Undercover Probe Of Nevada Gun Shows

Status
Not open for further replies.
If what DMF says is true, and his friends at the BATF are only looking to put the dangerous bad guys away, why do we hear so many stories every year of people's lives being ruined because of some clerical error that they were charged with by the BATF. These are generally regular folks trying to play by the book who made a mistake in paper work of some kind, not bank robbers. I am not afraid of the folks that the BATF are usually after. I've heard cases of the BATF charging local police officers with illegal possession of full auto weapons, because when their department told them the procedure to follow, they got some small portion wrong. Should society be afraid of their local law enforcement officers who might have followed the wrong procedure in acquiring their full auto weapons? What would be wrong with a notification that some procedure was not done correctly, and a follow up to make sure it got done correctly, instead of placing people under arrest for a clerical error? I guess they have to try and justify their existence with the number of arrests they make each year.
 
www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/nevada/2004/may/21/052110408.html

14 arrested in undercover federal probe of Nevada gun shows
By SCOTT SONNER
ASSOCIATED PRESS

RENO, Nev. (AP) - Federal agents working undercover at gun shows in Nevada the past year have arrested 14 suspects on a variety of firearms charges that include illegally possessing machine guns and explosives, agents said Friday.

The FBI, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and local law enforcement agencies joined to apprehend the 13 men and one woman in five Western states - Nevada, California, Utah, Idaho and Washington - as part of "Operation Over the Line."

Nine of the suspects were arrested after search warrants were served Friday, and five others already were in custody as part of the investigation, said Daniel Bogden, U.S. attorney for Nevada.

They've been indicted by federal grand juries in Nevada and Idaho. The indictments, some dating to February, were unsealed Friday.

"Undercover ATF agents purchased nearly 40 firearms using different Reno gun shows as the hub of activity," said John Torres, ATF special agent in charge of the San Francisco office.

"We also seized explosives at one residence in Reno today," including 20 blasting caps and 20 feet of detonating cord, he said.

The agents purchased guns over the past year at about 10 gun shows, one in Las Vegas and the rest in Reno, including large events held at the Reno Hilton hotel-casino and the Reno-Sparks convention center, authorities said. The weapons include eight machine guns, 10 hand guns and 15 long guns, Torres said.

Items seized include a bulletproof vest, assault rifles and semiautomatic pistols - specifically a Korean-made AK47 machine gun, a .45-caliber submachine gun, an AK47 semiautomatic assault pistol, a Glock 9 mm pistol, a Glock .40-caliber pistol and a Baretta semiautomatic pistol.

"We want to show that you can't use gun shows as a vehicle to conduct illegal firearm sales," Torres said.

The operation was "part of a nationwide commitment to reduce the number of illegal guns in possession out there," Bogden said.

Assistant Washoe County Sheriff Jim Lopey said the operation was a huge success.

"We got a lot of weapons off the street," he said.

Torres and Bogden said each of the suspects appeared to have been acting independently and none is known to be involved in terrorism or belong to a gang.

"But we want to be sure they do not get into the hands of gang members," he said.

The indictments show undercover buys were made at the "Las Vegas Gun Show" on Jan. 17 and at various sessions of the "Big Reno Gun Show" on April 23 and last year on Aug. 16 and Nov. 15.

"We are not targeting gun shows. We're targeting people who use gun shows as a conduit to traffic illegally in firearms," Torres said.

A message left at the number for the Big Reno Gun Show was not immediately returned. Another listed contact, Donald Shiffer of Carson City, was out of town and not immediately available for comment, said a woman who answered the telephone and identified herself as his daughter.

Nina Delgadillo, senior special agent and spokeswoman for the ATF field office in Sacramento, emphasized that most gun show dealers follow the law.

"This is a minority of people who are using gun shows to conduct illegal activities," she said.

"Unfortunately you have this other kind of people mixed in here," added Thomas Cannon, ATF special agent in charge of the Reno office.

Several of the people charged were felons or were covered by domestic violence restraining orders and were prohibited from possessing firearms, Bogden said.

