shotgunjoel
Member
Is the ATF ussually considered pro gun, or anti gun in how they run their department? Like do they nit-pick good people just to push them around, or what?
Is the ATF ussually considered pro or anti?
- Thread starter shotgunjoel
- Start date
- Status
General Geoff
Member
The ATF is by definition anti-gun. They are the agency who regulates that which should not be regulated.
Tinman357
Member
ATF
After having worked in close proximity to the BATFE and several DHS members that have worked with then hand in hand, I can assure you that they are the most dedicated individuals you would ever want to meet. They are so anti-gun they make Feinstein look like Charlton Heston.
They violate their own regulations and guidelines as a matter of routine. A favored quote often heard is "The end justifies the means"
The end is the shutting down of every FFL dealer that can't keep up with regulations that change so fast and are so nit-picking strict that even they don't know what they are. Law is made up by individual agents on the spot to suit what ever agenda they have for the moment.
I personally know a very well known FFL that has been fined SEVERELY for allowing "Y" and "N" instead of "YES" & "NO" on a 4473.
I know of a FFL that was run bankrupt and his license yanked because he was the victim of shoplifting. :banghead: HE WAS THE VICTIM!!
Vent off::::: Yes. They are very anti gun for "We the People" Very elitist group.
After having worked in close proximity to the BATFE and several DHS members that have worked with then hand in hand, I can assure you that they are the most dedicated individuals you would ever want to meet. They are so anti-gun they make Feinstein look like Charlton Heston.
They violate their own regulations and guidelines as a matter of routine. A favored quote often heard is "The end justifies the means"
The end is the shutting down of every FFL dealer that can't keep up with regulations that change so fast and are so nit-picking strict that even they don't know what they are. Law is made up by individual agents on the spot to suit what ever agenda they have for the moment.
I personally know a very well known FFL that has been fined SEVERELY for allowing "Y" and "N" instead of "YES" & "NO" on a 4473.
I know of a FFL that was run bankrupt and his license yanked because he was the victim of shoplifting. :banghead: HE WAS THE VICTIM!!
Vent off::::: Yes. They are very anti gun for "We the People" Very elitist group.
jackdanson
Member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 859
Very, very, very, very ANTI.
There seems to be less stories of blatant corruption/entrapment/illogical use of force than there was in the 80s and 90s, but as GG said, the atf, by definition, is ANTI.
The ATF is a "tax agency" that will bust down your door and point mp5s at your face if you (ironicaly) have a gun that is malfunctioning and firing full auto or accidently trim a barrel a quarter of an inch shorter than the legal limit.
There seems to be less stories of blatant corruption/entrapment/illogical use of force than there was in the 80s and 90s, but as GG said, the atf, by definition, is ANTI.
The ATF is a "tax agency" that will bust down your door and point mp5s at your face if you (ironicaly) have a gun that is malfunctioning and firing full auto or accidently trim a barrel a quarter of an inch shorter than the legal limit.
jackdanson
Member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2008
- Messages
- 859
Speed limit laws aren't unconstitutional.
Furthermore, even if I agreed with the law, the punishment doesn't fit the crime. If you go 1 mph over the speed limit you are going to get a ticket for $50-$100. It is LEGAL to trim a barrel to under 16 inches, but you have to pay your $200 tax. Failing to pay for a $200 tax stamp is NOT justification for sticking guns in peoples' faces or putting them in prison for 10 years.
A "fair" punishment would be making them pay for the tax stamp, plus a ticket of $100 or something.
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
Just how antigun they are is determined by the party in power at any given time.
I have watched them swing back and forth from "sorta" to "rabid" several times over the last 50 years.
rc
I have watched them swing back and forth from "sorta" to "rabid" several times over the last 50 years.
rc
Duke of Doubt
member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2008
- Messages
- 2,863
They aren't "anti-gun," any more than the IRS is in favor of higher tax rates. If anything, in a sense they're pro-gun, inasmuch as without guns they'd be out of a job and probably unemployable by the private sector. However, they are regulators of guns, they are highly bureaucratic, and they aren't gun enthusasts like we are. They also have among them more than a few control freaks with self-esteem issues -- just as most large organizations do. Low barriers to entry/credentialing and high degrees of control over better men than they -- guess what sort of person that tends to attract. It's like DHHS social workers. Any moron can become a social worker, and they are given huge powers over individuals and families. So that job tends to attract lousy people and repel honest people. Similarly, unfortunately, with ATF. They're not "anti-gun," and some of them are just fine. But too many jerks find an ATF job a great outlet for their emotional problems.
BCCL
Member
They are by definition, there for the purpose of interfering in and destroying the freedoms of free citizens.
Can they be any more anti?
I honestly do not know how an American "citizen" can put on an ATF badge and look themselves in a mirror.
Can they be any more anti?
I honestly do not know how an American "citizen" can put on an ATF badge and look themselves in a mirror.
Doctor's won't imprison you for having a virus. They don't require you to pay a tax or have a permit for having certain viruses.
This analogy doesn't make sense.
Like others said, by definition, the ATF (and those who have passed any sort of law restricting ANY form of gun ownership), are anti-gun. Again, by definition, they oppose the constitution (specifically the 2a) by infringing on it (they trespass/breach/encroach) while it clearly states that you shall not infringe it.
Using the Merriam Webster dictionary, by definition, the ATF is anti-gun to be specific and anti-rights to be broad.
Last edited:
Deanimator
Member
The BATF(E) has a long history of being anti-law and Constitution.
I think their greatest hit was their production of an OFFICIAL training video on how to LIE UNDER OATH.
Runner up was their allowing a serving supervisor to organize a RACIALLY SEGREGATED annual shindig, out of government offices, on government time, using government resources, the invitations for which went out on agency letterhead.
