Federal agents hunt for guns, one house at a time

Look at the numbers posted above, suposedly from the BATF. (http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pu...n_internet.pdf) Then look at this quote from the article in the opening post:

Somehow I don't see how they can jibe. Something here is way out of line.

 

And to add to the confusion we have this. Isn't it interesting that somehow the various numbers provided by the BATF or Mexican authorities never seem to agree from one day to the next.

You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool ALL of the people ALL of the time.

But this doesn't mean they won't try...

 

No, I didn't read all the posts. This is one of many threads on this subject that've been locked already today. . . .

 

interesting article. i personally have no problem with ATF enforcing existing laws in the books that they should be enforcing all along.

from the news story:

someone asked why the ATF is doing the work for the Mexican government. there are two reasons i can think of. (1) exporting firearms across the border violates US laws if the State Department did not authorize it, making it a federal violation, and (2) Mexican officials have no legal standing to investigate anything in the US. the US has an interest in enforcing its own firearms exportation laws, doesnt it?

the news story infers that this is not a random selection. so you ask, where does ATF get the names and addresses of people they're looking to talk to? my guess is Multiple Sale forms that FFL's are required by law to submit. two or more handguns within five business days from the same dealer generates this report. and then i suppose they look at the sheet and see what was purchased. if the person bought two Five-Seven pistols or two .38 Super Colts then that may be enough for ATF to go do a knock-and-talk to see if the original purchaser still has them. the FFL has until the end of business that day to send out the Multiple Sale form. that means the ATF and home jurisdiction agency (say the sale occurred in Houston, Texas, so Houston PD or Harris County Sheriff's Office gets a copy too) will get a copy of this form within days. so if the sale took place say on a Saturday and within a week or two the ATF comes to check and see if the original purchaser still has the pistol(s), then perhaps this may be a big red flag if the pistol is no longer in the possession of the original purchaser.

multiply this a few times, where the original purchaser's name shows up repeatedly and buying alot of the same pistol, and you have yourself a clue. especially if these people don't have the pistols in their possession anymore, that means that is a bigger clue. not enough to make an arrest, but then compound that to possibly one of these pistols ending up south of the border. another clue....you see how the investigation continues.

if you still have the pistol(s) and ATF asks you if you have them, i just don't see the logical reason to tell them to go fly a kite and slam the door on them. they will probably assume that you don't have the pistol(s) anymore and your name goes into a file. now that in and of itself may not mean anything, so long as you're legit and you know that your guns will never turn up in Mexico because you have them, so no big deal. but if your name ever comes up again, you bet your bottom dollar they are going to pay more scrutiny to you.

i can see how people can say the ATF is being a bunch of JBT's coming up and asking to see a firearm, but really, they are working within the confines of the law. the law allows them to do a knock-and-talk on your house and you have the right to tell them that you aren't going to cooperate.

but i wouldn't want to bring any undue scrutiny upon myself simple due to the principle of not wanting to cooperate with ATF, simply because you don't want to.

if ATF is out to make cases on crooks then i have no problem with it. crooks who use guns against the good guys make the good guys with guns look like crooks.

 

In most cases you are probably right, but I would still be careful about giving them information.

If by chance it happened to me I would consider meeting them at my lawyers office to let them inspect the firearms in question, that's about as far as I would go.

I am sure in most cases it truly would hurt nothing to go ahead and show the guns to them in your living room but I've never seen a single lawyer ever recommend talking to LE without the lawyer present, and I don't see any reason to start second guessing lawyers at this point.

Might cost me a couple hundred bucks sure.... cheap insurance.

 

The problem is not that they want to enforce straw purchase laws. The problem is that all it takes for you to become a suspect in such investigations is the purchase of more than one handgun within a 5-day period.

 

So, why are you so hot to get this thread locked?

Does it somehowmake your life worse if we discuss this?

Or are you just playing wannabe mod?

 

Doesn't bother me a bit what is talked about. This isn't news (it was first reported by one of our own a month ago), anyway.

Can't say the same for the mods, and my post was just a warning to folks here to expect the ol' "lock".

