Why aren't we boycotting the BATFE concerning the DC Sniper Case?

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

El Rojo

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2002
Messages
2,540
Location
The People's Republik of California
You know, I got to thinking, why isn't anyone raising hell with the BATFE over the handling of the audits conducted at Bull's Eye gun shop in Washington (the gun shop that let Malvo walk out with the Bushmaster)? Think about it, the BATFE conducts an audit at the store and finds several missing guns. What do they do about it? Well it doesn't appear that they shut down the gun shop as there ended up being 238 guns missing!!! I don't know about you all, but if I had 238 missing guns, I might notice I had lost a whole lot of product without payment.

So I gotta ask, what are we doing about the BATFE's complete failure to shut this place down? Why should anyone ask Bushmaster why they continued to sell guns to a lawfully licenced dealer when the real question is why the BATFE didn't shut Bull's Eye down? I am going to draft a letter to my Congressman and Senators and ask this question. I am also going to ask them why they failed to pass legislation that would have prevented Bushmaster from even being in this position when it is clear that the negligence was at the hands of the owners of Bull's Eye and the BATFE for failing to shut them down when they couldn't pass their audits.

I recommend we all start raising hell about this. Write letters to your congresscritters, senators, and the President. Lets hold the BATFE accountable. If we want to reduce gun crimes, we need to crack down on these dealers who are unlawfully selling or "losing" guns and have strict enhancements for committing a crime with a firearm. The last thing we need to do is allow Bushmaster to have to spend another dime of their insurance company's money on a crime that could have prevented by the BATFE doing their job.

If anyone has any good links about exactly what happened with the BATFE at Bull's Eye, post them.
 
Bulls Eye closed down after what happened. Changed ownership to a different FFL licensee. That's why BATFE won't shut them down, because it's a different owner with a different bound book. They have to go after the former owner instead.
 
You're assuming that the BATFE actually cares about doing anything other than continuing its own bureaucratic growth spiral.

The entire agency should be disbanded and its assets auctioned off to reduce the national debt. Maybe DEA can take on the kitten-stomping role.
 
No Deej, I am not assuming anything. That is my point. What is their point in existance? Lets start asking those questions and putting the heat on the government to do what is says it is going to do. If they can't, then as you say, lets get rid of them.
 
Of course if the ATF had shot them down youd be seeing threads about how the jackbooted thugs closed down a lawabiding dealer blah blah blah


WilddamnedifyadoanddamnedifyadontAlaska
 
But didn't the BATFE audit them prior to the shootings and find guns missing?
Click to expand...
And what difference would that have made? Muhammad and Malvo went on a shooting spree because they wanted to go on a shooting spree. If they didn’t get the gun from Bulls Eye they would have got it someplace else.

Stop blaming the gun! (or the gun shop owner.)
 
Keeping the books in a high volume gunshop is not an easy thing. The gunshop
didn't do right but they didn't do that badly either. The owner has paid and
will probably pay some more.

I seriously doubt any high volume place has their books 100% right. Too many
different forms and places to keep information. All of the required info is in
different formats and to reconcile them all is not an easy/simple thing.

The BATFE is not your friend. they are not gunstores' friends. If I was President
for a week the first thing I would do is take away their guns and badges. They
should not be considered LEO's, at best tax law enforcement troops.

Then see if there is enough room in the Peace Corps for them.

allan
 
If they didn’t get the gun from Bulls Eye they would have got it someplace else.
Click to expand...
So why bother trying then right? Just go ahead and let gun dealers sell guns to ex-felons because ex-felons break the law anyway? That makes no sense. Either it is illegal to let guns slip out your door and/or to sell guns to ex-felons or it isn't. Which one is it? This relativism is not kosher.

In this case, Bull's Eye's negligence in letting 283 guns slip away (sorry, but losing 283 guns is "doing too badly") resulted in one of their firearms being used in a crime. They should be held liable. Yes, the two decided to shoot the gun and kill the people, but the fact remains, the gun walked right out of their door. Not just one, but 283 guns walked out of their door. How do you explain 283 guns walking out your door and the BATFE never bothers to shut the place down? Sure maybe they only knew about a dozen or so before the shootings, but how many guns do you watch "disappear" before you start asking some tough questions. I just don't get how 283 guns doesn't make a difference in your bottom line.

By boycotting, I hope you all see my play on any possible calls to boycott Bushmaster. What I really want to do is write some letters and ask how a gun dealer misplaces so many guns with out the agency tasked with oversight doing its job. Then I want my representatives to get some good legislation that limits the ability for anti-gun lawyers and other plantifs from having these rediculous cases in the first place.
 
I don't remember if ATF audited Bulls-Eye prior to the sniper case or not. However, it is doubtful. The ATF will tell anyone that will listen that their Inspectors are overloaded, and can't possibly keep up with the workload. ATF needs more Inspectors plain and simple. BTW, Inspectors aren't LEOs.

