Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Waitone on October 01, 2011, 11:35:11 AM
-
http://townhall.com/columnists/katiepavlich/2011/09/30/bombshell_doj_considering_elimination_of_atf/page/full/
Elimination of bATFE is a well considered action for a number of reasons. . . . . but not until we get to the bottom of Fast and Furious (aka Project Gunwalker et al).
Do ya thimk this may be a coverup? Odds on republicans doing the stupid thing?
-
It's just smoke and mirrors. Only reason the D's would do that is to enable burying bodies hidden in that agency. And they'd never really close it down. It would just get re-org'd into another agency or three. And the only purpose of doing that would be make it easier to implement new regulations with greater difficulty to make the .gov accountable for said regulations.
-
They can move it to the Ministry of Peace in the DHS.
-
http://townhall.com/columnists/katiepavlich/2011/09/30/bombshell_doj_considering_elimination_of_atf/page/full/
Elimination of bATFE is a well considered action for a number of reasons. . . . . but not until we get to the bottom of Fast and Furious (aka Project Gunwalker et al).
Do ya thimk this may be a coverup?
The whole NFA34/CGA68 system won't be going away. Someone else would be handling enforcement.
Odds on republicans doing the stupid thing?
Count on it.
-
Are we sure this wasn't a reprint from The Onion? [tinfoil]
-
Agreed on the smoke and mirrors.
All the agents, and managers, and bureaucracy that is part of the ATF will just get transferred to the FBI... or even worse... to a new sub-branch of DHS.
Probably end up with a Firearms/Explosives branch in DHS that wants to treat every gun purchase as a candidate for terrorist activity.
-
Agreed on the smoke and mirrors.
All the agents, and managers, and bureaucracy that is part of the ATF will just get transferred to the FBI... or even worse... to a new sub-branch of DHS.
Probably end up with a Firearms/Explosives branch in DHS that wants to treat every gun purchase as a candidate for terrorist activity.
I don't know if eliminating the BATFE is a great idea. We've been able to keep the BATFE from having an actual director since 2006. Better a weak and disorganized adversity than a strong and relatively well organized adversity.
FBI would be very hard to counter if they pulled sneaky underhanded tactics. I know from personal experience the FBI has a more institutional sense of ethics, or perhaps just a longer history that allows them to realize one has to be subtle to get away with sneaky underhanded tactics. So likely the sneaky underhanded actions would be more rare, but harder to counter.
DHS? Oy. They're the only branch of the government more incompetent and flatly hostile to Americans than BATFE. They're under the institutional perception that everyone hates them for doing what is necessary in keeping the country safe. It leads to a generally sullen mildly spiteful environment.
Honestly, I'd rather we kept the BATFE around, slash their budget, slash their field personnel, refuse to let them have a director, and retract whatever discretionary powers we can from their remaining personnel. As I said, better a weak adversity that we know and already have on the ropes. Doing this to the FBI or DHS would be nearly impossible, and weakening the FBI might actually endanger the country rather than empowering it as we do by weakening the BATFE.
Weakening the DHS would probably be safer for Americans, though. They haven't caught many terrorists, yet they've made life a living hell for many Americans. Call me funny, but I see DHS as a more long term threat to the United States than terrorism.
-
Yeah, really, DHS would be the nightmare scenario.
And I think FBI would be a wash. They'd be more professional and probably less spiteful in the day-to-day issues of gun regulation, but I agree, that if/when they did decide to screw over a gunstore, or whoever, they'd be even harder to fight.
-
If I was the director of the FBI I would politely decline the opportunity to take over the functions of the AFT. They (the FBI) have more important things to do.
-
The fun part would be giving all the tax enforcement back to the IRS. $50/pack cigs, moonshine would be all you could afford and your form 4 would get lost....forever.
On the gun purchase screening/law enforcement end I'm sure that state police could handle 90% of it and the other 10% would be the FBI for gun trafficking, really bad rare stuff.
-
If I was the director of the FBI I would politely decline the opportunity to take over the functions of the AFT.
Of course, that could mean resigning.
-
No, it would only be worse. The FBI would be more efficient/effective at enforcement, and the Treasury folks would screw up your paperwork six ways to Sunday and you'd have to file twelve amended forms to get a gun.
If they are going to "close it down", then "Close It Down", de-funded and delete all the laws, regs, etc. that they enforced.
-
The FBI would be more efficient/effective at enforcement
That could be both good and bad.
The FBI runs the NICS system for background checks, which the ATF never follows up on if a known violent felon attempts a purchase.
We might get prosecution of Bloombergs minions who attempt illegal purchases as well.
The ATF is disorganized and corrupt, but I never liked their arbitrary enforcement of laws.