Suggestions for the Acting Deputy Director
#51
Posted 03 July 2011 - 01:34 PM
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
To "Citizen":
Be careful when using a broad brush. Yes, there are instances (you gave one example) when a small group of people within ATF did "manufacture a criminal". They are not all like that and that you were able to post what you did proves that.
To "Avatar":
"In a real-world sense, ATF mismanagement that affects the firearms industry (manufacturers, importers, gunsmiths) through the unannounced reinterpretation of long-standing rules is a legitimate issue." Absolutely correct.
You are also correct about the attorneys who concoct this stuff rarely if ever have to clean up the mess.
As you stated it is NOT mismanagement by Special Agents. That being said there were only a couple of unfortunate times when I have had the displeasure of interacting with Special Agents who enjoyed enforcing the ATF attorney's agenda a little to much. They were few to be sure, out many many interactions with Special Agents; Just as some wack job doesn't represent the whole firearms industry, neither do they represent all of ATF.
As to MAC style "upper" you speak of...yes, all true. The really sad tale there is ATF then Associate Chief Counsel (now Deputy assistant Director) in early 2006 wrote a memo concerning ATF new interpretation on MAC "uppers" for FTB. Myself and my company and products were mentioned throughout...ATF never shared the information or the document with my company.
I never would have designed or built the "arrested" MAC "upper" if my company had been aware of the memo (which was released in a FOIA to another party recently). I certainly would not have agreed with it's conclusion, but I would not have wasted the enormous time, money, and resources. ENFORCEMENT BY AMBUSH.
The growing frustration of "How can I be compliant with something held secret and only revealed when I'm in Federal Court?"
I'm a reasonable person, certainly not violent in any manner. I prefer to work methodically within the system. Beware however, not all are like me and this dangerous game of destroying lives, marriages, businesses, savings, etc. is eventually as any statistician can tell you come up "all lemons" as some point.
Since we apparently all concur on the source of this foolishness, we have a responsibility to correct it. Look through darned near any thread on this forum and the common denominator is CCO or Chief Counsels Office.
How do we fix it?
#52
Posted 03 July 2011 - 12:38 PM
SY,
To clarify some things, the person in charge of the operation was a first line supervisor (a RAC - resident agent in charge) just as this guy Voth was a RAC at the heart of the Gunwalker fiasco in Tucson. A bad supervisor can do a lot of damage. The vast majority of ATF agents are hard working, honest and cherish the 2nd amendment. Many ATF agents served or still serve in the military, and most own their own firearms outside of what we carry. Because of this, it hurts ATF agents when stupid initiaitives (like what happened in Richmond and Tucson) damage our credibility and paint us as "gungrabbers" or ignorant about the impact of ill conceived "initiaitives". For the majority of the 5100 ATF employees, nothing is further from the truth. Look at the FBI, DEA, ICE or any large law enforcement agency - they all have a few bad apples and we are no different.
As to the "whims of some agent who happens to be reviewing the books," that would typically be our inspectors (now known as investigators or IOIs). These IOIs are the person that FFLs usually encounter. They are NOT law enforcement, carry no powers of arrest, search or seizure. When agents come knocking on a dealer's door, it is typically for another reason, like getting 4473s for criminal cases, conducting interviews (FFLs are our key partner in stopping straw purchases and firearms trafficking), etc.
To help out the majority in ATF, write to or call your Congressman or U.S. Senator and demand accountability for those at all levels of ATF who violate ATF and DOJ ethical rules, aided in the trafficking of guns to Mexico ("Gunwalker"), lied to or misrepresented facts to Congress, etc. Only when the likes of Melson, Hoover, Chait, McMahon, Newell, Needles, Gillett, Voth are gone from positions of authority can ATF begin to heal. Believe me when I say we want nothing more than to serve the public as the honored law enforcement officers, IOIs and support that 99% of us are.
Well put Valkyrie
#53
Posted 03 July 2011 - 12:22 PM
This is the type of stuff that scares me. I am not any type of LEO... I am just your average shooting enthusiast and the son of a 25 year plus FFL. The capriciousness of some members of the ATF doesn't exactly give me the warm fuzzies (and they are the ones in charge, no less...). It would seem that my father and I stand to lose quite a bit based solely on the whims of the agent who happens to be reviewing the books that day.
I have spent fifteen years of my life serving in the military for THIS?!?
Kudos to those agents trying to turn things around. You have the support of us folks on the "other side of the line." I know you are risking much and appreciate your integrity.
Wish I could do more to help...
SY
SY,
To clarify some things, the person in charge of the operation was a first line supervisor (a RAC - resident agent in charge) just as this guy Voth was a RAC at the heart of the Gunwalker fiasco in Tucson. A bad supervisor can do a lot of damage. The vast majority of ATF agents are hard working, honest and cherish the 2nd amendment. Many ATF agents served or still serve in the military, and most own their own firearms outside of what we carry. Because of this, it hurts ATF agents when stupid initiaitives (like what happened in Richmond and Tucson) damage our credibility and paint us as "gungrabbers" or ignorant about the impact of ill conceived "initiaitives". For the majority of the 5100 ATF employees, nothing is further from the truth. Look at the FBI, DEA, ICE or any large law enforcement agency - they all have a few bad apples and we are no different.
As to the "whims of some agent who happens to be reviewing the books," that would typically be our inspectors (now known as investigators or IOIs). These IOIs are the person that FFLs usually encounter. They are NOT law enforcement, carry no powers of arrest, search or seizure. When agents come knocking on a dealer's door, it is typically for another reason, like getting 4473s for criminal cases, conducting interviews (FFLs are our key partner in stopping straw purchases and firearms trafficking), etc.
To help out the majority in ATF, write to or call your Congressman or U.S. Senator and demand accountability for those at all levels of ATF who violate ATF and DOJ ethical rules, aided in the trafficking of guns to Mexico ("Gunwalker"), lied to or misrepresented facts to Congress, etc. Only when the likes of Melson, Hoover, Chait, McMahon, Newell, Needles, Gillett, Voth are gone from positions of authority can ATF begin to heal. Believe me when I say we want nothing more than to serve the public as the honored law enforcement officers, IOIs and support that 99% of us are.
#54
Posted 03 July 2011 - 12:20 PM
OK, as Webmaster, I'll weigh in on this...
We would never intentionally engage in activity, commercial or otherwise, that makes light of F & F, Gunrunner, etc., for obvious reasons. That said, this entire endeavor has expended an extraordinary amount of uncompensated time and money. Merely responding to daily member and visitor inquiries, login problems, media requests, monitoring rules compliance, etc., etc., has become a full time job as we approach 700 registered users and an average of 3,000 to 4,000 visits a day. I happen to have a full-time job already, and the manner in which this site exploded over the last 2 years is frankly more than I ever bargained for. I'm not complaining; just sayin'.
Accordingly, we are considering the pursuit of some suitable advertisers to generate operating revenue for the site. Our initial thoughts are that we would limit available advertising exclusively to companies/products/services that would be of direct or indirect interest to federal law enforcement personnel and/or their families. Obviously, we would need to determine what such items should/would be.
Although this is a privately-owned website and not a democracy per se (meaning that we can do pretty much whatever we feel like), we would be interested to hear the membership's opinion, particularly as to what types of advertisers you would view as appropriate.
CUATF.org Webmaster
CUATF staff,
Thank you for doing all that you do and I am sure this is very time consuming. If you sell advertising space, I would prohibit any company that is regulated by ATF to avoid any nonsense later on in a court or administrative hearing. Keep doing what you are doing and Happy 4th of July everyone.
