ATF agents showed up at my house?

[Deanimator]

I think that there is a need for some federal agency to try to make sure that weapons, explosives, etc. aren't sold/bought by criminals. Are people really arguing that no federal agency should monitor the sale of weapons and or explosives?

People are saying that if such a federal agency does exist, it should not itself commit crimes. That's a quality which the BATFE cannot claim for itself.

It also sounds to me as though the ATF is unpopular because it enforces unpopular laws. But I really do think the founding fathers got this one right - the legislative branch makes the laws, and the executive enforces them. The alternative is really to have the executive make and enforce laws. I think that's a bad idea.

The BATFE is unpopular because it doesn't OBEY the law. They made an OFFICIAL training video on how to commit PERJURY. BATF agents were TOLD EXPLICITLY TO ***LIE*** about the accuracy of the NFA record keeping system. And you CANNOT say that it was NOT a LIE because the supervisor giving these instructions EXPLICITLY said that the system was NOT 100% accurate as he instructed agents to state UNDER OATH. That's PERJURY. When is perjury ever legal?

As with any large federal agency, they are going to screw up, but then I am not perfect at my job, either.

LYING UNDER OATH is NOT "screwing up". It's PERJURY, a CRIME. And they did this in cases where people's livelihoods and freedom were jeopardized. I know someone who may have been convicted wrongfully on the basis of this perjured testimony. Why on earth should I have one iota of trust in an organization which not only does not respect the law, but which will gleefully LIE to wrongfully deprive someone of their freedom?

Putting on an explicitly racist gathering AT PUBLIC EXPENSE is NOT a "screw up". It's conclusive proof that that organization has an agenda, and one clearly not compatible with the US Constitution.

Discriminating racially against ones own employees isn't a "screw up". It's an actionable tort for which the BATFE settled with its Black agents for something in the vicinity of $4.6 MILLION.

These don't seem like "screw ups" to me. They seem more like an intentional pattern and practice of behavior. If it IS just an endless parade of "screw ups", then they're screwing up BY THE NUMBERS and have been since the day they were established.

 

[Scorpiusdeus]

The BATFE has a VERY long history of misbehavior, ranging from rudeness to shooting people for no good reason.

So do many Citizens of the United States, let's round em all up...

 

[budney]

So do many Citizens of the United States, let's round em all up...

That's not a very good analogy. A better analogy is to liken BATFE to a terrorist organization, since it's... a terrorist organization. It runs around flouting the law, trumping up charges, incinerating churches full of harmless crackpots and just generally killing the crap out of people.

We should put its members on a no-fly list, and start tapping their communications.

--Len.

 

[RPCVYemen]

People are saying that if such a federal agency does exist, it should not itself commit crimes.

I am not sure that an agency can commit crimes, although I am sure that people who work at agencies can commit crimes. If you are saying that an agency should not encourage it's employees to commit crimes, we are in agreement.

When is perjury ever legal?

Do you gave a cite for this video? I am not challenging you, I am intrigued. I'd like to watch it.

Discriminating racially against ones own employees isn't a "screw up". It's an actionable tort for which the BATFE settled with its Black agents for something in the vicinity of $4.6 MILLION.

A lot of federal agencies have (sadly) been sued successfully by women and/or minorities for job discrimination. The settlements tend to be in millions because of the number of plaintiffs and punitive.

I think that I agree with you that such discrimination is in fact wrong.

I would have a hard time naming a federal agency that has not been sued successfully for wage discrimination - if I recall correctly, the Secret Service, FBI, and Foreign Service have all been successfully sued within the last couple of years. Do you recall the amounts of those settlements? I think they were much higher, but I am not really sure about that.

Mike

 

[Deanimator]

The BATFE has a VERY long history of misbehavior, ranging from rudeness to shooting people for no good reason.

So do many Citizens of the United States, let's round em all up...

So have Al Qaeda. Do you not wish to round THEM up?

 

[Jerry Morris]

I know this is a mantra for states' rights folks, but I am not all that convinced. I suspect that there are some laws that should be enforced by states, and some by the feds. Is there a clear argument for the belief that all law enforcement should be only in the domain of the states?

Actually.I am more for People's Rights. But, there is that nagging passage in The Constitution about the Several States.

For all laws, you'd have to convince me that treason should be prosecuted only by state governments. Maybe that's too high a standard.

Going out for the long fly ball? This is a reach, as Treason is defined under the Constitution. AND it is a very difficult crime to prosecute.

When I was growing up, that meant that no white man could be convicted of killing a black man at any time for any reason in some of our states. That's not a real big selling point for me.

I'll buy that. I saw similar things. But, no where did you see me say "throw out The Consitution" Just put the enforcement back where it belongs. It does not mean I have to obey the INA signs. Do you think our present society would actually allow going back in time, perhaps even to slavery? I think our fastest route to there is to continue to allow the fed to run amok.

Jerry

 

[ArfinGreebly]

So, It's Monday . . .