Yeah, they're a real class act...
I think their greatest hit was their production of an OFFICIAL training video on how to LIE UNDER OATH.
Runner up was their allowing a serving supervisor to organize a RACIALLY SEGREGATED annual shindig, out of government offices, on government time, using government resources, the invitations for which went out on agency letterhead.
Yeah, they're a real class act...
so if your going 1 mph over the speed limit, you should not get a ticket?
Vehicle analogies are always poor choices when used to compare against firearms. It's something the opposition does constantly.
The federal government does not define speed limits, nor fine for when they are broken. Unless I am mistaken, enforcement of the limit can be relaxed in some cases by the officer responsible for writing the citation. In any case, your car isn't going to be considered henceforth an "illegal car" just because you were speeding.
Conversely, you won't get a "warning" for accidentally sawing your shotgun barrel half an inch too short. The weapon will likely immediately be confiscated and you'll face charges, of the federal kind. How much more dangerous is that 17.5" barrel than your previous 18" barrel? Apparently enough that it should warrant felony charges.
Now the ATF didn't create that law or the other ridiculous ones that they enforce, but I'm sure they aren't wailing and gnashing their teeth at the doors of Congress trying to get them relaxed.
<soapbox> BATFE is not a gun-rights organization of any kind; much of their function infringes on the right to keep and bear arms which is protected by the second amendment of the Constitution. They are a bureaucrat-heavy organization which does little besides exist to perpetuate itself and provide tax revenue. It's function could easily be redefined and enforcement of the remaining laws handed off to other state and federal law enforcement. But you aren't going to see that happen under a regulation/legislation-philiac, liberal Democrat government. "We need more regulation!" </soapbox>
jm
Vehicle analogies are always poor choices when used to compare against firearms. It's something the opposition does constantly.
The federal government does not define speed limits, nor fine for when they are broken. Unless I am mistaken, enforcement of the limit can be relaxed in some cases by the officer responsible for writing the citation. In any case, your car isn't going to be considered henceforth an "illegal car" just because you were speeding.
Conversely, you won't get a "warning" for accidentally sawing your shotgun barrel half an inch too short. The weapon will likely immediately be confiscated and you'll face charges, of the federal kind. How much more dangerous is that 17.5" barrel than your previous 18" barrel? Apparently enough that it should warrant felony charges.
Now the ATF didn't create that law or the other ridiculous ones that they enforce, but I'm sure they aren't wailing and gnashing their teeth at the doors of Congress trying to get them relaxed.
<soapbox> BATFE is not a gun-rights organization of any kind; much of their function infringes on the right to keep and bear arms which is protected by the second amendment of the Constitution. They are a bureaucrat-heavy organization which does little besides exist to perpetuate itself and provide tax revenue. It's function could easily be redefined and enforcement of the remaining laws handed off to other state and federal law enforcement. But you aren't going to see that happen under a regulation/legislation-philiac, liberal Democrat government. "We need more regulation!" </soapbox>
jm
Gunnerpalace
Member
A. The ATF is never going to go away, you can grip all you want it isn't going to happen.
B. Pro or Anti goes with the administration, I will point out however, the ATF directors testified before congress that 1. legal MG's don't cause crime, 2. the AWB was/is/is going to be worthless, and the current director has said he supported the Heller decision whereas the FBI director denounced it.
B. Pro or Anti goes with the administration, I will point out however, the ATF directors testified before congress that 1. legal MG's don't cause crime, 2. the AWB was/is/is going to be worthless, and the current director has said he supported the Heller decision whereas the FBI director denounced it.
Some people here are great. They can be so literal. Of course physicians don't arrest or tax people. My point was, ATF tries to regulate/limit/control firearms, and physicians work to regulate/limit/control viruses. Neither would be "pro" something they are trying to eliminate/control.
From wordnet.princeton.edu:
analogy: drawing a comparison in order to show a similarity in some respect; "the operation of a computer presents an interesting analogy to the working of the brain"
But wait...a brain doesn't have a power cord....or RAM that can be upgraded. Therefore, this can't be an analogy (sarcasm).
It won't be long before someone chimes in "Not all viruses are bad. Some can be used for molecular genetic research and are likely the future for cures to diseases...blah blah blah.".
You either get it, or you don't.
jakemccoy
Member
The ATF is anti-rights and powerful. Otherwise, I would not have a healthy fear of them.
rojocorsa
Member
Them? Those armed tax collectors?....
Obviously they wouldn't make most of their living off illegal guns.
Obviously they wouldn't make most of their living off illegal guns.
ServiceSoon
Member
They can be good or bad. Depends on the director(s).
Prince Yamato
Member
Umm... not really. They are, by definition a tax and regulatory agency. They enforce the laws, they don't make them. My dealings with the ATF have generally been pleasant. I've only dealt with them on firearms matters. They also serve the function of making sure the liquor that comes into the country (like Absinthe) isn't cut with anti-freeze. People have an irrational fear of the ATF.
Cannonball888
Member
Agent Smith
Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2009
- Messages
- 48
The BATFE enforces regulations, it does not pass them. Do not violate any laws and you will not have any problems.
Kind of Blued
Member
Agent Smith, that's precisely the problem many people have with the ATF. So many of the laws which the ATF enforces are considered unconstitutional nonsense by so many Americans.
Just because a governmental employee is "following orders" or "enforcing the law" doesn't mean that it's the right thing to do ethically. The photo above your post is getting at that same point.
Just because a governmental employee is "following orders" or "enforcing the law" doesn't mean that it's the right thing to do ethically. The photo above your post is getting at that same point.
- Status
