ATF agents harass/intimidate Richmond, VA gun show buyers & sellers

Discussion in 'Legal' started by progunner1957, Feb 20, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. progunner1957

    progunner1957 member

    Nov 14, 2004
    A wolf living in Sheeple land
    Scrutiny of city gun show criticized
    U.S. agents, police rattled customers, organizer tells panel

    Thursday, February 16, 2006

    WASHINGTON -- A crackdown on illegal firearm sales at Richmond-area gun shows led to a congressional inquiry yesterday into whether federal agents trampled the rights of gun buyers.

    The organizer of an August gun show at Richmond Raceway Complex told a House panel that a large team of federal agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and city, state and county police patrolled the two-day show, harassing law-abiding gun buyers while looking for illicit gun sales.

    Annette Gelles of Showmasters, the organizer, told the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime that agents' aggressive tactics unnerved some attendees, and the visible presence drove away other customers.

    Rights called impeded
    "They impeded people's Second Amendment rights," Gelles said after the hearing. "I think they were there trying to shut the show down. Why else would they bring that many officers? It scared away a lot of law-abiding people."

    After noticing that guns purchased at shows -- which, unlike store sales, do not always require a background check -- were used to commit local crimes, the ATF, Richmond and Henrico County police and Virginia State Police joined to strengthen oversight of gun-show firearm sales.

    Representatives of the four agencies were not invited to the hearing.

    Officials with the ATF, Richmond police and state police declined to comment or did not return telephone calls. Henrico police spokesman Doug Perry said, "It was a federal operation. We were only there to assist." He declined to comment further.

    The ATF is scheduled to present its side of the story at a hearing Feb. 28, said subcommittee chairman Rep. Howard Coble, R-N.C.

    "I don't want anyone to leave here thinking it's time to decommission the ATF. We will hear from them," he said.

    'Straw purchases' cited
    ATF director Carl J. Truscott defended his agency's operations in a letter to the committee.

    From 2004 to 2005, four homicides in Richmond were linked to guns sold at shows, he wrote. Agents patrolled eight shows during the period, leading to more than 30 arrests for gun crimes, including lying on background check forms and "straw purchases" -- buying a gun for someone else.

    The size of the police presence at the shows is in question. Attendees alleged that hundreds were involved in the operation. But Truscott wrote that 24 to 50 officers and agents attended the shows.

    "ATF is sensitive to the rights of law-abiding citizens:barf: and has no interest in inhibiting the lawful acquisition of firearms," he wrote.

    James Lalime, a gun dealer from Colonial Heights who testified yesterday, said he was interrogated at length by two ATF agents because he was considering purchasing some guns.

    "Never in my life have I been made to feel so violated," he said.

    Suzanne McComas, a private investigator hired by the National Rifle Association to look into the allegations of harassment, said officers targeted minorities.

    "Anyone who was a minority, they picked up their trail and followed them through the show. . . . It was ridiculous," she told lawmakers.

    Rep. Bill Delahunt, D-Mass., told McComas that he found the racial allegations questionable.

    "I'm not saying that I disbelieve you, but I'm shocked that they could be that stupid. It's almost difficult to believe," he said.

    In some cases, officers followed gun buyers from the show or went to their homes to confirm addresses listed on background check forms, the witnesses said.

    In his letter to the committee, Truscott defended "residence checks" as "an important and useful tool to ensure the lawfulness of firearms transactions and to prevent straw purchases."

    Rep. Robert C. Scott of Virginia's 3rd District, the top Democrat on the subcommittee, said he would like to change the law that allows some purchases without background checks. Until that happens, Scott said, he wants to make sure existing laws are properly enforced.

    "If people are law-abiding citizens, they should have the right to conduct lawful activities," he said.

    Peter Hamm, a spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said he is worried Congress will use the incident to restrict enforcement activities, which he said work. Pro-gun lobby groups are trying to use the incident to get the ATF off their back, he said.

