorbitant and extortionist polices implemented on?

How much do people pay for vacations? Night's out for dinner and dancing? Custom bowling balls? Bottom line: If people feel a dire need for a gun, they'll save up and buy one, just like they save up and buy other things. You've got a problem with prices? Join the club, that's across the board for necessities and electives. And please spare me the lame ass gunner propagandistic taunts...it makes you look stupid and me feel embarassed for you.

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
And there have been state, city, town bans on carrying weapons in public since the frontier days. Like I said, gunners want autonomy in this regard...but in a democracy where people vote, they are not always going to get it. My previous statement stands valid.

so what used to be a government to protect the rights of the minority should now be turned in to a government that lets tyranny of the majority rule the day?

Only in your gunner propagandistic fevered mind, STY. Last time I checked, being able to buy a weapon(s) does not equate "tyranny", but quite the opposite. Like I said, gunners want complete autonomy regarding weapons, so they see ANY regulation as "tyranny", and go apeshit spewing all types of exaggerated, hysteria inducing mantras.

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Again, spare me all the gunner propaganda, exaggerations and substitution of supposition and conjecture for FACTS. Bottom line: any law abiding citizen can buy a gun for home protection providing they meet state requirements. It varies from state to state regarding types of weapons, concealed or open carry, etc. The ATF works dealing with state to state transport, federal regulations as to type of weapons available to the civilian population, etc. Like I said, gunners want autonomy with regards to weapons, so the ATF is a mortal enemy.

when the amendment says 'shall not be infringed', ANY hoops or ladders in the way is infringement.

When gunner propagandist try to isolate and take things out of context to make their case, they make an ass of themselves, because the right of a MILITIA to bear arms has NOT been infringed, as there are states that have functioning militias.

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
And for the umpteenth time, the 2nd amendment refers to "we the people" having the right to form armed MILITIAS....that means you officially form one...that prevents any yahoos from suddenly jumping up, grabbing guns and claiming 2nd amendment rights to do whatever the hell they want via the 2nd amendment.

and for the umpteenth time, your interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is totally and completely wrong.

and for the umpteenth time, your interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, your gunner propaganda is no substitute for a proper, comprehensive reading of the Second Amendment.

Bottom line: The current ATF story is ungoing...and I'll wait for the updates and final reports before making blanket statments. As I previously showed, the ATF is FAR MORE than the one note democracy killing machine you portray it to be. I'm all for kicking ass and taking names when it screws up, but you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Who is this "we" you refer to? Surviving Branch Dividians? Were you a member? Or a supporter or racist extremist Weaver (who got $3 mil as a court settlement as result of Ruby Ridge...hardly a "whitewash")? Or just some anti-gov't crank who grasps any straw thats a failure of the federal gov't? Or just another anti-Obama crank?

Bottom line: this ATF thing ain't over yet, and yes, the MSM has reported the story. I'll wait for the updates.

And support the government every step of the way.

And support removing and revamping parts and personnel of gov't when it fails or acts in contrary to the dictums of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the rule of law as determined by the people and it's representatives. Got that bunky?

 

[Billy the Great Khan]

In 1962 Taichi would have written...

Difficult does not equate impossible....never has. Essentially people are bitching about paperwork and time frames...so please spare us all the exaggeration of "virtually impossible", because if you meet the criteria, you'll get TO VOTE. Just because you want TO VOTE doesn't automatically mean you get TO VOTE, or should get TO VOTE. And there have been state, city, town RESTRICTION ON VOTING since the frontier days. Like I said, BLACKS want autonomy in this regard...but in a democracy where people vote, they are not always going to get it. My previous statement stands valid.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

and for the umpteenth time, your interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, your gunner propaganda is no substitute for a proper, comprehensive reading of the Second Amendment.

talk about felony stupid, this would be you. a 'comprehensive reading' is not supposed to be done with modern definitions. It's not even funny anymore that you'd tell James Madison he wasn't reading the constitution correctly.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

and for the umpteenth time, your interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, your gunner propaganda is no substitute for a proper, comprehensive reading of the Second Amendment.

Bottom line: The current ATF story is ungoing...and I'll wait for the updates and final reports before making blanket statments. As I previously showed, the ATF is FAR MORE than the one note democracy killing machine you portray it to be. I'm all for kicking ass and taking names when it screws up, but you don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

the high court does not hold your view.

Held:

1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53.

(a) The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22.

(b) The prefatory clause comports with the Court’s interpretation of the operative clause. The “militia” comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved. Pp. 22–28.

(c) The Court’s interpretation is confirmed by analogous arms-bearing rights in state constitutions that preceded and immediately followed the Second Amendment . Pp. 28–30.

(d) The Second Amendment ’s drafting history, while of dubious interpretive worth, reveals three state Second Amendment proposals that unequivocally referred to an individual right to bear arms. Pp. 30–32.

(e) Interpretation of the Second Amendment by scholars, courts and legislators, from immediately after its ratification through the late 19th century also supports the Court’s conclusion. Pp. 32–47.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

the high court does not hold your view.

worthless to taichi, he'll just say it's a bad ruling by a neocon, tenther, birther, libertarian, threeper far right wing bench.