Only licensed dealers can sell firearms at gun shows and they can sell directly to people only from within the same state. Sales to out-of-state buyers must include a licensed dealer from their home state.

Most of the charges in the indictments are punishable by up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine, although several carry maximum sentences of 10 years in prison, including possession of a machine gun and possession of a firearm by a felon, Bogden said.

--
 
If what DMF says is true, and his friends at the BATF are only looking to put the dangerous bad guys away, why do we hear so many stories every year of people's lives being ruined because of some clerical error that they were charged with by the BATF.
Because criminals lie. They lie and try to convince people they are being victimized by the government hoping to get sympathy. One thing to remember is the ATF (or any other LE agency for that matter) can't put anyone prison, a prosecutor must take the case to court. So LE agencies don't take BS cases because the prosecutors won't take them to court.

On another thread I was flamed because I said ATF didn't have time for small BS cases, when someone claimed a gunshop was robbed because ATF didn't investigate some a small time criminal that the thread starter claimed robbed the shop. I was told it was BS and they should have time for that little stuff. Well it was true then, and it's true now - The feds don't have time for little cases, and they don't take cases the AUSA won't prosecute.

Again, you hear these stories because people lie in attempts to get sympathy, and get out of trouble. Remember the movie Shawshank Redemption? Red - "You're gonna fit right in. Everyone in here is innocent. Heywood, what're you in here for?"
Heywood - "Didn't do it. Lawyer f***ed me."
 
Right on DMF...mindless LE/govt bashing from the armed chicken littles ( hey I coined the opposite of sheeple) is as dumb as the gun bashing of the looney left.

WildproudotbeasheepleAlaskaAlaska
 
wildalaska, I want to see how much you love the government when you transpose two digits on an ATF form and you get your door kicked in and make the 5 pm news on utter BS charges. All the pro-government cheerleading on the gun boards won't make a difference to a prosecutor trying to ruin your life.
Anyone disagree with what I'm saying?

atek3
 
Anyone disagree with what I'm saying?
Yes, I do disagree with what you're saying, because your little two digit hypothetical doesn't come close to reality.

You want a true story of the ATF?

A friend who collects M1s and M1 Carbines called me concerned because he had purchased an M1 Carbine and when it was shipped to him he got an M2 instead (select fire version of the M1 Carbine). He asked me for advice because he didn't want to "get screwed by the ATF." I told him call the ATF explain what happen and they would help him out. Now he had been spending too much time listening to the propaganda, and was convinced as soon as he called the ATF they would dispatch 50 jack booted thugs to his home and seize his sizeable, and very valuable, collection of Garands and M1A Carbines. He was especially concerned because he had just gotten his FFL a few months prior. After a bit of convincing from me, he called the ATF, they were nice and friendly, and helped him straighten out the mess.

Now, my friend didn't do anything wrong, didn't get into any trouble, and no ATF agents or prosecutors tried to make any trouble for him. No doors kicked in, no property seized, no revocation of his FFL. Just a nice cordial effort to straighten out the problem. Why? Because as I said ATF and the AUSAs that prosecute cases are looking for real criminals.

Do ATF Inspectors expect the paperwork to be correct? Sure do. So do IRS Auditors when it comes to your income tax return. But little paperwork errors don't cause Auditors to convince IRS-CI Special Agents to kick in your door, anymore than they cause ATF Inspectors to convince ATF Special Agent to do it. They have real crimes to worry about.

Wildalaska is correct, the hysterical LE/Gov bashing is the equivalent of the hyterical anti-gun propaganda. Both are are perpetuated by people with irrational fears based on ignorance of the facts.
 
Seems conveniently timed with the AWB renewal debate. Too bad they didn't catch anyone for paperwork errors. Those are the most serious threat and show a lack of attention to detail that will ultimately lead to more serious crimes like income tax errors!
 
Well documented? Could you provide me with some information on where to get this documentation? If there were documented abuses by the ATF you would think there would be numerous successful "Bivens actions" againtst ATF agents. For those that don't know Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents is the Supreme Court case that allowed for Constitutional Torts against federal agents, and now Constitutional Torts against federal agents are now known as Bivens Actions or Suits.

But Hawkeye, I'm open to your documentation as long as it's legit documentation and not some BS that can't be backed up. Let me explain so we are clearw, this website: http://www.elfie.org/~croaker/batfabus.html
Is NOT documentation, because it doesn't provide any information that would allow one to verify the claims made are true. So you find some real documentation and I'll listen.

Hell I'll give you an example of the kind of documentation I would consider legitimate: Findlaw.com link to Groh v. Ramirez et al You'll love it Hawkey, it's a Supreme Court decision allowing an ATF agent to be sued for a clerical error in serving a search warrant. BTW, the decision only allows the suit to be filed, it doesn't guarantee that a jury will decide against the agent.
 
atek3,

I have been through that site, and it does not have "documentation" just a bunch of stories that can't be confirmed in any legitimate way. I guess in your world it would be legit documentation if I put together a website with a title like "Abuses of atek3" and just because I bothered to pay for the bandwith, and put some stories there, it wouldn't matter that I don't have any way to confirm those abuse stories are true? :rolleyes:
 
DMF,

Please clarify: If ATF is so busy investigating dangerous criminals, how is it they found the resources to shut down "kitchen-table" gun dealers in the 90's, interpreting the inocuous phrase "must obey all local ordinances" to mean that dealers must have separate commercial store front; and/or commercial zoning where they operate from? Please cite correlation of serious criminal activity with violation of zoning ordinances.

Or, was the 75% reduction of FFL's during the Clinton years just BS?

Why not shut down the thousands of Amway/Avon/Shaklee etc.; home based businesses who operate without the benefit of a commercially zoned storefront? Equal protection under the law, and all that?
 
hammer4nc,

So we are now off the topic of BS stories ATF Special Agents serving warrants for transposing two digits on a form, to ATF Inspectors and other administrators requiring FFLs to comply with local ordinances? Just want to be sure we're done with the previous BS before we move on to a separate debate. ;)

Denying or revoking FFLs is not a criminal investigation, or law enforcement action of ATF Special Agents. You do realize there is a difference between the LE and administrative activities of ATF, just like there is a difference between the administrative activities of IRS auditors and other admin functions, and IRS-CI, or the FDA and FDA-OCI, don't you?

FFLs must comply with local ordinances. Since CONGRESS defined ATF's jurisdiction they don't have the authority to do anything about Amway, AVON, or other businesses outside their statutory authority. You aren't actually suggesting that you want an agency of the federal government to exceed their statutory authority,are you? In addition, if a local zoning ordinance draws a distinction between various businesses, that is up to that local or state government, not the feds. Time to complain to the local or state governments about the zoning laws, not ATF for denying or revoking FFLs for failing to comply with local laws.

Again, big difference between the administrative and LE functions of ATF, just like other departments of government. Also, huge difference over who is responsible for local zoning laws.

EDIT TO ADD: Also, important to take into account that many FFLs may have been shutting down because their businesses may no longer have been profitable due to reduced consumer interest in firearms. Want to fix that? Convince you non-shooter pals to get interested in firearms. Just try to do it in a way that doesn't make you look like a tin hat wearing nut job. It tends to turn off those of us who don't believe in all the hysterical anti-gov't hype. ;)
 
Rather than wait for "activities" (crimes) that do hurt someone, using 18USC922(g) the government can PREVENT the those "activities." It's simple you commit a felony one of the consequences is losing the right to bear arms, just like they lose the right to vote.

Hmmmm.
So, if I go to pick my daughter up from school, and I have my Leatherman on my belt. No, wait, let's make it better.
Suppose I go to pick my daughter up from an after school activity(I.e., band practice, cheerleading, whatever), and I have a Leatherman supertool in my center console(which I always do), but I leave it there in the truck while I walk to the classroom. Now, here comes my daughter's ex boyfriend(who is angry because I have a restraining order against him after he threatened me), or a teacher who I reported to the administration, or somebody who just gets freaked out for what ever reason and calls the cops.
The police come and wait at my truck. When I return, I am arrested for bringing a knife with a blade longer than 2.5 inches onto school grounds(which is illegal in CA, and a FELONY!)
Do I deserve loss of my 2nd amendment rights, as well as the right to vote? Especially if I am Joe Average, who doesn't know the rediculous zero tolerance laws, since he just moved in from out of state a few months back?
Here's another fun CA fact.
When I attended the police academy last year, every one of the recruits in my class comitted felonies on a daily basis. How? Well, halfway through our academy, the public safety training center was declared a Junior college. Suddenly, it was a felony to use our private range on campus. Do we all deserve to lose our rights now? If someone wanted to be a jerk, we could have ALL been indicted.
It just doesn't hold water.
Sorry. :barf:
 
ATF, as an agency, has the responsibility to direct resources according to its (perceived) priorities. If the enforcement branch is so overworked (as you suggest) that they can't follow up on "little crimes"; is it unreasonable to suggest that they hire a few more enforcement agents, and a great deal fewer "administrative" workers, within their funding envelope? Is that so difficult to comprehend?

Seems like priorities are somewhat skewed...no, I'll go further than that. In the 90's, BATF (among their other misdeeds) became the willing accomplice for gun control advocates like Josh Sugarman, who reasoned that making guns more difficult to obtain would be "another way to skin a cat".

Hence the scheme to have ATF (a federal agency) surreptitiously enforce state and local ordinances (arguably unconstitutional) that have nothing to do with their core enforcement mission. Shut down the kitchen table dealers. Harrassment to achieve a political agenda.

I raise the issue of other home-based industries (like Avon) to point out how absurd it would seem to have them regulated in the same way that ATF has regulated firearms. I'm certainly not advocating the creation of a federal agency for these other businesses. So, you agree that this is unequal (selective) enforcement?
 
I'll type this slowly for those who don't read fast.

Law Enforcement Officers do not make the laws.

Politicians make the laws.

Law Enforcement Officers get paid to enforce the laws created by the Politicians.

If you don't like the laws blame the Politicians not the Law Enforcement Officers.
 
wildalaska, I want to see how much you love the government when you transpose two digits on an ATF form and you get your door kicked in and make the 5 pm news on utter BS charges. All the pro-government cheerleading on the gun boards won't make a difference to a prosecutor trying to ruin your life.

:rolleyes:

I"ll be back on this thread after I mold my tinfoil....

PS..its aint Pro government cheerleading..its called reality...and as one who has been a criminal defense lawyer and as one who has been involved in sec 1983 lawsuits I think I have a better handle on how LE works that the internet ranters (and I wonder how many people who cry about felons being prohibited from owning guns are either too young to own em or felons themselves :D )

BTW, I am sure that abuses occur...so lets see, if 1% of all LE officers are corrupt rights violating thugs, I guess following your logic that means they all are..

Be consistent, under that logic all gun owners are dangerous, all gun dealers are criminal...

WildthegunchickenlittlesscarememorethanthegovernmentdoAlaska
 
Law Enforcement Officers do not make the laws.

Absolutely agreed. And I wouldn't expect LEOs to ignore violations with criminal intent.
However, there used to be a thing called discretion. Very few LEOs seem to use this these days. It is an underexercised(is that a word?) power of LE these days.
Too many of the new breed of LEO are following the letter, rather than the spirit of the law.
FWIW, I do know quite a few who respect and uphold the term"Peace officer".
Much like guns, we only hear the stories which paint them in a poor light.
Which is what the left leaning media wants....
 
Law Enforcement Officers get paid to enforce the laws created by the Politicians. If you don't like the laws blame the Politicians not the Law Enforcement Officers.
So the SS troops who were just enforcing the law were not to blame for anything?

Don't think I'm anti-cop because I'm not. Most cops I have met have been fair and honest people but if a law is wrong, the cop who enforces it is just as wrong. As far as the cops in this thread I won't make any judgement as I don't know any of the details.
 
However, there used to be a thing called discretion.

I agree, in fact my first chief preached that discretion was the most powerful tool a police officer had.