#55
Posted 03 July 2011 - 12:04 PM
#56
Posted 03 July 2011 - 11:32 AM
In a real-world sense, ATF mismanagement that affects the firearms industry (manufacturers, importers, gunsmiths) through the unannounced reinterpretation of long-standing rules is a legitimate issue. The reason is that since ATF has declined to, for example, make public its various Letter Rulings, and manufacturers, importers and gunsmiths find out about the "new" rules only after the fact in proceedings that are rightly termed "enforcement by ambush," because the enforcement falls to ATF Special Agents, Industry Operations Investigators (who have no enforcement powers, per se, but whose reports can be and are used to support enforcement activities) and others, the perception of not getting a fair shake falls on THEIR backs, not on the backs of ATF attorneys who concoct the rules.
In an environment, then, in criminal cases where Discovery motions cause ATF to fork over ONLY those Letter Rulings and other documents that justify and support the ATF position, while declining to provide exculpatory or potentially exculpatory Letter Rulings and other documents, the enforcement process gets subverted.
To be clear, this is not "mismanagement" by ATF Special Agents and others who are tasked with doing enforcement; rather, it is a case where ATF mismanagement victimizes ATF Special Agents and others by putting them in crummy positions of having to unfairly enforce the law, typically against SELECTED manufacturers, importers and gunsmiths. Not across the board.
Let me close with an example. There was a recent case involving an "upper" manufactured by Historic Arms, LLC, that was ruled to be a machine gun as the result, in part, of ATF putting chains, zip ties and other devices on the "upper" to convert it into a machine gun. As such, those items were conversion devices. What was troubling about that case, is that Historic Arms, LLC, selected 5 or so other "uppers" that ATF didn't even classify as firearms; used the same chains, zip ties and other devices to convert these uppers into machine guns; and doing that had no bearing on the legal outcome of the case involving the Historic Arms, LLC "upper."
Now, I personally have no interest in "uppers" or the issues involving them, which apparently revolve around changing calibers in a machine gun to make it more versatile. The problem that I have with the ruling in that case is WHAT on Earth would or could prevent ATF from arbitrarily selecting, from the MILLIONS of "uppers" that ATF has not even ruled to be firearms, some poor guy who has one installed on his lawfully registered and possessed machine gun; coverting that upper into a machine gun; and then charging the guy with Possession of Unregistered Firearm, to wit, a machine gun?
This "retroactive noncompliance" to which you refer seems to fall squarely into the situation that I have just described, but carries it to even more treacherous ends. It boils down to ATF arbitrarily dishing out felony violations of the NFA against people whom ATF did not in the past regard as criminals. I suppose manufacturing criminals is one way to improve ATF's performance statistics--but is this a proper way to do it? And is this a proper/ethical use of ATF Special Agents and others at ATF?
#57
Posted 03 July 2011 - 09:38 AM
I'm not sure you'd want advertisers from the industry, though, for a lot of obvious reasons - a) to avoidd the appearance of any "quid pro quo" relationship with the advertisers, and then the embarrassment of an advertiser turning out to being someone like Cavalary Arms or Ben Paz (former owner of that glock parts site). (google him - caught selling glocks from a suitcase in a hotel room to a non-resident alien, and found to have 140+ glock frames in his shop without their serial number plates, and he got 7 years of home confinement for a sentence.
I think you're chances of drawing industry advertisers would grow a little if you had an industry side of this forum - ie where industry members could detail their experiences with ATF, Washington DC in the way of incompetence, arrogance and corruption. personally i'm at the point of writing a letter to technology branch that may well prove to be my suicide note but i'm ready to retire anyway. They've re-interpreted so many regs, so many times, and done mental gymnastics in their "re-interpretations" that a reasonably intelligent individual would need more than one roll of duct tape to keep his head from exploding.
Then layer on top of that, on one of those mis-interpretations i had then Chief Counsel's Office Theresa Ficaretta, in a mocking tone of voice agree with me that the newest "re-interpretation" was ridiculous & she asked me to commit it to writing and send in the letter direct to her. Two weeks later i rcvd a response that, and I kid not, basically said "we can do this because we never said we wouldn't". Then to make the letter worse, (tech branch and her were reversing long standing policy that Title I regs didn't apply to NFA items, ie in the way of "non-sporting" weapons regs), in my letter i had indicated that the 450 -500 customers that had bought the shoulder stock (for a pistol) in good faith based on the previous FTB's chief, Ed Owen ruling(who was no slouch in the way of knowledgeability of the regs) - Those owners had presumably registered their pistols as SBRs - at least they were due a variance or exemption otherwise by this new interpretation, ATF was putting them into felony violation retroactively. And ATF was complicit in their "felony violation" as ATF had accepted their SBR registrations. That request was also denied by Mrs Ficaretta.
I realize this site was started by ATF agents for ATF agents, but i think if you had another side or page on this forum for industry members, it would expand support for your cause and expose the corruption & incompetence ATF demonstrates on a daily basis to the industry.
But back to point - another suggestion for revenue for the board to help cover costs. Have you considered offering "premium" memberships. it wouldn't entail anything or everything you would decide it to include. On another gun forum HK Pro, members can view & post without paying any fees, but if a member chooses to cough up the "Premium" fee, the title "Premium" member under their identity in postings. They've added some other benefits to being a Premium member overtime, the fee is basically a chance for members/users to support the forum financially.
I and i'm sure a lot of others, recognize that this forum takes quite a bit of effort & time by the webmaster, and with the membership fees some of the "ditch digging" work could be farmed to an IT guy to handle, and let the webmaster devote his time to managing the site. I don't think most folks would have a problem with paying a $15-20 annual fee for membership.
Between membership fees, and some revenue from a "CleanUPATF.Org" T-shirt, it should lighten the cost of maintaining this forum. Servers cost money and need upgrading, bandwith costs, etc - I remember when the owner of HKPRO.com told me, in the early years what the monthly costs were, it surprised me. In fact, if the webmaster wanted to contact him, he's a captain on a Missouri PD, i'm sure he would share his experiences and how he handled them when he was in the same situation this forum is, with viewership climbing the way it is. If so, throw me an email thru my profile, and i'll send you his contact info.
again, just some suggestions
#58
Posted 02 July 2011 - 10:41 PM
I have spent fifteen years of my life serving in the military for THIS?!?
Kudos to those agents trying to turn things around. You have the support of us folks on the "other side of the line." I know you are risking much and appreciate your integrity.
Wish I could do more to help...
SY
#59
Posted 02 July 2011 - 09:19 PM
I am not a federal law enforcement officer (or any type of law enforcement officer) and am not familiar with federal law enforcement publications, but would respectfully suggest that to the extent such exist on some commercial basis, take a look at them and see who advertises, and what they advertise. I suggest this because federal law enforcment is a specific target "audience" and there is probably some common experience there. By that, I mean one thing I know about ANY law enforcement is a concern about showing any sort of favoritism or political tendencies. Of course, politics and favoritism exists everywhere, but I don't think concern about image is anything to be sneezed at. I realize that saying "study these issues" isn't a quick answer, but I think in this case it is important to think all of the objectives through. If, for example, it is a matter of needing to raise some money to get technical assistance with the CleanUpATF site, and manage it, consider an appeal to members and others to make anonymous donations and see what gives or not.
#60 Guest_CUATF Webmaster_*
Posted 02 July 2011 - 09:07 PM
We would never intentionally engage in activity, commercial or otherwise, that makes light of F & F, Gunrunner, etc., for obvious reasons. That said, this entire endeavor has expended an extraordinary amount of uncompensated time and money. Merely responding to daily member and visitor inquiries, login problems, media requests, monitoring rules compliance, etc., etc., has become a full time job as we approach 700 registered users and an average of 3,000 to 4,000 visits a day. I happen to have a full-time job already, and the manner in which this site exploded over the last 2 years is frankly more than I ever bargained for. I'm not complaining; just sayin'.
Accordingly, we are considering the pursuit of some suitable advertisers to generate operating revenue for the site. Our initial thoughts are that we would limit available advertising exclusively to companies/products/services that would be of direct or indirect interest to federal law enforcement personnel and/or their families. Obviously, we would need to determine what such items should/would be.
Although this is a privately-owned website and not a democracy per se (meaning that we can do pretty much whatever we feel like), we would be interested to hear the membership's opinion, particularly as to what types of advertisers you would view as appropriate.
CUATF.org Webmaster
#61
Posted 02 July 2011 - 07:52 AM
Actually there's more detail to that report - first, apparently the agent wearing that T-shirt, was attempting UC dress as a biker, as he had motorcycle gang type attire (chain going from his belt to his wallet, etc). An employee of a local gun shop (that shop has never exhibited at gun shows and will not exhibit / sell at shows), was at the richmond show, trying to sell a personally owned Remington 870 & a S&W M60 (boxed) walking around with them with index cards on both indicating "for sale". The ATF agent that seemed to be in charge of the operation pulled him cause he had seen him at another show selling guns and wanted to know if he was selling without a license. The kid tried to explain that while he had been at another show BUT WITH THE SAME TWO GUNS for sale. The agent in charge interviewed him or held him in a henrico PD cruiser for 45 minutes as a check of his driver's license came back "showing it had been suspended" - after 45 minutes or so, he released the kid saying it must have been a computer glitch, driver's license was good.Lest we forget:
May 2004 - August 2005. Richmond, VA and Pittsburgh, PA. ATF Agents, in conjunction with Virgina State and local police, conducted an operation at some eight gun shows in Virginia. With special attention to female purchasers, hundreds of gun show attendees were stopped by Virginia State Police (VSP) as they returned home, were detained and interrogated by ATF Agents, and many had their purchases confiscated by these ATF agents who failed to cite any legal authorization for confiscation. The purchasers were compelled by an ATF letter (under threat of arrest) to appear later at ATF offices to explain and justify their purchases. ATF provided purchaser names and addresses to the local police who then conducted "residence checks". ATF task force personnel involved in the operation were Ed Melton, Andrew Stanley, and Ricky Williams. The Resident Agent in Charge, Scott L. Sammis signed the confiscation letter. "One ATF Agent had a t-shirt on which read, "If you can read this, the bitch fell off". Gun show participants objected. (From an official Virginia State Police Report, dated 22 August 2005)
In addition, in Pittsburgh, Pa., ATF agents showed up at gun show customers’ homes a week after a show, demanding to see the buyers’ guns or sale paperwork and arresting those who couldn’t — or wouldn’t — comply.
Great PR, Guys..... "How to win friends and influence people". Wouldn't Dale Carnegie be proud?
Now comes the great PR work part. The kid had enough sense, when released from the henrico cruiser to ask the ATF agent for identification, as he wanted to know who had interviewed him. With a henrico cop standing right there, the agent stated "do you want to be in more trouble than you're already in?" in a loud beligerent voice.
The kid insisted there was no honest reason to not identify himself and he wanted to know who had interviewed him. The agent stepped forward and got in the kid's face, and in an even louder voice bellowed "I'm Agent McClosky, got that?" (that id is from my memory from listening to the kid being interviewed on the Gordon Liddy talk show, and McClosky was in the richmond office)and turned to walk away. As the agent turned to walk away, the kid saw that T-shirt with the "b---h fell off" inscription and asked him "Agent McClosky, is it customary for representatives of my gov't to wear clothing with profanity detailed on it, in an environment where there are children and family members?". the agent turned & walked back over and in the kid's face bellowed "I'm a federal f--king agent and i'll do what the f--k i please!" That's the part that really made that operation the winner in the "excellence in public relations" competition.
If that guy wasn't the richmond SAC, then he at least was in the management training program.
The seizure of the purchased firearms, this was the first i heard of that, but what i do know was happening was that background checks being performed at the show (state of VA Police maintain a booth for bc checks), were being delayed by Va State police due to "computer problems" and dealers told to come back in an hour or so. while they waited, that info was given to either a City of Richmond officer or a Henrico officer, depending on where the purchaser resided, for the officer supposedly to confirm the purchaser resided where the purchaser had indicated. And that's when they would interview the occupants of the purchaser's address. WTF??
There were 54 marked PD cruisers (city of richmond & Henrico PD, as reported on the radio in richmond), and 70+ officers and with no arrests for mis-represented addresses on their 4473s. A lot of money spent on an imagined problem. I have no doubt some mis-represent info on their 4473, but to treat innocent buyers the way those were, ON THE ASSUMPTION, that there was a violation there somewhere - kind of turns my opinion on what law enforcement is supposed to be about, upside down.
the second part of that op that was disturbing, that the info on the 4473s that was released to city of richmond & henrico county pd was privacy protected material. The State Police of Va forms (counterpart to the 4473 ) do not detail addresses, only name and SS#, so it had to have been ATF releasing that info.
The real purpose of that operation, i suspect, was to kill gun show attendance, that day and in the future. What the papers didn't report at the time, the entrance to the state fairgrounds, where the show was being held, was framed by six cop cars, with lights flashing, 3 on either side of the entrance road. And if you did decide to drive thru the entrance to the parking lot, seeing 54 "black & white" cruisers parked in the lot would definitely cause most folks to head somewhere else. Most folks, if they pull into a 7-11 to get their morning java, see one or 2 cop cars nosed up to the store's entrance with lights on, tend to think, maybe i'll get my coffee at the next 7-11. Same here - and sure enough, that weekend's attendance was down over 60%.
the part that made it curious, if the operation was to catch straw purchasers with a strong UC presence (ATF had a number of UC working the show, that would follow female attendees around hoping to hear them tell a dealer she was "looking for a gun for her boyfriend" or blacks looking to buy for their "homies in the hood"), then why announce a Law enforcement presence with that many marked police cruisers, out front and in the parking lot? If i recall the congressional hearing correctly, no one was charged with any violations at that show.
the genius at HQ that thunk this operation up sure left a lot of his IQ turned off that day.
#62
Posted 02 July 2011 - 07:01 AM
Oversight hearing on Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE): Gun Show Enforcement (Part I and II)
On February 15 and February 28, 2006, the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, held a hearing on ATF enforcement activities at gun shows; and, specifically, its activities at a Richmond, Virginia, gun show. The latter included "uniformed law enforcement [visiting] the address of every purchaser form Richmond or Henrico County attempting to purchase a gun and ask for a full description of the individual attempting to purchase the firearm, where he or she worked, how many firearms the potential purchaser owned, and in some instances, if there were any concerns about the person in question purchasing the firearm. If no one was at the listed address, a neighbor was interviewed."
For ATF and other folks who may be interested, there is a Web Site called National Firearms Act Owners Association (NFAOA) that has an a large number of hard-to-find documents posted as PDFs (so one can see the copy of the document itself, rather than electronic text), which delve mainly into experiences of citizens, gun collectors, and FFLs with ATF mismanagement in a number of areas. The above PDF is taken from that site. It is an interesting site, in part, because it seems to complement the CleanUpATF site in the sense that the NFAOA site was created because many citizens, gun collectors, and FFLs were disgruntled by how ATF was treating them and wanted to band together and memorialize common experiences as well as put into public view the many public documents that ATF created to deal with them.
By the way, the NFAOA "Resources" page did not spring fully formed out of the head of Zeus during the past few weeks. It has been around since 2003, and its managers have slowly but methodically added documents as time allows. Nobody is paid anything for this work, and much like CleanUpATF, it has been perpetuated by a core group that believes ATF and the Government can give its citizens, gun collectors, and FFLs a fairer shake in a significant number of instances. The principle behind the NFAOA "Resources" page is to (1) make hard-to-find documents that are in the the public domain more widely available, for free, (2) briefly or not so briefly discuss aspects of the documents such that cold readers will have some notion about what the issues are, and (3) act as clearinghouse for such documents.