    "It's obvious that the gun-show lobby doesn't want this [arrest] information to get out, because it strengthens the argument for closing the gun-show loophole," he said.
  2. Henry Bowman

    Henry Bowman Senior Member

    Dec 30, 2002
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    :confused: :confused: What "gun-show lobby"? What "gun-show loophole"? It seems to me to support the closing of the BATFE.

    :barf: Wow. Showing his stripes here. This guy's leash needs a hard jerk.
  3. Logistics

    Logistics Member

    Jan 13, 2004
    ahhh yes....

    >>>In his letter to the committee, [BATFE Dirstor Carl J.] Truscott defended "residence checks" as "an important and useful tool to ensure the lawfulness of firearms transactions and to prevent straw purchases." <<<

    "residence checks"........?????? Ahh yes lets stalk the average joe even though he hasen't done anything yet because he just MIGHT do something later on...

    Gotta love the Gulag! Hitler / Stalin are rolling in their graves...... the alphabet soup crowd using YOUR tax dollars is supporting this......

    What ever happened to character in the good ole Us of A???

    Amazing millions of lives were squandered in past World Wars to preserve your rights only to have men of such little character come around today and trample them without cause.
  4. Merkin.Muffley

    Merkin.Muffley member

    Feb 12, 2006
    Why weren't they invited to present their side of the story? I think I'll wait until the hearing on the 28th is over before forming an opinion on this.

    I think we'll find this is being blown up to something much bigger than what actually happened. So what - some peoples rights were "impeded". They still had their rights, they weren't taken away. The BATFE under President Bush has been a good organization - for comparison remember what it was like under Clinton and Reno.
  5. JohnBT

    JohnBT Member

    Dec 26, 2002
    Richmond, Virginia
    "I think we'll find this is being blown up to something much bigger than what actually happened."

    No you won't.

    A question for you...

    Where in the law does it say that a 'home visit' is required, or even permitted, in Virginia in order to purchase a firearm? Or in the Federal regs for that matter?

    I'll save you some time, it isn't.

    Member www.vcdl.org
    NRA Endowment Member
  6. Henry Bowman

    Henry Bowman Senior Member

    Dec 30, 2002
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    The F-Troop is starting to act out again, even under Bush.

    So how about if the police made a visit to the house (and neighbors) of a teenager who was about to exercise her right to get an abortion to check her residency and to ask whether anyone there knew she was getting an abortion? Wonder if that would be a problem? Or, pick a right that is actually in the Constitution -- say you were going to buy a newspaper, or some pornography. OK if I check with your spouse and neighbors first?
  7. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Dec 24, 2002
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    It's time and long past time to pull the plug on the B.A.T.F.E.

    The nation's borders are an infinitely more serious problem than anything the B.A.T.F.E. could even hope to identify, still less deal with.
  8. Helmetcase

    Helmetcase Member

    Dec 6, 2005

    SIXPACK Member

    Aug 22, 2005


    Do you actually believe the drivel that you posted??????????!!!!!!!!!!:what:

    If you do, then I feel very sorry for you..............................

    It's easy for you to sit there and "excuse" the atf for their actions, as they didn't affect you directly. But I was there, and I recieved their "impedement" on my rights, and I was directly affected by their actions.

    It's because of apathetic and complacent people like you Merkin.Muffley, that agencies like the atf, and the politicians who promote and support their actions, are allowed to run wild, stripping American citizens of their God-given-Constitutional Rights!!!!!

    According to you a little "impedement" of ones rights is "okay"?:what: Well, when will the "impedement" be too much for you? Huh? As far as I'm concerned, an "impeded" right, is a violated right. The atf, AND the politicians who allowed those "impedements" should be made to answer for those violations!!! If they are not made to answer for an impeded/violated right, then their next step will be to ignore them altogether.

    In other words-Ignore the impedments now, and your rights WILL be taken away later...................................
  10. makanut

    makanut Member

    Dec 25, 2004
    Open mouth, insert foot. Seriously though, Agent Shmuckatelli has way too much time on his hands.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice