ATF, "non-sporting," and publishing emails to them


PDA






leadcounsel
May 16, 2011, 06:50 PM
:fire:I received an email from a watchgroup stating that the ATF had published my email to them, along with the emails of hundreds of other people and any personal information they disclosed.

What an underhanded group!:fire:

If you enjoyed reading about "ATF, "non-sporting," and publishing emails to them" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
CoRoMo
May 16, 2011, 07:01 PM
I wouldn't expect better.

But what is the "non-sporting" term in your title referring to?

Owen Sparks
May 16, 2011, 07:10 PM
Sounds like your name is now on "the list".

alsaqr
May 16, 2011, 07:12 PM
Every federal regulatory agency publishes a list of comments to their proposed changes. They have done this for many years. The list on the ATF website has comments through 6 March, 2010.

http://www.atf.gov/about/foia/atf-submissions-for-public-comment.html

azmjs
May 16, 2011, 07:13 PM
Where are the emails published?

alsaqr
May 16, 2011, 07:17 PM
Where are the emails published?

Se the link in my post above. Scroll down to the bottom, on the left hand side is a link to the list.

Shadow 7D
May 16, 2011, 07:28 PM
http://www.atf.gov/about/foia/shotgun-study-responses/0306-shotgun-study-responses.pdf

I guess they decided not to publish my comments
but then I did call them <deleted> stupid
and point out a few issues, mainly creating a study to find what they assumed.

Shadow 7D
May 16, 2011, 08:45 PM
Oh, and I noticed there are alot of 'spam' and Cut-N-Paste responses in there
weirdly enough, they all seemed Anti-Gun....

merlinfire
May 16, 2011, 09:50 PM
A lot of form emails in there....yeah it seems the anti-gun groups got mobilized for this. Didn't even care enough to customize the email: probably because they wouldn't know what to say besides "GUNS BAD, GUNS KILL, ME HATE GUNS"

merlinfire
May 16, 2011, 09:54 PM
And, sadly, some emails for "our side" that were not the level-headed emails I was hoping for. You can't honestly expect that a person reading an email calling their employer out of control and calling for the elimination of their job will take such a response seriously.

coltsfreak18
May 16, 2011, 10:07 PM
And, sadly, some emails for "our side" that were not the level-headed emails I was hoping for. You can't honestly expect that a person reading an email calling their employer out of control and calling for the elimination of their job will take such a response seriously.I too noticed that. Many of these people wanted to settle for compromise, not a full 2A right. These sorts of people will make the Hughes Amendment and the NFA infinitely more difficult to repeal in the long run.

Gordon_Freeman
May 16, 2011, 10:07 PM
This makes me a little paranoid. If you send a pro second amendment message to a government agency, could they make it difficult for you to pass a NICS background check when buying firearms?

hso
May 16, 2011, 10:17 PM
Folks, it is vitally important that we learn what the processes are in government instead of thrashing around wildly.

Like every other government agency that has a public comment period for anything that impacts a regulation they are OBLIGATED by law to open a comment period, publish those comments and to fully attribute them. This validates the comments as being real. They even publish the spam, repetitions, and outright nutty stuff to avoid the accusations of sifting comments. Anything from a source that isn't attributable isn't included. Anyone that is upset by this just doesn't understand how the process works.

We had a thread (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=576367) running on the comment period and dissected the results of it.

By March 6 there were 516 pages of comments on the so-called "shotgun study" and not a single page published supported the study! Now, 41 of those entries were spam, 4 of them were just nutty with no value, one was blank, but the rest opposed the basis, "science" and conclusions of the "study". I doubt that the nature of the comments will shift much by the time all the comments are published.

I'm proud to have received this in my email and look forward to having my email published with everyone else that made the minuscule effort to participate. We should be ashamed if more THR members don't.-

U.S. Department of Justice
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives


Dear Sir or Madame:
Thank you for responding to the Shotgun Study. Your assistance will further promote ATF’s ability to support the firearms industry. We will review and consider your comments and suggestions.
If you have any questions, you may contact the Firearms and Explosives Industry Division @ 202-648-7090. Once again, thank you for your email.

Firearms and Explosives Industry Division
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

Shadow 7D
May 17, 2011, 04:22 AM
I got mine too HSO
guess it's worth having some extra spam in the ol inbox

Animal Mother
May 17, 2011, 08:25 AM
I'm fine with my email being published, if there is a list, I'm already on it. I hold an FFL 03 and a CCW License. I'm a member of the NRA, GeorgiaCarry.org, have contributed to the SAF, I write my congressmen every time lame-brain legislation comes up, and have sent comments to the ATF every time theres a open comment period on something gun related. I'm glad my email wasn't just dropped off in the trash and so that there can be no mistaking how the public feels about this. I just wish we had more people willing to stand up for their rights, I was a bit embarrassed that we only had 500+ pages of responses. If we all stood up and let our voices be heard - and put money where our mouth is - anti-gun legislation would never gain any traction in this country, it would truly become the third rail of politics.

hso
May 17, 2011, 08:47 AM
If we all stood up and let our voices be heard - and put money where our mouth is - anti-gun legislation would never gain any traction in this country, it would truly become the third rail of politics.

Bulls-eye!

At least the OP made the effort to send in a comment even if he didn't fundamentally understand the process.

Most people would rather rant on the internet instead of making even the minimal effort of contributing a comment to something that will impact regulations or would rather shrink from the opportunity to be heard in fear of being "on some list" (which if they think that way probably should think they're on one for ranting here:rolleyes:).

If everyone here had sent in a cogent comment on the "study" and would do so every time a comment period opened on RKBA issues the message to the government would be clear and visible to everyone.

If you enjoyed reading about "ATF, "non-sporting," and publishing emails to them" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!