ATF Special Agents don't do audits, and their responsibility is in investigating crimes (which is why their job code is GS-811 Criminal Investigators ;) ) Sometimes criminal cases are generated by audits, but that is not the typical ATF investigation.

For more info on ATF needing more inspectors and their workload check out this:

Foxnews: ATF Lax on Gun Dealers

The federal agency that checks compliance with gun laws inspects only about 4.5 percent of the nation's federally licensed gun dealers (search) each year, far below the agency's own goals . . .

. . . At that rate, it would take the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (search) 22 years to inspect all 104,000 federally licensed gun dealers, according to the review by Glenn A. Fine, the Justice Department inspector general. ATF's goal is to check each dealer once every three years. . .

. . . The review made nine recommendations for changes in the inspection process, including better staffing requirements, development of a tracking system for license revocations and improved use of gun tracing capabilities. ATF has accepted most of the recommendations, Fine said. . .
Click to expand...

However, as I said the LE functions of ATF are separate from the audits. I posted many of the success stories of the ATF Special Agents on this website, and if you would like to see more just look at the press releases prepared by the US Attorney's Offices around the country. ATF is quite proud of them, and posts links on their homepage, www.atf.gov, some more here, http://www.atf.gov/pressreleases.htm, Project Safe Neighborhood press releases at, http://www.atf.gov/press/press_links.htm If you go to the sites for the individual field divisions they also post press releases about their cases.

It's obvious that ATF does good work, although the Inspectors are undermanned and overworked. They have no problem justifying their existence or budget.

In fact some of their agents just got a very prestigious award for their excellent work:

ATF AGENTS HONORED WITH PRESTIGIOUS TOP COPS AWARD
For Their Work Infiltrating Hells Angels Motorcycle Gang in Arizona
Click Here To Read the Entire Story
 
You're assuming that the BATFE actually cares about doing anything other than continuing its own bureaucratic growth spiral.

The entire agency should be disbanded and its assets auctioned off to reduce the national debt. Maybe DEA can take on the kitten-stomping role.
Click to expand...
Look at their cashflow. They spend something like 700 million (it was <600 mil in 2003), total, and the vast majority of that is spent on firearms operations and outreach (they finance guns-are-bad programs for schools). They rake in 300 million or so in firearms taxes, but their net "income" is something like 15 Billion. Where does it come from? Tobacco and alcohol tax, of course.

The government will never shut down an agency that generates so much money.

That rough cashflow overview I gave above is available on their website, or at least it was. As of 2003, it seems that the income is still going to the Dept. of the Treasury, collected by the BATFE but not reported on its financial statements. I couldn't find it in the 2003 annual report when I just went looking.
 
I don't see anything on that list of press releases that couldn't be adequately handled by another law enforcement agency. Most, if not all of them could be handled by the local PD.

I also see a few things there that fall outside the ATF's purview. Maybe if they spent less time chasing drug dealers (isn't that the DEA's job?) they would have more time to stomp kittens, cut down shotgun barrels, shoot each other while conducting raids, etc.
 
Look at their cashflow. They spend something like 700 million (it was <600 mil in 2003), total, and the vast majority of that is spent on firearms operations and outreach (they finance guns-are-bad programs for schools). They rake in 300 million or so in firearms taxes, but their net "income" is something like 15 Billion. Where does it come from? Tobacco and alcohol tax, of course.

The government will never shut down an agency that generates so much money.
Click to expand...

Looks like the F part of it is a loss leader. Disband it, roll the A&T parts back into Treasury, and we'll have a net gain of $300 million or so. FBI can handle the E end of things.
 
I don't see anything on that list of press releases that couldn't be adequately handled by another law enforcement agency.
Click to expand...
A yes the standard line when someone has a gripe with a particular agency. However, what everyone forgets is that the Congress likes to ensure the money gets spent in a particular way, and that certain laws get particular attention. Therefore they give certain agencies authority over different statutes and control the enforcement by pulling the purse strings. The DEA is a great example. Congress was tired of the various turf wars/hot potatoe attitude toward Title 21 enforcement so they created the DEA to have primary jurisdiction on Title 21. They wanted various Title 18 statutes related to alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives to get better attention than IRS-CID was giving them, and therefore created ATF as a separate agency solely responsible for those laws.
Most, if not all of them could be handled by the local PD.
Click to expand...
Well you're missing the point. ATF enforces FEDERAL laws. So while they pride themselves on working well with the locals, they can take the case even if the locals have no interest, and more importantly the locals don't have jurisdiction over those offenses. Often the locals invite fed agencies to get in on cases, because the penalties are stiffer under fed law.
I also see a few things there that fall outside the ATF's purview.
Click to expand...
None of those cases were outside their jurisdiction. If the case involves illegal weapons, explosives, arson, etc. then ATF has a nexus.
Maybe if they spent less time chasing drug dealers (isn't that the DEA's job?) . . .
Click to expand...
Well ATF often works joint cases with DEA, when the drug runners are also committing weapons, explosives, or arson crimes, in addition to dealing drugs. Just like they would work with the Postal Inspectors if a bomb goes through the mail, same as the DEA would work jointly with the Postal Inspectors if drugs go through the mail. Overlapping jurisdictions allows the experts in each specific area to help work a good case by working together.
. . . they would have more time to stomp kittens, cut down shotgun barrels, shoot each other while conducting raids, etc.
Click to expand...
Ah yes, wonderful rhetoric you spew there, but the facts show that ATF does good work, putting very dangerous criminals in jail.
 