When was this meeting?

Do we know anything new?

Like FACTS?

 

[Scorpiusdeus]

Reading all these paranoid posts I'm amazed I've managed to survive and avoid jail as long as I have. I am a law abiding citizen, I've had numerous encounters with LE, including Feds, and here I sit today never having been railroaded by jackbooted thugs.

I guess maybe I'm feeling a little left out.

How many guns do I have to buy before I get attacked by the Government sanctioned demons?

After having gone through numerous background investigations and learning how much info the government really does have on me, I'm still just not scared. What's wrong with me?

Maybe I'm just too clean cut.

Branch Davidian's got exactly what they wanted and set up, at least David Koresh did. I mourn the lose of of those fine agents.

 

[Ithaca37]

Lets see, harassing innocent people, murdering innocent people, enforcing oppressive laws that dangerously limit the people's freedom. Sounds an awful lot like the Gestapo to me.

For all of you who have said that the ATF is not so bad, answer me this: If an organization (government, non-government, whatever) has a track record of members [under orders of the leaders of said organization] doing such things as: killing innocent women and children, setting fire to a church full of women and children, and harassing innocent citizens at their homes, would you not agree that the organization in question should be disbanded and its members brought to justice?

Why, when a law is broken, does one set of rules apply to the government and a different set of rules apply to the people? If there was a club comprised of "civilians" in which we did these things we sure as hell wouldn't be being defended by anybody on this board (and rightfully so). Why should the ATF be any different?

 

[GRIZ22]

DEA? I guess if you consider drug cartels "terrorist." They are just shady businesses with (vicious) strong arm tactics.


There are many terrorists organizations, including Islamic ones, that use drug trafficking to finance their operations.

Bingo. Don't feel too badly. If you're not guilty, I wouldn't worry about the meeting with the ATF agent. Contrary to what the tinfoil hat crowd claims, they're not out to get you. I wouldn't worry about the lawyer unless they charge you with something. In that case, you can always get the lawyer later.

I agree with the Prince on this. If you don't feel comfortable answering any of the questions you are within your rights to to terminate the meeting until you get a lawyer. Refusing to talk to them can result in being charged with interfering with an investigation. The crowd saying don't talk to them period will be the ones ATF might keep looking at.

As far as the comment that the Federal govt has no business enforcing the law and that's for the States to do is totally absurd. Each state enforcing immigration, customs, aviation, commerce, etc laws? States have no jurisdiction in such matters and do you really want to confuse things more?

 

[Ithaca37]

Branch Davidian's got exactly what they wanted and set up, at least David Koresh did. I mourn the lose of of those fine agents.

Do you really think that the little children who burned to death "got what they wanted" I am shocked that you would make light of these people's suffering. If this had happened anywhere but America you wouldn't be saying the same thing, you just can't bring yourself to believe that the government might not be looking out for the people's best interest.

Maybe I'm just too clean cut.

I don't commit crimes other than driving a few miles per hour over the speed limit, but that doesn't mean I trust the government. History has demonstrated what happens to those who put their faith in government. They die in killing fields and gas chambers.

 

[Ithaca37]

There are many terrorists organizations, including Islamic ones, that use drug trafficking to finance their operations.

Yeah like the CIA.

 

[RPCVYemen]

But, there is that nagging passage in The Constitution about the Several States.

Where is it exactly? I wanted to re-read that, and I can't find the part about what rights are reserved for the States. I don't think it contains the phrase "Several States", unless the search engine is broken. Is this it?

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

What does case law say about the ATF? Is it covered by the inter-state commerce clause?

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

Maybe common Defense?

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Mike

 

[budney]

Reading all these paranoid posts I'm amazed I've managed to survive and avoid jail as long as I have. I am a law abiding citizen, I've had numerous encounters with LE, including Feds, and here I sit today never having been railroaded by jackbooted thugs.

The odds of any one person being targeted are small--but that's always true. Less than 4% of the population of Germany actually fell victim to the holocaust. For the US to reach Holocaust proportions, about ten million people would have to be "railroaded by the jackbooted thugs." Yet ten million isn't that many. If things did reach that extreme, over 96% of the people could say, "That's funny, the JBTs have never come after ME!" And one random individual like yourself would have a 96% chance of never having run afoul of any JBTs. And that's if a Holocaust were underway.

--Len.

 

[Ithaca37]

If things did reach that extreme, over 96% of the people could say, "That's funny, the JBTs have never come after ME!"

Exactly. Couldn't be put better.

 

[wjustinen]

Unfortunately,

physicians of middle eastern descent are being looked at around the world because of a couple who were involved in car bomb crimes in Britain recently.

This may be a case of performing "due diligence" to determine that you aren't one of the "bad guys." Of course we would all be more comfortable if the old saw "if you aren't doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear" were as true as some would like us to believe.