However, that was 25 years ago. In todays law-suit-happy world an officer could get sued in civil court for not enforcing the laws exactly the same to everyone no matter what the circumstances.

Nowadays a LEO is under the microscope every day. There are legions of people watching and waiting for any opportunity to pounce.

I honestly don't think I could still do the job in today's social climate.
 
Should have thought of that before ya left the scene...

WildtoobadforhimAlaska


This is the sort of simplistic foolishness that causes people to so despise such a large segment of LEO, especially the federal level.

Let me tell you a little story: 15 years ago, give or take, I was going thru a divorce. I had also allowed my drivers license to expire in that time. Just slipped my mind. After the divorce I wound up with one vehicle and my ex the other, which she didn't want. I agreed to sell it for her. So at my place of business, on my parking lot, I have this white '78 Eldorado which I would park in the lot during the day, then pull back into the garage on another section of the lot at nite.

One evening I am backing it out of its slot and I flatten the side of a customer's mini-van. The Eldo doesn't even have a scuff but that Chrysler...wow. So I go in and tell the customer and let him know I'll pay for the repairs, of course, then go ahead and call the cops so the guy feels more comfortable having a police report. I then park the car back in the garage. Now keep in mind this is all on private property...

Johnny Law arrives and it is an ISP trooper instead of the local I expect. Oh well, no biggie. Well, so I thought...until I was ticketed for no license, no insurance, leaving the scene and no plates. For a vehicle that wasn't being driven, was still in the same location and an accident that didn't happen on public streets. My license was suspended and it took nearly a year of court fights to get it back and avoid a felony charge. In the end the state finally admitted the entire thing was bogus. Of course they didn't offer to pay me back any of my expenses.

I don't know how many people I know who have had instances where they "left the scene" and were later charged in some fashion even though there were no injuries and both parties were amenable to leaving. Fortunately in indiana this is not an automatic felony but I doubt very seriously it happens any less frequently in states where it is. But hey, they shoulda thought about it...eh?

And this sort of thing, along with examples of mistakes with checks and a thousand other inconsequential but suddenly felonius acts is justification for losing ones rights of Citizenship, Wild? Of course it is... :rolleyes:
 
hammer4nc doesn't want any LE discretion, which might be construed as unequal of selective enforcement:
So, you agree that this is unequal (selective) enforcement?
BTW, I do not agree.

However, fjolnirsson wants all kinds of LE discretion:
However, there used to be a thing called discretion . . . Too many of the new breed of LEO are following the letter, rather than the spirit of the law.
So the LE guys can't win, because if an LEO uses discretion one person will cry it's unfair enforcement, and if an LEO doesn't someone else cries it's a ridiculous adherence to the letter of the law.

Well Blues Bear is right about why discretion is limited for LEOs:
Nowadays a LEO is under the microscope every day. There are legions of people watching and waiting for any opportunity to pounce.
For those that don't know where discretion in the government side of the criminal justice system lies it's with the prosecutor's not LE. Prosecutors decided whether to file charges, and take cases to court. I have had cases I knew were good denied by the prosecutor because it just wasn't big enough, or in fed vernacular "sexy" enough. Also, there can be pressure from prosecutors to get things the LE agency thinks is a waste of time investigated.

Add to the mix that the priorities brought up earlier aren't really decided by the agency, they are decided by Congress. If an agency like ATF wants to hire more Special Agents for criminal investigations (as suggested earliear) they have no say if the budget from Congress doesn't support that. Congress in providing money, can and does specify how money is spent, and in doing so controls agency priorities.

It's a lot more complicated than the anti-LE, anti-gov't propaganda would have you believe. Sort of like the issue of crime control is a lot more complicated than the anti-gun hysteria tries to make people believe.
 
I agree, in fact my first chief preached that discretion was the most powerful tool a police officer had.

A couple years back I was roundly and thoroughly condemned on TFL for suggesting that discretion was possibly the most important part of being a good officer and that today's lack of discretion was one of the biggest problems facing LEO. When I think back to some of the stupid things we did as kids that, then, got us yelled at by the cops and today would leave us with felony raps I thank God I am not growing up today.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top