The contents of the NFAOA "Resource" page is too extensive to summarize, but below is a listing of what amounts to its Table of Contents. You can get there by going to http://www.nfaoa.org/resources.html
- New: Amnesty Documents and ATF activities relevant to §207( b ) and §207( d ) of the Gun Control Act of 1968
- 5th Amendment rights: An attorney explains why not to talk to the police, which includes ATF
- Federal District Court cases with a significant focus on the NFRTR, 2007 to present
- CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight reports on the Olofson case and ATF abuses
- Citizen's Guide to using FOIA and Privacy Act to obtain Government Documents, and Example Letter
- ATF Special Agents prepare for million dollar lawsuits nationwide, consider class actions
- District of Columbia v. Heller -- Parker v. District of Columbia case on 2nd Amendment
- Resources for the NFA Owners Association - General Items
- James Bardwell: NFA and other gun law and related info and cases
- Legal discussions of NFA issues by James H. Jeffries III, Esq.
- ATF or Department of Justice responses to letters from Members of Congress
- Len Savage Court Testimonies, Firearms Technology Branch (FTB) Classification Letters and Related Issues
- National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers FOIA BATFE Manuals
- Letters by Members of Congress regarding ATF mismanagement
- War Trophy firearms, DEWATs, and related issues
- Legal issues regarding the accuracy and completeness of the NFRTR
- ATF and Treasury Department Inspector General investigations and audits of the NFRTR, and related documents
- Department of Justice Inspector General Reports on BATF, and related documents, 2005 to present
- National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934, as amended
- Gun Control Act of 1968: Hearings, Legislative History and related documents
- Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986: Hearings, Legislative History, and related documents
- Congressional reports on ATF, and related documents
- Proposed NFA and other firearms legislation in the 110th Congress (2007-2008), and related documents
- Proposed NFA and other firearms legislation in the 109th Congress (2005-2006), and related documents
- 2006 ATF Oversight Hearings before the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security
- Congressional testimonies and statements of Eric M. Larson, 1996 to 2001, and related documents
- Congressional Research Service (CRS) reports on the National Firearms Act and related issues
#63
Posted 01 July 2011 - 10:16 PM
May 2004 - August 2005. Richmond, VA and Pittsburgh, PA. ATF Agents, in conjunction with Virgina State and local police, conducted an operation at some eight gun shows in Virginia. With special attention to female purchasers, hundreds of gun show attendees were stopped by Virginia State Police (VSP) as they returned home, were detained and interrogated by ATF Agents, and many had their purchases confiscated by these ATF agents who failed to cite any legal authorization for confiscation. The purchasers were compelled by an ATF letter (under threat of arrest) to appear later at ATF offices to explain and justify their purchases. ATF provided purchaser names and addresses to the local police who then conducted "residence checks". The VSP acknowledged at least twenty-one individuals were deterred from making purchases due to questioning from Task Force members (Gee, I wonder why?) ATF task force personnel involved in the operation were Ed Melton, Andrew Stanley, and Ricky Williams. In addition, the Congressional Hearing listed Acting Resident Agent in Charge, Brian Swann and Agent McComas. The Resident Agent in Charge, Scott L. Sammis signed the confiscation letter. "One ATF Agent (Agent McComas) had a t-shirt on which read, "If you can read this, the bitch fell off". Gun show participants objected. (From an official Virginia State Police Report, dated 22 August 2005) ATF stated at the Richmond gun show, that this was a "Pilot Program" that ATF was planning to apply throughout the country. Witnesses at the Congressional Hearing testified that ATF Agents were verbally abusive......
In addition, in Pittsburgh, Pa., ATF agents showed up at gun show customers’ homes a week after a show, demanding to see the buyers’ guns or sale paperwork and arresting those who couldn’t — or wouldn’t — comply.
Great PR, Guys..... "How to win friends and influence people". Wouldn't Dale Carnegie be proud?
#64 Guest_Sandy Davis_*
Posted 01 July 2011 - 02:42 PM
Also, I did not mean to say that you personally were blaming Vince, but this is a very public forum and I think ATF has already held him up to enough public ridicule. But that's just my opinion, and I think this is now just becoming a distraction from the one thing we all agree on and that is helping in whatever way we can to support the agents who are fighting so hard to set things right.
#65 Guest_old school_*
Posted 01 July 2011 - 12:13 PM
Old School - ATF has "unlimited funds to litigate this case indefinitely" (old quote from Michelle Davis King, but current mindset), they have zero accountability if they are caught retaliating, lying under oath, and conspiring to break the law, and they get to make up the rules as they go along. They have all of the power and none of the consequences. The media is usually the only weapon left to agents. It's the media that gets the politicians and the attorneys to take your case. Many times without the media, you are simply ATF's latest casualty. Unfortunately, many times the media has it's own requirements before they will give you air time. I didn't like doing some of the hokey stuff "60 Minutes" had us do, but that was nothing compared to the agents who were losing their careers and needed the spotlight turned on them.
Just curious - if you were fired, or about to be, and your pension and your family's welfare was on the line, what would you do if no one was paying attention? I think most agents struggle with the decision to go to the media as it does indeed give the entire agency a black eye and most agents truly love this agency. But I think that instead of agents sitting around judging Vince's media compromises, they would be better served focusing on the true problem within ATF, and that would be the snake pit at the top. Of course we all know it's a whole lot easier to blame Vince and others like him than it is to stand up to those who really are the problem.
I have always been uneasy with those who criticize agents who don't get involved because they just don't have it in them, but if you are unable to get involved or just too afraid (and righteously so), at least do not sit back and criticize those who are putting it all on the line. And ironically, it's usually those agents sitting around thinking that it can not happen to them, who get sucker-punched, or even more ironically, benefit from those who did stand and fight. I think 'lead, follow, or get out if the damn way' certainly applies here.
Hello, sorry to make you -uneasy- but you don't know me or my story. I get it, the media tool. You misunderdstood me or perhaps I was not clear. I also understand ATF has unlimited power to come after you. I have been through some very bad times with ATF in 20+ years and I know what the hell I'm talking about. I have done the "right thing" against bad managment in the past many times and it nearly cost me my job. I have suffered extreme retaliation 4 times but not to the extent of Vince and Jay. You say I am one of these agents -just sitting around being critical- but that was not my point and it would be inaccurate. I have been down the lonely road with ATF when even my ATF friends would not stand up for me when false allegations were stacked against me. FLEOA would not even help me.
I did not say I was against Vince or others going to the media with interviews, but myself and many others who DO support Vince think the video taping in the ATF Office was out of line and a bad move.
I commend Vince on standing his ground and seeking justice and giving us a voice through this forum. I am not slamming Vince in ANY way and I apologize to vince if he takes it that way. I am not blaming Vince either as YOU said, but the fact is many of us did not agree with what he did with the video taping, and that is ALL I said in my post.
Now I'm puzzled, do you want actual opinions or is this forum supposed to be a love-fest?
#66 Guest_Sandy Davis_*
Posted 01 July 2011 - 11:07 AM
Just curious - if you were fired, or about to be, and your pension and your family's welfare was on the line, what would you do if no one was paying attention? I think most agents struggle with the decision to go to the media as it does indeed give the entire agency a black eye and most agents truly love this agency. But I think that instead of agents sitting around judging Vince's media compromises, they would be better served focusing on the true problem within ATF, and that would be the snake pit at the top. Of course we all know it's a whole lot easier to blame Vince and others like him than it is to stand up to those who really are the problem.
I have always been uneasy with those who criticize agents who don't get involved because they just don't have it in them, but if you are unable to get involved or just too afraid (and righteously so), at least do not sit back and criticize those who are putting it all on the line. And ironically, it's usually those agents sitting around thinking that it can not happen to them, who get sucker-punched, or even more ironically, benefit from those who did stand and fight. I think 'lead, follow, or get out if the damn way' certainly applies here.
#67 Guest_old school_*
Posted 01 July 2011 - 10:47 AM
on the point of the "F&F" t-shirt possibly offending the Terry family, sorry, that possibility hadn't occurred to me - sometimes i'm tunnel visioned
but a simple "CLEANUPATF.ORG" t-shirt - not sure how that's hijacking the website or it's focus. I'm suggesting this website do the shirt and use the proceeds to support this board and to gain more notoriety ie attention of the public, which would directly serve this forum's purpose as you stated
sorry for the mis-step on the t-shirt making light of "F&F"
Understood O/R, the shirt is a great idea but I'm just voicing my opinion.
