BATFE Director B. Todd Jones resigns

Status
Not open for further replies.
What is important here is now we know what an online campaign to your representatives will do. All of those folks up there need voter support to get re-elected. One of the few things they have the power to do is threaten to cut budgets. That will kill or cripple an agency faster than anything and the adm knows that.

I have to wonder why it's so hard to just operate under the constitution and guide lines. The ATF has or had 81 attorneys on staff. Do they not use them or are they just so driven by AG agendas that they don't care what the fall out is going to be from public opinion. I can see some more hard times coming for the ATF in congress. This agency seems to have real problems identifying what their authority is and why they exist in the first place. Maybe if congress cut their budget in half that would send a message to the right people. Maybe Jones saw the writing on the wall.
 
Good point about Brandon, he's just a placeholder while Congress begins to look forward to confirmation hearings with Fast and Furious as their main topic. He very well may have to ditch again. Seems the administration would be more than aware of it and is just using him as a distraction while they assess whether they have the traction to force the appointment or get some other up and coming fellow traveler from another office.

As for Quislings - the general definition is that they are people who support the statists, the same as those loyal to the Crown in our war of independence. In the public eye they line up for 15 seconds of fame as a traditionalist who hunts but wants universal background checks and couldn't be happier until everyone had to get a Stamp to own any firearm.

Here? Posters who support the ATF and don't want anyone to lift a finger in protest to it's obviously inane decisions and political bias.

IF YOU THINK THE ATF HAS DONE NOTHING WRONG AND DOESN'T DESERVE ONE WORD OF CRITICISM FOR IT'S ILLEGAL ACTIONS AND MUDDLED INTERPRETATIONS IN THE LAST 6 YEARS, YOU ARE A QUISLING. You are supporting losing your guns entirely, same as Britain and Australia.

Stop cluttering up our forum and go join Mom's Against Intelligent Thought About Guns or any of the other anti gun orgs funded by Bloomberg. They love it when gun owners help with incremental steps in their universal disarmament program.

Keep it up, you'll have to get a background check to loan your gun to your brother hunting and pay a fee to do it. Much less wear a smart tag to fire it.
 
Those "tin foil hatters" who had predicted Obama's intentions long before he was sworn in have made a lot of uppity gun owners look like naive fools.
 
We just need to always watch what the other hand is doing. There are still gun owners out there who are willing to praise BHO because he signed the law that allows NP carry.
The turn coats like the W VA. Governor are enough proof to me that those from the party of gun control shouldn't be trusted to serve in office.
 
It's time for this whole "bureau" to disappear.
It should never have been opened in the first place, but it is very hard to kill off any bureaucracy, especially one that has a bunch of armed agents working for it. Government needs those guys to cow the rest of us into submission. Sometimes, that works better than other times.

Sometimes we fight back politically and are able to make small victories, sometimes we take small losses.

getting rid of an entire federal agency would be a huge political win for us less government folks. probably is not politically doable though. they would just disperse those employees into other agencies so nothing would change.
 
vamo said:
But seriously why in the world should my opinion of the NFL change 1 bit over this. Should people we disagree with politically never work in the private sector again? I have a problem with his policy decisions and nothing against him personally I could care less where he works now that hes out of a policy making position.
When the people in question are pushing government policies that hurt me personally, I take it personal, and insofar as I am able I will not do business with a firm that hires such a person. I think it would be good for these types of workers to know that doing bad things when they're working for fed.gov can have personal negative consequences that last long after their patron has left office.

Unfortunately, since I don't buy NFL tickets or merchandise, the effects of my personal boycott of the NFL would be nonexistent.
 
Here? Posters who support the ATF and don't want anyone to lift a finger in protest to it's obviously inane decisions and political bias.

Yes, here. We have some ATF supporters here. We probably all know who they are. I've seen more than once where and individual claimed the ATF has their hands tied because they have to follow the law. Seems to me they do that and a lot more. It's pretty sad when congress has to put operational restrictions on an agency because they can't figure out what operations are not included in their operations manual. Or maybe they don't have one.
 
Will be gone by end of month. Total comments re: M855 reported to be in excess of 300,000 !
Funny that when they banned 5.45x39 7N1, nobody fluttered an eyebrow even though it was a prelude for things to come. I have a feeling they will have no issue banning 7.62x54R milsup since that caliber is not on the list of the ones used by the AR.
 