 

It's news in that the article posted by the OP recounts a little bit different version of the story, along with a reporter on the scene to record their words and actions.

That and it is the first sort of "public" admission that this stuff is happening.

And the tactics they seem to favor:

So yeah, it's more of the same but it's confirmation by an outside source and it gives some view into the scope of the operation.

100 agents is a lot of taxpayer money being spent in Houston.

 

The NRA ran a news story on this a couple of weeks ago (or did you mean "public" = "government sources"?).

 

This is a massive fishing operation by the BATFE, and they will spin the results in whatever way will justify a bigger budget and a greater erosion of our constitutional rights.

If they find no evidence of large numbers of straw purchases, they will say they need more agents and more restrictive laws to dig deeper to stop drug violence in Mexico.

However, if they do find evidence of large number of straw purchases, they will say it is proof that U.S. gun laws are too lax and that they need more restrictive laws and more agents to stop drug violence in Mexico.

It is a win-win situation for the agency that brought you Waco and Ruby Ridge.

 

Certainly. NRA, us, other pro 2A groups can claim it but until this the ATF itself had not specifically come out and said what they were doing and what the scope of the operation was.

I'd say that's something new.

 

Once again we are distracted by lesser issues. Yes, people who illegally contribute to trafficking of weapons should be dealt with. After all, we keep arguing that the feds should enforce laws already on the books. They are doing that, fine. But shouldn't the focus be on the trash pulling the triggers? People are obsessed with placing the blame everywhere but where it belongs. It matters less where you got the gun. If you have conscienceless vermin loose in your country running drugs and killing people, the focus should be on your pest infestation not the tools they use.

 

I agree with you Colt Smith, the cops and courts need to put the thugs away, and stop the revolving door justice system.

 

The red flag is sent from 2 handguns within 5 days, regardless of how unfair or wrong people think it is, anyone could easily stay off that list. Just don't buy 2 handguns within 5 days. Its REALLY simple.

 

Or the F troop could investigate actual crimes as opposed to perfectly legal firearms purchases

 

"Or the F troop could investigate actual crimes as opposed to perfectly legal firearms purchases"

It doesn't matter because they wont stop.

What if they came across a person that bought 2 handguns in one day, but every few weeks and sold them to some bad Mexicans? That would be a great person for them to arrest.

If you don't want to look suspicious then don't put up a red flag.

 

I will not alter my legal behavior because of government intimidation.

 

Birdmang
I don't think you have really thought out the logic of your position. A line must be drawn somewhere. There are those who would happily change the law so that a red flag goes up for anyone who buys 2 guns in a lifetime.

 

Very well said.

I also agree that it is ATF's job and mission to enforce laws regarding buying and selling firearms. That is their job.

I also agree that far stiffer penalties regarding even illegal possession of a firearm would be far more cost effective. If criminals knew they would face twenty hard years if they were caught even carrying a gun, most of them would start carrying knives.

 

My logic is this: If you don't want the ATF on your back, or should I say doorstep, then don't buy 2 pistols within a week.

If I purchased 2 pistols today and the ATF showed up at my door next week asking about them, I would gladly show them my receipts, the pistols with matching numbers to the receipts, and everything about how I legally purchased them for personal use. When the truth is on your side then you have nothing to hide. Granted I don't live anywhere near the Mexico border, I couldn't see this happening.

I don't understand the problem with cooperating when nothing is at stake.

 

Or you could just reffer them to your lawyer

Please read my sigline. It's a quote from an associate justice of the SCOTUS

Any time you are beeing investigated by a law enforcement agent of any type your freedom is at stake

 

What's a red flag? And who decides?

A few weeks ago we had the Department of Homeland Security basically saying ALL gun owners are red flags.

You selling all your guns this week?

 

Maybe growing up in Illinois I have lived with my freedoms infringed upon and am used to it, but I have no problems with cooperating with law enforcement of any kind.

Your freedom will only be at stake if you are hiding something.

 

This is a repost of something I said in the last thread that still holds true