O/S
#68
Posted 01 July 2011 - 10:03 AM
on the point of the "F&F" t-shirt possibly offending the Terry family, sorry, that possibility hadn't occurred to me - sometimes i'm tunnel visionedAbsolutely not. There are definite problems and issues with our agency but this forum or its name does not need to be hijacked by enemies of ATF (not you Original ralph). This is not "abolish ATF" as many in the industry and public would like to see, its "cleanup ATF". In my opinion, purpose and messages on this site need to be used to inform those who are unaware of the issues and corruption AND to let the public know that these terrible decisions and policies that have occurred do NOT represent most of the agents and employees of ATF who work each day to try and make a difference for the safety of the country. I wish we did not need it, but this site is a good mechanism of checks and balances of the commoners of ATF against the corrupt elite of ATF - and I don't think all of our top mgt is corrupt.
Merchandise? I would not support any t shirt or merchandise that made light of the F&F issues. I think that would be in poor taste and insulting to the Terry family and others.
There are some things associated with this site I do not agree with, for example Vince recording himself in the office and airing it on TV. Many agents I know wished he would not have done that. However, I have not walked in his shoes and I understand he must have felt that was a good decision for him. I knew Vince back in the day and would still go through a door with him anytime (even if I think he is a little extreme) but that is his way.
but a simple "CLEANUPATF.ORG" t-shirt - not sure how that's hijacking the website or it's focus. I'm suggesting this website do the shirt and use the proceeds to support this board and to gain more notoriety ie attention of the public, which would directly serve this forum's purpose as you stated
sorry for the mis-step on the t-shirt making light of "F&F"
#69 Guest_old school_*
Posted 01 July 2011 - 09:07 AM
Absolutely not. There are definite problems and issues with our agency but this forum or its name does not need to be hijacked by enemies of ATF (not you Original ralph). This is not "abolish ATF" as many in the industry and public would like to see, its "cleanup ATF". In my opinion, purpose and messages on this site need to be used to inform those who are unaware of the issues and corruption AND to let the public know that these terrible decisions and policies that have occurred do NOT represent most of the agents and employees of ATF who work each day to try and make a difference for the safety of the country. I wish we did not need it, but this site is a good mechanism of checks and balances of the commoners of ATF against the corrupt elite of ATF - and I don't think all of our top mgt is corrupt.don't know if you guys have thought about but the possiblity of some CUATF related merchandise to help cover the board's costs
obviously, a couple of just plain "CleanUPATF.ORG" T-shirts, maybe in some different colors, reasonably priced would sell, but they'd have an additional benefit. Once some folks wear them into a gun shop, it will draw some folks into visiting this site, and the more aware the public is, especially the firearms owning public, the more support you'll get. And a lot of the folks drawn to this website, i'd be willing to bet would buy one of the T-shirts. You may think you know how much animosity there is in the firearms industry toward ATF management, but it's deeper than i suspect you realize.
2nd idea for a T-shirt - this one will at least give someone a chuckle, and maybe an idea for other T-shirts, but one that pokes fun at ATF management with a pix of the Taco Bell chihuahau (or one close) with the caption - "My owner went to the US, and only came back with an AK-47" or a "fast & furious AK-47), then again, with the CUATF.org somewhere across it
if you guys need or want an assist with organizing the T-shirt production, it's easier than you think and i wouldn't mind giving someone contacts (printer, t-shirt supplier etc).
I assume the idea of marketing something is probably totally foriegn to most in law enforcement, and the possibility of it may even be an anethema to some, but especially the first t-shirt would sell well, and the more folks are wearing it, that's free advertising
another idea, might be to seek assist from some industry organizations (and i'm not saying the NRA, but i would talk to them as well) to see what kind of finanncial support, and other kinds of support they could offer - whether in direction, legal, etc. I'd also consider contacting the major firearms manufacturers, for the same support, financial and basic directional support.
I've been in the industry since 1982, and as Len Savage at historic Arms LLC can tell you, the industry's opinion of ATF management would make a sailor blush. The regs get re-interpreted so often, and usually in a 180 degree fashion from the last interpretation, that you have to be a mental gymnast of Olympic caliber to keep up.
the more organized this effort gets, the more management is going to be worrying.
02 from an old fart
Merchandise? I would not support any t shirt or merchandise that made light of the F&F issues. I think that would be in poor taste and insulting to the Terry family and others.
There are some things associated with this site I do not agree with, for example Vince recording himself in the office and airing it on TV. Many agents I know wished he would not have done that. However, I have not walked in his shoes and I understand he must have felt that was a good decision for him. I knew Vince back in the day and would still go through a door with him anytime (even if I think he is a little extreme) but that is his way.
#70
Posted 30 June 2011 - 08:28 PM
obviously, a couple of just plain "CleanUPATF.ORG" T-shirts, maybe in some different colors, reasonably priced would sell, but they'd have an additional benefit. Once some folks wear them into a gun shop, it will draw some folks into visiting this site, and the more aware the public is, especially the firearms owning public, the more support you'll get. And a lot of the folks drawn to this website, i'd be willing to bet would buy one of the T-shirts. You may think you know how much animosity there is in the firearms industry toward ATF management, but it's deeper than i suspect you realize.
2nd idea for a T-shirt - this one will at least give someone a chuckle, and maybe an idea for other T-shirts, but one that pokes fun at ATF management with a pix of the Taco Bell chihuahau (or one close) with the caption - "My owner went to the US, and only came back with an AK-47" or a "fast & furious AK-47), then again, with the CUATF.org somewhere across it
if you guys need or want an assist with organizing the T-shirt production, it's easier than you think and i wouldn't mind giving someone contacts (printer, t-shirt supplier etc).
I assume the idea of marketing something is probably totally foriegn to most in law enforcement, and the possibility of it may even be an anethema to some, but especially the first t-shirt would sell well, and the more folks are wearing it, that's free advertising
another idea, might be to seek assist from some industry organizations (and i'm not saying the NRA, but i would talk to them as well) to see what kind of finanncial support, and other kinds of support they could offer - whether in direction, legal, etc. I'd also consider contacting the major firearms manufacturers, for the same support, financial and basic directional support.
I've been in the industry since 1982, and as Len Savage at historic Arms LLC can tell you, the industry's opinion of ATF management would make a sailor blush. The regs get re-interpreted so often, and usually in a 180 degree fashion from the last interpretation, that you have to be a mental gymnast of Olympic caliber to keep up.
the more organized this effort gets, the more management is going to be worrying.
02 from an old fart
#71
Posted 28 June 2011 - 04:24 AM
http://www.atf.gov/p...observance.html
Taxpayer funded celebrations of sex habits has NO place in government. Sex acts have caused this agency enough grief already. If someone is gay, straight, multiple discipline or whatever and needs a self esteem boost.... annual leave and personal finances can fill the void.
The best part is, the HQ crew really believed they were going to get blessings from the taxpayers by advertising this on the web. THE COUNTRY IS BROKE - NO MORE SEX CELEBRATIONS!
#72
Posted 28 June 2011 - 12:10 AM
#73
Posted 24 June 2011 - 10:07 PM
#74
Posted 24 June 2011 - 03:17 PM
#75
Posted 24 June 2011 - 02:39 PM
#76
Posted 23 June 2011 - 04:10 PM
#77
Posted 18 June 2011 - 06:04 PM
#78
Posted 16 June 2011 - 03:39 PM
#79
Posted 16 June 2011 - 01:09 PM
#80
Posted 13 June 2011 - 04:20 PM
#81
Posted 09 June 2011 - 05:50 PM
#82
Posted 09 June 2011 - 02:46 PM
#83
Posted 06 June 2011 - 12:37 PM
No! Do not let ATF do that to you! They have set their precident!