That's because the authority under which they banned 7N6 was valid; all imports of ammo are banned except for wht the AG designates as "for sporting purposes." Take it up with Congress or a judge.

"Those "tin foil hatters" who had predicted Obama's intentions long before he was sworn in have made a lot of uppity gun owners look like naive fools."
Now to be fair, Obama has tried and wanted a lot of things, but hasn't accomplished much besides reap a ton of blowback when we expose and denounce his machinations. That's more an attaboy on us than a reflection of his incompetence, but having fools running point on their strategy team is mitigating a lot of harm.

TCB
 
Obama made it very clear what he wants to ban.

Here is the whitehouse position (playbook) on guns:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/wh_now_is_the_time_full.pdf


The President’s plan includes:
1. Closing background check loopholes to keep guns out
of dangerous hands;
2. Banning military-style assault weapons and high-capacity
magazines, and taking other common-sense steps to reduce
gun violence;
3. Making schools safer; and
4. Increasing access to mental health services.


Finish the job of getting armor-piercing bullets off the streets: It is already illegal to
manufacture and import armor-piercing ammunition except for military or law enforcement use.
6
But it is generally still not illegal to possess or transfer this dangerous ammunition. Congress should
finish the job of protecting law enforcement and the public by banning the possession of armorpiercing
ammunition by, and its transfer to, anyone other than the military and law enforcement.
 
"That's because the authority under which they banned 7N6 was valid; all imports of ammo are banned except for wht the AG designates as "for sporting purposes." Take it up with Congress or a judge."

But that's not how imports of 7N6 were terminated. Please do your homework.

Update: Just as I expected...there was absolutely no congressional authority to support the unconstitutional "banning" of this particular round. The BATboys' contention was calculated on absolute lies which they believed would be blindly accepted by Soros's gun-control fascists and their well-funded agitprop.
 
Last edited:
Now to be fair, Obama has tried and wanted a lot of things, but hasn't accomplished much besides reap a ton of blowback when we expose and denounce his machinations


The fact that he has even tried should have made the naysayers a little wiser. It hasn't. Still a lot of face-saving skeptics out there who like to claim that Obama hasn't yet hurt the 2nd Amendment.
 
Last edited:
But that's not how imports of 7N6 were terminated. Please do your homework.

But legally, that's a distinction without a difference. The AG has clear authority and discretion to determine which ammunition is exempted from the prohibition on importing ANY ammunition into the United States.

To reiterate:

18 USC § 922 (l)

Except as provided in section 925 (d) of this chapter, it shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to import or bring into the United States or any possession thereof any firearm or ammunition; and it shall be unlawful for any person knowingly to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been imported or brought into the United States or any possession thereof in violation of the provisions of this chapter.

18 USC § 925 (d)

The Attorney General shall authorize a firearm or ammunition to be imported or brought into the United States or any possession thereof if the firearm or ammunition—
(1) is being imported or brought in for scientific or research purposes, or is for use in connection with competition or training pursuant to chapter 401 of title 10;
(2) is an unserviceable firearm, other than a machinegun as defined in section 5845(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (not readily restorable to firing condition), imported or brought in as a curio or museum piece;
(3) is of a type that does not fall within the definition of a firearm as defined in section 5845(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and is generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes, excluding surplus military firearms, except in any case where the Attorney General has not authorized the importation of the firearm pursuant to this paragraph, it shall be unlawful to import any frame, receiver, or barrel of such firearm which would be prohibited if assembled; or
(4) was previously taken out of the United States or a possession by the person who is bringing in the firearm or ammunition.

In short, it makes absolutely no difference what rationale the AG's office used to revoke the exemption that make importing 7n6 legal, and there is nothing in statutory law that required them to argue a case for it. They just did it, because congress gave them the authority to so do. They could have done it for any reason whatsoever, including not liking the color of the primer sealant because it clashed with the ATF director's wife's handbag.
 
Just because the puddle of gas and the match failed to ignite, doesnt mean they didnt try..... and wont keep trying.


Elections matter. We can fool ourselves and we can mute ourselves here on THR every election cycle....

But there's a Impossible to miss, absolutely HUGE indicator of how an elected official will vote regarding our main issue here the Second Amendment, how their appointees will behave, judges they appoint, legislation they write & sponsor, and/or executive orders they author....
Here's the Clue D=Democrat.... When you see "D" or "Democrat" behind the name in the voting booth... THIS is what they do, will do, plan to do, or at a minimum will allow others in their party to do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top