Well I'm going to have a hard time listening to people who refer to seizure of evidence as stealing, when the agents complied with the fourth amendment, by establishing PC, and getting magistrate to sign a warrant.

Also, with regard to Weaver, the ATF can hardly be blamed for those deaths. 1st, the entrapment defense is an affirmative defense. It requires the defendant admit to breaking the law, and then shifts the burden of proof to the defense to prove that the government provided excessive inducement or coercion. However, Weaver had no interest in participating in his Constitutionally assured due process, because his court date was in Feb 92, however the shootout with the Marshals wasn't until Aug 92. Weaver had refused to appear in court, and was a federal fugitive because he wasn't willing to make the affirmative defense required when claiming entrapment.

It is also doubtful that Spence would have ever defended Weaver, if the shootout and subsequent shooting by FBI HRT hadn't thrust Weaver into the national spotlight. Either way, it was the illegal acts of Weaver that caused those deaths. ATF had made a case that had been reviewed by the AUSA, and secured warrants from the magistrate. Further the judge had issued a separate warrant based on Weaver's refusal to appear in court and mount a defense. Weaver could have avoided all of the this by just showing up in court and making his case.

Decent synopsis of the Ruby Ridge incident (which is also critical of fed LE): http://www.crimelibrary.com/gangsters_outlaws/cops_others/randy_weaver/1.html?sect=18

As I've said before if the abuses of the ATF are so widespread, and so blatant, where are the successful criminal prosecutions and successful civil torts against the agents?

Since an ATF agent was recently sued for a paperwork error, all these other stories of outrageous abuse would surely get action in the courts if they were true. Groh v. Ramirez et al
 
Wildalaska: When do people complain about the ATF going after bad guys? I am refering to actual bad guys, not some guy who made an innocent mistake.
 
So why bother trying then right?
Click to expand...
Exactly. In case you haven't heard by now, studies show that none of these gun laws affect crime.

A sporting good store has a bat stolen, a kitchen store has a knife stolen, and a gun store has a gun stolen. All are used to kill someone, but the gun store is somehow more responsible?? That doesn't make any sense.

Surveys show that criminals buy stolen guns and they pay a helluva lot less for them than we do. Criminals are NOT going to walk into gun stores to buy guns if it were suddenly legal for them to do so.
 
deej, exactly. Give the forensics equipment and techs and any decent investigators to the fbi. The A&T folks can go back to working under the same roof as the Secret Service. And everyone's happy (except the Senators and Congresscritters who then look impotent to their constituents when it comes to doing something about the "gun crime problem" in America).

For anyone wondering where in the world I got my figures, try these:

http://www.atf.gov/pub/gen_pub/2001annrpt/2001acc_report.htm
Look at the "financial results, position, and condition" section. 81% of budget in 2001 was spent to "reduce violent crime." (page 4) 11% was spent to "protect the public". The remaining 8% was spent on collecting taxes.

The 2001 financial statements include 14+ billion in taxes collected. The 2003 financial statements do not.

Then look at this (specifically, the pdf for 2001, 4th quarter cumulative tax collection figures):
http://www.atf.gov/alcohol/stats/

Interestingly, they stopped keeping stats after 2001. Hmmm... Maybe now that they're part of the DoJ, they think it compromises OpSec to tell the public what they're doing? :scrutiny:
 
The BATFE does not need more agents. It needs far fewer agents - zero would be ideal.

Lets not miss the most important point here - the laws that the BATFE enforces do not past the test of moral or practical law. Having an agency that exists for the sole purpose of enforcing irrational and immoral laws is, to put it bluntly, stupid.

The fact that the BATFE reigns in an occasional violent criminal is irrelevant - despite all the state's rhetoric, crime isn't a signifigant threat to anyone not actively participating in it. Of course the state loves to talk up the danger of crime - they want us to remain afraid, and to look to - guess who? - for protection.

- Chris
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

BSA1
  • Locked
Why the fear of the BATF?
2 3
Replies
53
Views
2K
Frank Ettin
Frank Ettin
B
  • Locked
Are BATFE career staffers "Gun People"
Replies
9
Views
616
Art Eatman
A
2
  • Locked
BATFE Antics...
Replies
0
Views
402
280PLUS
2
S
  • Locked
BATFE does it again more NICS checks
2
Replies
45
Views
2K
solareclipse
S
C
  • Locked
BATF Backs Down on Background Checks for Wyoming CCW Holders
Replies
8
Views
869
txgho1911
T
Back
Top