Vanessa McLemore lied to investigators under oath (perjury) on two separate occasions and was allowed to retire and praised as an agency "trailblazer" when she left. That was arranged courtesy of Carter and Hoover.
When someone lies but is not under oath they call it "lack of candor". It is perjury without the formality.
Ask Marvin Richardson how that works. As an ASAC in Phoenix he answered questions with a "lack of candor" to OIG investigators. He then told the OIG that all the Agents who recalled the situation in question in the same way but, different from him, were lying. His lack of candor was documented.
In all their wisdom ATF then promoted him to be the Cheif of the Professional Review Board so he could oversee and impose punishments on Agents for the same violations he got a free pass on! Then he got promoted again to the SAC of Denver.
I dare one person to step up and claim that any of that is not true. Please. Challenge my statements but, be careful. Because when you do I am going to jam the documentation that validates these claims down your throat.
abc, if you need this documentation it will be gladly supplied to you.
#84 Guest_Jumper_*
Posted 06 June 2011 - 08:27 AM
Vanessa McLemore lied to investigators under oath (perjury) on two separate occasions and was allowed to retire and praised as an agency "trailblazer" when she left. That was arranged courtesy of Carter and Hoover.
When someone lies but is not under oath they call it "lack of candor". It is perjury without the formality.
Ask Marvin Richardson how that works. As an ASAC in Phoenix he answered questions with a "lack of candor" to OIG investigators. He then told the OIG that all the Agents who recalled the situation in question in the same way but, different from him, were lying. His lack of candor was documented.
In all their wisdom ATF then promoted him to be the Cheif of the Professional Review Board so he could oversee and impose punishments on Agents for the same violations he got a free pass on! Then he got promoted again to the SAC of Denver.
I dare one person to step up and claim that any of that is not true. Please. Challenge my statements but, be careful. Because when you do I am going to jam the documentation that validates these claims down your throat.
abc, if you need this documentation it will be gladly supplied to you.
Is one way to fire agents just to say they LACK CANDOR WITH no evidence to support these claims.
#85
Posted 06 June 2011 - 05:18 AM
#86
Posted 27 May 2011 - 04:31 PM
#87
Posted 23 May 2011 - 08:38 AM
This information collection is both illegal and unnecessary. ATF justification for collection of the data is based upon lies, false and misleading data.
Analysis of the number of firearms seized shows that Mexico may be primarily supplied with firearms by South American countries, NOT the United States. In fact, a STRATFOR report indicates that fully 90% of of the firearms traced in Mexico are NOT coming from the United States, contrary to assertions by ATF and the mainstream media: http://wwwprod-17561...0-percent-myth.
Additionally, Wikileaks cables have shown the US Government is at least partially responsible for supplying Mexico from the United States: http://narcosphere.n...repower-mexico. These firearms are NOT from the US commercial market.
1. ATF admitted it (falsely) overstated the "trafficking" problem and deliberately mislead Congress and the American People. Between 2008 and 2010, ATF quoted 90% of guns seized in Mexico came from the United States. In September 2010, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) issued a draft report critical of Project Gunrunner, followed by a final version in November, 2010. The OIG analysis of ATF data shows, of the guns submitted for tracing, a much lower percentage of guns (about 27 percent) traced to the United States. These percentages significantly differ from those in ATF testimony before Congress. See below for additional detail.
Only after being confronted with the OIG analysis, did ATF then admit to the OIG that the 90% figure cited to Congress is misleading. During this 2010 review by the OIG, ATF could not provide updated information on the percentage of traced Mexican crime guns that originated in or imported through the United States.
2. ATF's proposed reporting is overly broad and vague. Rather than "a very narrow group of long guns" as ATF stated, the proposed rule includes a huge number of guns unlikely to be trafficked. Instead of specifying the guns ATF keeps saying are the problem (AK47, AR15, .50 caliber, etc.), they have included a huge number of curio and relic rifles up to 100 years old - of interest mainly to collectors. Many ordinary hunting rifles, and many rifles chambered for obsolete ammunition no longer manufactured are included. This is a strange way to gather information on firearms traffickers!
3. ATF's proposed reporting violates the Firearm Owners Protection Act:
a. By requiring these records be transferred to the United States Government, and
b. Creating an additional system of registration of firearms and firearm owners.
"No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary's authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation."
4. Once reported to ATF, these proposed registration records never go away, but permanently remain in ATF databases at the National Tracing Center, and if traced, will be reported to corrupt Mexican police.
If a trace links to any of these records, even in error, many innocent American gun owners personal information (including name and address, height, weight, drivers license number, possibly Social Security Number, date of birth, place of birth, and all other guns linked to that last name and date of birth) will be reported with each trace to Mexican police. If your name is Smith or Jones (Garcia or Martinez in the Southwest), there are many people with the same date of birth!
5. ATF is attempting to exceed it’s authority to require reporting of rifles. 18 USC Section 923(g) explicitly gives ATF authority to gather information on multiple handgun sales, but not rifles.
6. ATF has been complicit in supplying Mexican Narco-terrorist forces with firearms. Source documents of the ATF uncovered by US Senator Grassley and US Representative Issa show that ATF has been complicit in supplying Mexican Narco-terrorist forces with firearms: http://www.scribd.co...CEG-to-DOJ-ATF.
7. ATF will use violations of the multiple rifle sale reporting requirement to punish dealers. The proposed rule is vague (by not defining “greater than .22, etc.) and deliberately misleading. As a result, many law-abiding dealers will misunderstand and inadvertently fail to report some sales. These unintentional violations will be used by ATF in attempts to revoke dealers licenses.
8. ATF is attempting an “end run” around Congress. As expressed in a letter from Montana’s Congressman, Denny Rehberg to the President, implementing ATF’s proposal will subject firearms dealers and their customers to:
a. New, onerous reporting requirements that will inevitably track and register the purchases of innocent law-abiding gun owners.
b. Congress authorized multiple sales reporting for handguns, but have never extended this authority to other types of firearms.
c. Expanding multiple sales reporting for rifles by executive decree would be an end run around Congress.
10. ”FFL” holders are already required by law to respond to ATF requests for information on firearms distribution pursuant to criminal investigations: Title 18 U.S.C. § 923(g)(7).
11. There is a grave potential for this regulation to unduly burden citizens who are collectors or must obtain purchase permits at the local or state level to possess firearms. The proposed regulation does not say what the agency intends to do with the information but ostensibly it would be for criminal investigations. Subjecting law abiding gun owners to this type of investigation under the guise of “information collection” is an overt attempt to prevent them from exercising their 2nd Amendment rights to purchase and own firearms.
ATF has repeatedly lied to Congress and the American People regarding sources of seized Mexican guns;
1. On February 2008, William Hoover, Assistant Director for Field Operations of ATF falsely testified before Congress that over 90% of the firearms that have either been recovered in, or interdicted in transport to Mexico, originated from various sources within the United States.
2. In May, 2008, William Newell, Special Agent in Charge of the ATF Phoenix Office falsely reported: "When 90 percent-plus of the firearms recovered from these violent drug cartels are from a U.S. source, we have a responsibility to do everything we can to stem the illegal flow of these firearms to these thugs."
3. President Obama, Hillary Clinton, California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, CBS newsman Bob Schieffer and several others falsely and foolishly repeated the same 90% figure in public - to the media.
4. On April 02, 2009, Fox News published "The Myth of 90 Percent: Only a Small Fraction of Guns in Mexico Come From U.S.".
5. On June 19, 2009, The U.S. Government Accountability Office falsely reported to Congress (based on ATF data), "Over 90 percent of the firearms seized in Mexico and traced over the last 3 years have come from the United States."
6. On July 16, 2009, William McMahon, Deputy Assistant Director for Field Operations, ATF, falsely testified before Congress that about 90 percent of the guns recovered in Mexico that ATF has traced were initially sold in the United States. (Committee on Homeland Security Subcommittee on Border, Maritime, and Global Counterterrorism, U.S. House of Representatives, concerning “Combating Border Violence: The Role of Interagency Coordination in Investigations”).