 

[Scorpiusdeus]

For all of you who have said that the ATF is not so bad, answer me this: If an organization (government, non-government, whatever) has a track record of members [under orders of the leaders of said organization] doing such things as: killing innocent women and children, setting fire to a church full of women and children, and harassing innocent citizens at their homes, would you not agree that the organization in question should be disbanded and its members brought to justice?

I think you just described the U.S. Army in Vietnam. And no, I don't think they should be disbanded, but I do think that the individuals who actually committed these atrocities should be individually punished.

 

[Scorpiusdeus]

If things did reach that extreme, over 96% of the people could say, "That's funny, the JBTs have never come after ME!" And one random individual like yourself would have a 96% chance of never having run afoul of any JBTs. And that's if a Holocaust were underway.

If If If, If.

IF that ever happens, I'll apologize to you and take up arms.

 

[budney]

I think you just described the U.S. Army in Vietnam. And no, I don't think they should be disbanded, but I do think that the individuals who actually committed these atrocities should be individually punished.

You're right. But they're not punished, which proves that the rot goes all the way to the top. Which is in turn why maybe they should be disbanded. The same goes for armies as individual firearms: if you demonstrate that you can't use one responsibly, you shouldn't be allowed to have one at all.

--Len.

 

[Scorpiusdeus]

Do you really think that the little children who burned to death "got what they wanted" I am shocked that you would make light of these people's suffering. If this had happened anywhere but America you wouldn't be saying the same thing, you just can't bring yourself to believe that the government might not be looking out for the people's best interest.

I'm not making light of anything. It is very sad what David Koresh caused to happen.

Those Children weren't Branch Davidians, their mentally ill and or abusive parents were. The children were the victims.

 

[Deanimator]

Originally Posted by Deanimator
When is perjury ever legal?

Do you gave a cite for this video? I am not challenging you, I am intrigued. I'd like to watch it.

http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/batfe/index.php

Jump down to the heading labeled, "How often do you see a Federal agent admitting perjury on videotape?"

Originally Posted by Deanimator
Discriminating racially against ones own employees isn't a "screw up". It's an actionable tort for which the BATFE settled with its Black agents for something in the vicinity of $4.6 MILLION.

A lot of federal agencies have (sadly) been sued successfully by women and/or minorities for job discrimination. The settlements tend to be in millions because of the number of plaintiffs and punitive.

I think that I agree with you that such discrimination is in fact wrong.

I would have a hard time naming a federal agency that has not been sued successfully for wage discrimination - if I recall correctly, the Secret Service, FBI, and Foreign Service have all been successfully sued within the last couple of years. Do you recall the amounts of those settlements? I think they were much higher, but I am not really sure about that.

The BATF wasn't sued just for wage discrimination. It was sued for a pervasive pattern of racial harassment and intimidation, which included the putting on of the Good Old Boy's Roundup, and the posting of items such as "ni**er hunting licenses" in Federal Offices. Watch the Don Johnson movie "Dead Bang". Most of the racist activities attributed to the local sheriff's office were in fact DOCUMENTED in BATF offices, the Oklahoma City office in the Murrah Federal Building in particular.

The BATFE has been and continues to be irretrievably corrupt, heavily infused with a profound disrespect for the law and the Constitution and racial bias against non-Whites both within and outside the agency.

 

[Deanimator]

Branch Davidian's got exactly what they wanted and set up, at least David Koresh did. I mourn the lose of of those fine agents.

Didn't those "fine agents" come from the Oklahoma City office? You know, the one with the "ni**er hunting licenses" on the wall?

Take a look at a group photo of the Davidians. Knowing the history of the BATF, it shouldn't be too tough to figure out how THEY got picked...

 

[Roccobro]

I'm just going to wait and see how the BATF deals with alpha6164 (the OP) and what advice he chose to follow....

Justin

 

[Poper]

RPCVYemen: Is it possible you answered your own question?

Where is it exactly? I wanted to re-read that, and I can't find the part about what rights are reserved for the States. I don't think it contains the phrase "Several States", unless the search engine is broken.

What does case law say about the ATF? Is it covered by the inter-state commerce clause?


Quote:
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

Just curious.

Poper

 

[RPCVYemen]

I watched the video, and read the retraction:

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/rip/doc1.txt

Mr. Busey's statement that NFA specialists testify that the data
base is 100 percent accurate was a misstatement of the facts. I
have never testified that the data base is 100 percent accurate
nor, to the beat of my knowledge, has any other of the NFA Branch
personnel, including Mr. Busey.

There was an internal investigation

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/wbardwel/public/nfalist/rip/doc2.txt

in part, that investigation found:

His personnel testify only
to the accuracy and diligence of their search and make no
comment, either in court or an any official document,
concerning the accuracy of the database.

Seems like Mr. Busey said something stupid, which the agency had to clean up after.

Is there a documented pattern of ATF agents committing perjury? That would illustrate whether Mr. Buseys' remarks were a statement of policy or not.

Mike