New Administrative Ruling at Justice Dept/ATF

[Trent]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/sep/6/atfs-latest-gun-grab/

The Obama administration is making it easier for bureaucrats to take away guns without offering the accused any realistic due process. In a final rule published last week, the Justice Department granted the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) authority to “seize and administratively forfeit property involved in controlled-substance abuses.” That means government can grab firearms and other property from someone who has never been convicted or even charged with any crime.

This is very RKBA relevant, I believe. If not, mods, please advise.

 

[TurtlePhish]

Couldn't this be (easily) argued as completely unconstitutional if it went to court?

 

[Trent]

In theory, yes. But there's a long enough precedent in place with seizure of boats, cars, and houses ...

You *DO* have recourse, obviously, but it will involve lawyer(s), and lots of time + money.

 

[Cesiumsponge]

They gave the ATF the same powers of broad asset forfeiture the DEA has used for the better part of a decade. Take a look at how the DEA uses asset forfeiture and you'll know where this is going.

 

[fatcat4620]

So they will take your guns when they arrest you for drugs?

 

[baylorattorney]

Means a lot of college kids could lose their daddy's collectors pieces if in proximity to a Bong?

 

[Cesiumsponge]

Property seized under civil asset forfeiture laws require a lot of lawyering to get back. Lawyering is difficult if they seize your financial assets. Your property is assumed guilty unless proven innocent. They can take your assets away and not charge you with anything, sell off your property, and use the proceeds to buy neat stuff.

Here is a primer in it. More people should be outraged. http://www.ij.org/part-i-policing-for-profit-2

 

[berettaprofessor]

Except you start that crapola with gun-owners and...well...we'll just watch and see how it goes.

 

[cassandrasdaddy]

a link to the actual ruling? the author neglected one

 

[Neverwinter]

Except you start that crapola with gun-owners and...well...we'll just watch and see how it goes.

Fairly well since the DEA has been involved with civil asset forfeiture for a while now. Where's the outrage about that, or is this just an emotional knee jerk reaction because of the association of the ATF?

Sent using Tapatalk 2

 

[Frank Ettin]

This appears to be merely an extension of current civil asset forfeiture practices to the ATF. Civil forfeiture of assets related to drug offenses has been going on for some time.

Civil forfeiture is highly controversial and raises a number of constitutional, due process and civil liberty issues. But those issues are not directly firearm relates, and therefore a proper discussion of those issues is well beyond the scope of this Forum.