7. In September 2010, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) Office of the Inspector General (OIG) issued a draft report, followed by the final version in November, 2010, critical of Project Gunrunner. The OIG analysis of ATF data exposed the false statements and shows, of the guns submitted for tracing, a much lower percentage of guns traced to the United States, ranging from 44 percent in FY 2005, falling to 27 percent in FY 2007 and 31 percent in FY 2009. These percentages significantly differ from those in ATF testimony before Congress (see above).
8. Between September and November 2010, ATF admitted their prior statements were false and that “the 90% figure cited to Congress could be misleading because it applied only to the small portion of Mexican crime guns that are traced.” During this 2010 review by the OIG, ATF could not provide updated information on the percentage of traced Mexican crime guns that originated in or imported through the United States.
9. In October 2010, ATF announced they would no longer release estimates of how many guns came from the United States because the numbers have become "too politicized". ATF’s Kenneth Melson stated, "It doesn't matter if 20 percent are coming from the U.S. or 80 percent...". [Many people think it does matter...]
10. On December 14, 2010, despite ATF's announcement they would no longer release estimates, yet, NBC reported "U.S. firearms agents estimate that around 80 percent of the weapons used by Mexican drug traffickers come from the United States...", a percentage previously disavowed by ATF and discredited by the DOJ OIG in November 2010 (see above).
11. On February 10, 2011, Stratfor Global Intelligence published an analysis which concluded "almost 90 percent of the guns seized in Mexico in 2008 were not traced back to the United States."
12. On April 5, 2011, in a formal letter to a constituent, Senator Tom Udall (D-NM) [who should know better], repeated the same lie, “According to ATF, 90 percent of the weapons seized in Mexico are from sources within the United States.”
ATF has failed to address significant misleading factors in eTrace statistics of seized Mexican guns; legitimate export sales. These firearms are included in eTrace statistics, which further skews the statistical reports.
ATF fails to separately identify:
1. American origin guns legitimately sold to the Mexican military.
2. American origin guns legitimately and commercially exported to the Mexican gun shop in Mexico City.
3. American origin guns legitimately sold to Mexican police - at the Federal, state or local level.
4. American origin guns legitimately sold to Mexican banks, private security firms, or other companies.
5. American origin guns legitimately sold to other Mexican government entities.
6. American origin guns legitimately sold to police, military, security companies or private parties in other countries, which were later smuggled into Mexico from those countries.
Further, ATF fails to properly address:
7. American origin guns exported many years ago. (Average age of traced Mexican guns is over 14 years).
8. Foreign guns with American markings never imported into the United States for any number of reasons.
9. Counterfeit guns made elsewhere with fake American markings. ATF acknowledged this is a problem.
10. Frequently, pictures of seized Mexican guns show many .22 rimfire rabbit rifles and sporting shotguns. Are these included in ATF statistics? ATF doesn't say.
As as result of these duplicate 'successful' traces:
1. The American first purchaser receives up to five duplicate 'crime gun' trace reports on one gun that he may have innocently bought years ago.
2. The selling dealer will also receive up to five duplicate 'crime gun' traces on his record.
3. Mexican authorities submitting the traces will receive multiple duplicate trace reports providing the personal information (name, address and personal data) of the American first purchaser, and the name and address of the selling dealer.
4. Statistics on "seized Mexican guns" are even more seriously inflated than previously reported.
#88
Posted 16 May 2011 - 03:21 PM
Check out this link for an article from Time magazine in 1995. Do you see the reoccuring themes?Sir,
I appreciate the response, and believe me, I or anyone in my circles have any ill will toward you hard working agents, or any LEO who is sticking his neck out to protect the American people for that matter. I also get your point on the whole "They're coming for us" thing, and normally I ignore it. Especially if theres a Congress/Administration I am at least mildly comfortable with. I'm not that good a writer, so maybe I was too vague or inconsistent, but we have your back sir as agents and appreciate the grueling hours and work that you put in to keep America safe. I feel its an extremely short sighted mistake to paint any agency, group, or community with a broad brush. I did counterdrug work with the DEA and Arkansas State Police back in 2000-2001, so I understand how perception isnt always reality and how you can become the boogieman over night. That said, the political/bureaucratic wing of your agency sometimes scares the bejeezus out of me.
I agree and appreciate everything you put in your reply. I just hope the Constitution and our society are strong enough to allow our children to enjoy the freedoms we both have served and worked so hard to protect. Stay safe, and keep your powder dry. We ever meet up, the first beers on me. Be home in another 6 months.
http://www.time.com/...,983197,00.html
#89
Posted 08 May 2011 - 11:34 PM
#90
Posted 30 April 2011 - 01:06 PM
"We’re not investigating the sale of guns across the border. We’re investigating the lack of judgment at the highest levels."
"This goes all the way to the top. … If you made a decision this felony stupid you shouldn’t be making decisions any longer on behalf of the American people." Darrell Issa, Chairman of the House Oversight Committee, April 2011
ATF Executive staff,
Notwithstanding political agendas which we all know exist, it is time to retire, resign, and step down for most of our executive leadership. You have failed and you have done so across the board. Are you going to wait until they close down our appropriations? You have lost the trust and confidence and respect of the field. There is only a small handful of management across the country who will still support you. The American people are livid and demand accountability.
As a gentle reminder, the Democrats have always been on our side. During the post Waco period DeConcini and Republican James Lightfoot used ALL their power to save and rebuild us, but NOW you have the most powerful Congressman in the country holding you in contempt. You have insisted that a handful of self promoting managers had ALL the answers to the issues that confront this Bureau. We have fought tooth and nail to be heard and stop the train wreck everybody but you and your staff saw coming.
You have the ability to do the right thing. Your careers are not without merit and MOST of your service has been honorable and is and should be respected in its totality. HOWEVER, you have disgraced this Bureau and everybody who stood by and lied and manipulated to allow this to happen must quietly leave. Msrs. Melson, Hoover, Chait, Newell, Gillette, Martin, Ford, Ficaretta, Loos, Bouman and others can NO longer lead with any respect or authority. If you question my views, review the OVER 100,000 views of this website. The hundreds and hundreds of Postings and new membership WHICH GROWS DAILY. Of the 100,000 views, how many of your 5000 employees are included in those numbers? Do you think they are aware of the outrageous conduct and abuses of those who have been left in power?
Withholding information from the Legislative branch and manipulating data is NEVER a good idea, but it is unacceptable from a Federal Law Enforcement Agency. These are difficult times and difficult decisions must be made. Let your LAST decisions show that you LOVE this Agency and the sacrifices made by its Agents for decades, AS MUCH AS WE DO. BY STEPPING ASIDE WITH A REBUILD AND TRANSITION PLAN, YOU CAN LEAVE WITH DIGNITY AND HONOR. Do not continue with this scorched earth policy. The truth is coming out daily. Not even your managers are going to continue to withhold information.
Well said.
#91
Posted 30 April 2011 - 12:38 PM
"This goes all the way to the top. … If you made a decision this felony stupid you shouldn’t be making decisions any longer on behalf of the American people." Darrell Issa, Chairman of the House Oversight Committee, April 2011
ATF Executive staff,
Notwithstanding political agendas which we all know exist, it is time to retire, resign, and step down for most of our executive leadership. You have failed and you have done so across the board. Are you going to wait until they close down our appropriations? You have lost the trust and confidence and respect of the field. There is only a small handful of management across the country who will still support you. The American people are livid and demand accountability.
As a gentle reminder, the Democrats have always been on our side. During the post Waco period DeConcini and Republican James Lightfoot used ALL their power to save and rebuild us, but NOW you have the most powerful Congressman in the country holding you in contempt. You have insisted that a handful of self promoting managers had ALL the answers to the issues that confront this Bureau. We have fought tooth and nail to be heard and stop the train wreck everybody but you and your staff saw coming.
You have the ability to do the right thing. Your careers are not without merit and MOST of your service has been honorable and is and should be respected in its totality. HOWEVER, you have disgraced this Bureau and everybody who stood by and lied and manipulated to allow this to happen must quietly leave. Msrs. Melson, Hoover, Chait, Newell, Gillette, Martin, Ford, Ficaretta, Loos, Bouman and others can NO longer lead with any respect or authority. If you question my views, review the OVER 100,000 views of this website. The hundreds and hundreds of Postings and new membership WHICH GROWS DAILY. Of the 100,000 views, how many of your 5000 employees are included in those numbers? Do you think they are aware of the outrageous conduct and abuses of those who have been left in power?
Withholding information from the Legislative branch and manipulating data is NEVER a good idea, but it is unacceptable from a Federal Law Enforcement Agency. These are difficult times and difficult decisions must be made. Let your LAST decisions show that you LOVE this Agency and the sacrifices made by its Agents for decades, AS MUCH AS WE DO. BY STEPPING ASIDE WITH A REBUILD AND TRANSITION PLAN, YOU CAN LEAVE WITH DIGNITY AND HONOR. Do not continue with this scorched earth policy. The truth is coming out daily. Not even your managers are going to continue to withhold information.
#92
Posted 25 April 2011 - 05:14 AM
#93
Posted 24 April 2011 - 09:24 PM
Prepare to be shocked and surprised then, because ATF is releasing first purchaser data to Mexican authorities - and Colombia, Guatemala, Costa Rica, El Salvador, and Panama - just to mention a very few. Mexico and Colombia have their own in-house tracing centers, staffed by Mexican and Colombian nationals, directly connected to eTrace. You may recall that eTrace Version 4.0 is the bilingual version deployed in January to Mexico, Guatemala and Costa Rica. ATF has officially announced a specific goal to provide eTrace capability to all 31 states within Mexico. A trace system that doesn't release trace results wouldn't be much of a trace system, would it? You should review my eTrace postings in "Tracing and Industry policy mismanagement" here on CleanUpATF.org. I've got references for virtually everything I've written.
From: "FFL Newsletter", June 2010 http://www.atf.gov/p...ter-2010-06.pdf
"What information is provided to the foreign law enforcement agency?
ATF provides foreign and domestic law enforcement agencies with similar information, with the exception of Social Security number of the firearm’s purchaser (if provided on ATF Form 4473). The Social Security number of a firearms purchaser is not provided to foreign law enforcement agencies."
"The identity of the firearms purchaser provided to a foreign law enforcement agency is of particular concern to people, because the purchaser is not necessarily involved in any crime. FFL and retail purchasers of firearms recovered in crimes by law enforcement may not have committed any crime; ...... ATF traces firearms for more than 50 foreign countries each year, either through eTrace or via request by Interpol. ATF has no record of an American being at risk in a foreign country as a result of innocent involvement in the history of a firearm subsequently recovered and traced by a law enforcement agency." Just how would ATF know if an American was put at risk? Can anyone explain?
According to the U.S. State Department, Americans have become victims of harassment, mistreatment and extortion by Mexican law enforcement and other officials - even without being identified in a trace report. It should also be noted that in Mexico (as in many other countries), anyone accused of a crime is "guilty until proven innocent", and cash bail may be the only option to avoid incarceration.
ATF isn't allowed to share trace information between different police jurisdictions, but advertises to those police agencies that they can share between each other and release trace data on their own. Kinda defeats the intent of the legislation, doesn't it?
ATF isn't supposed to be creating databases with purchaser information, but they're doing it regardless of the law. Read the ATF Fact Sheets, where it's all laid out for us.
ATF can't get multiple sales reports on 'assault-style' weapons - because:
1. Unlike multiple handgun reports, it isn't allowed under current law,
2. ATF didn't restrict the reports to 'assault-style' weapons, but overreached and tried to include every semi-auto ever made with a detachable magazine over .22 caliber - including 100 year-old guns. Stupid.
#94
Posted 24 April 2011 - 07:09 PM
Ike,John Boy: Again, I appreciate your comments. A lot of what you say makes sense.
On one point, I'll have to disagree. Giving info to Mexico doesn't appear to be a myth. In April, 2010 the author of “U.S. Firearms Trafficking to Mexico: New Data and Insights Illuminate Key Trends and Challenges” by Goodman and Marizco, interviewed an ATF official in Washington who admitted, “If a trace is successful, Mexican authorities receive information from ATF such as when the firearm was purchased, the name of the person that purchased the firearm, and the total number of firearms the person may have purchased.“ Goodman is a numbskull, but I've done a lot of reading and research on this issue, and it appears that ATF is indeed, providing first purchaser personal info to the Mexicans. But don't take my word for it.....
I don't claim to be the holder of all knowledge, but I would be shocked and surprised to find out that we are sharing purchaser information from the trace reports with Mexico. We aren't even allowed to share information from US Police department to US Police department, even if they agree to give each other access to the information. Again, I could be wrong, but I think congress would be having a fit if we were sharing trace data with Mexico without their permission. Our trace data is strictly controlled by congressional mandate. We are not allowed to create databases with purchaser information. We can't even get multiple sales reports on assault weapons. Most of the firearms traffickers are quickly learning how to circumvent our FFL reporting requirements.
#95
Posted 24 April 2011 - 11:37 AM
You add to that the internal law firm at ATF [ATF chief counsels office] that has by default ran the place in the leadership vacuum. Now one of theirs {CCO} is a Deputy Assistant Director {TF}. CCO has grown it seems so that there is one of their attorneys in nearly every field office.
Some of the craziest crap seems to come from CCO both toward the industry and street agents. You add in the fact it appears they dictate to Firearm Technology Branch testing formats or results...it gives the entire bureau a bad name.
Fact is most ATF street agents I know are decent folks looking to prevent bad guys from making mayhem or hurting good folks. Only a few over the years were real turds. I suspect that in any group of people your going to have that.
To ATF employees on this forum:
Does any other Federal Law Enforcement have their own in house law firm?
Why does ATF need one now that they are under DOJ since the Homeland Security Act?
Has ATF CCO done anything positive? I can't find anybody praising them to date...
I'm looking for the source of the universal discontent with the bureau (from within and without), I suspect CCO may one of the major sources, if not THE source. Identify the root cause, and address it seems to be the first step in fixing any situation.
#96
Posted 24 April 2011 - 10:20 AM
On one point, I'll have to disagree. Giving info to Mexico doesn't appear to be a myth. In April, 2010 the author of “U.S. Firearms Trafficking to Mexico: New Data and Insights Illuminate Key Trends and Challenges” by Goodman and Marizco, interviewed an ATF official in Washington who admitted, “If a trace is successful, Mexican authorities receive information from ATF such as when the firearm was purchased, the name of the person that purchased the firearm, and the total number of firearms the person may have purchased.“ Goodman is a numbskull, but I've done a lot of reading and research on this issue, and it appears that ATF is indeed, providing first purchaser personal info to the Mexicans. But don't take my word for it.....
#97
Posted 24 April 2011 - 09:38 AM
#98
Posted 24 April 2011 - 09:17 AM
#99
Posted 24 April 2011 - 08:40 AM
I believe I am representative of most ATF agents.
#100
Posted 24 April 2011 - 08:10 AM
That's a powerful post.... We fully support the decent hardworking agents, supervisors, and administrative employees who spend their time hunting and locking up the 'bad guys'. However....., there's a bunch of other ATF employees, supervisors, administrative types, and lawyers who do concentrate on creating stupid regulations and rulings, and who target FFLs for minor bookkeeping violations and criteria based on nonsense.
ATF also has the entire National Tracing Center, which seems to be spending much of it's time trying to "Make Chicken Salad out of Chicken Shit" (as Winston Smith just posted), spouting statistical nonsense. (Now, I grant that occasionally a trace will generate a genuine investigative lead - but traces also point to a lot of innocent people.)
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users