Kernel
Member
http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/wa...botched-operations-b99352690z1-275464651.html
Apologies if this has already been posted and discussed.
Bill Introduced: ATF Elimination Act H.R. 5522
- Thread starter Kernel
- Start date
- Status
No problem here. http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=761847
Except that there was no real discussion. Seems people aren't really ready to question the status quo, and would rather "live with the evil they know than the evil they don't."
The core issue is that it won't get out of committee. It would be far too controversial for the extremes on both sides of the aisle to allow. It would mean change, rather than skilled manipulation of an existing system.
Except that there was no real discussion. Seems people aren't really ready to question the status quo, and would rather "live with the evil they know than the evil they don't."
The core issue is that it won't get out of committee. It would be far too controversial for the extremes on both sides of the aisle to allow. It would mean change, rather than skilled manipulation of an existing system.
AlexanderA
Member
Tempest in a teapot.
(1) This is one of those perennial bills that's introduced, and goes nowhere. The whole purpose is to score cheap political points.
(2) Suppose the BATFE is abolished. The functions -- including the personnel and most of the organizational structure -- would simply go to other agencies, that would have less institutional expertise. The period of transition would be chaotic, and not in a good way.
(3) Real progress would involve reforming the underlying laws (that the BATFE administers) and not the "ministerial" agency that administers them.
(1) This is one of those perennial bills that's introduced, and goes nowhere. The whole purpose is to score cheap political points.
(2) Suppose the BATFE is abolished. The functions -- including the personnel and most of the organizational structure -- would simply go to other agencies, that would have less institutional expertise. The period of transition would be chaotic, and not in a good way.
(3) Real progress would involve reforming the underlying laws (that the BATFE administers) and not the "ministerial" agency that administers them.
CoalTrain49
Member
You would have better luck surviving a fall from a 10 story building than reducing the size of the fed gov't. I've been on the inside and I know how it works. The fed won't down size because they don't have to. As long as they can borrow money and run a deficit you won't see any change. Our economy is surviving on borrowed time because of it. How much time is left? Not much.
bannockburn
Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 26,308
Eliminating the BATFE is a happy thought but the reality of our Federal bureaucracy is that it's pretty much impossible to get rid of any government agency once it has been created, regardless of how poorly and ineffectually it is run.
HRnightmare
Member
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2014
- Messages
- 630
I am NOt saying I wouldn't mind it being dissolved but it is NOT going to happen. This is exactly that, a cheap political grandstand.
DeepSouth
Random Guy
Yeah, their gonna shut down a .gov anything.... rrriiiggghhhttt
And after that they'll wave a magic wand and pay off the national debt.
It's just stupid and a waste of time. It's why people hate everyone in Washington.
And after that they'll wave a magic wand and pay off the national debt.
It's just stupid and a waste of time. It's why people hate everyone in Washington.
Elkins45
Member
How would eliminating the ATF change anything? Unless the NFA '34 and GCA '68 are repealed then their enforcement will just be handed off to someone else. How is that any better?
If Sensenbrenner wants to effect real change then let him introduce a bill to repeal either or both of the federal laws that created the ATF. This bill is just crass political pandering and actually makes me like him less.
If Sensenbrenner wants to effect real change then let him introduce a bill to repeal either or both of the federal laws that created the ATF. This bill is just crass political pandering and actually makes me like him less.
dogtown tom
Member
Nailed it.
Dr.Zubrato
Member
- Joined
- May 12, 2009
- Messages
- 400
Bobson
Member
It's a "look at my efforts; re-elect me" bill. It won't go anywhere and it's supporters know it.
Lycidas Janwor
Member
It's a fantastic bill that will never be passed. Just like the bill for auditing the federal reserve bank--this is a no brainer and absolutely should happen and there is a bill introduced by my favorite senator, Rand Paul, to audit the fed and it absolutely will never pass the senate.
Why?
don't even get me started...
Why?
don't even get me started...
CoalTrain49
Member
I'll tell you why. The majority of those in congress...never mind, I think we all know why.
Last edited:
Justin
Moderator Emeritus
Election time red meat.
Willie Sutton
Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2013
- Messages
- 2,025
Coming from Wisconsin.......
His seat is not in contest, so as far as it being an election issue, that's not a player. This is just his opportunity to poke a stick in the eye of the BATFE, for obvious reasons. None of the people who count (those of us who vote here) are going to pay attention to this other than to appreciate his sense of humor. It's a joke, but sends a message as well. If one guy planning BATFE field operations simply *thinks* a little bit as a result of this, that's good enough.
Willie
.
His seat is not in contest, so as far as it being an election issue, that's not a player. This is just his opportunity to poke a stick in the eye of the BATFE, for obvious reasons. None of the people who count (those of us who vote here) are going to pay attention to this other than to appreciate his sense of humor. It's a joke, but sends a message as well. If one guy planning BATFE field operations simply *thinks* a little bit as a result of this, that's good enough.
Willie
.
Take a look a this the same way business would.
It would eliminate the bureaucratic overhead and free up budget money for other use.
There would be more agents under a supervisor's belt, he gets paid more.
The duties of 90% of the agents can and do fall under other agencies purview, it would eliminate the competitive jockeying and lack of cooperation they sometimes indulge in.
Those duties:
Alcohol manufacture and sales - taxes by the IRS, manufacturing by the FDA. Trafficking by the DEA and local authorities.
Tobacco - same
Explosives - again, taxes by the IRS, manufacturing by EPA and OSHA, transportation by the DOT, and sales and use by Homeland.
Firearms - about the same.
About all it would do is eliminate one of all those agencies who already have a piece of the action.
What we have is a Congress who can pass laws faster than the people can accept them, an Administration who can create agencies with too little oversight already, and country that doesn't really care as long as they get to climb the ladder of success. I'd say with our deteriorating demographics and increasing poverty that is now attacking the middle class that we are about halfway to the point of the government collapsing. The issue is whether it's a straight up additive decline or the curve starts becoming geometric.
Therefore, "It'll never happen," and sticking your head in the sand only hastens the demise of our country. Thanks for giving it another little push, it takes good people doing nothing to let evil triumph.
It would eliminate the bureaucratic overhead and free up budget money for other use.
There would be more agents under a supervisor's belt, he gets paid more.
The duties of 90% of the agents can and do fall under other agencies purview, it would eliminate the competitive jockeying and lack of cooperation they sometimes indulge in.
Those duties:
Alcohol manufacture and sales - taxes by the IRS, manufacturing by the FDA. Trafficking by the DEA and local authorities.
Tobacco - same
Explosives - again, taxes by the IRS, manufacturing by EPA and OSHA, transportation by the DOT, and sales and use by Homeland.
Firearms - about the same.
About all it would do is eliminate one of all those agencies who already have a piece of the action.
What we have is a Congress who can pass laws faster than the people can accept them, an Administration who can create agencies with too little oversight already, and country that doesn't really care as long as they get to climb the ladder of success. I'd say with our deteriorating demographics and increasing poverty that is now attacking the middle class that we are about halfway to the point of the government collapsing. The issue is whether it's a straight up additive decline or the curve starts becoming geometric.
Therefore, "It'll never happen," and sticking your head in the sand only hastens the demise of our country. Thanks for giving it another little push, it takes good people doing nothing to let evil triumph.
Thermactor
member
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2008
- Messages
- 992
Well, I'm of the opinion that if they were to disband the BATFE, then instead of giving the FBI more powers, let's leave those responsibilities to the states and allow them to decide for their own constituencies.
Elkins45
Member
How's the view from up there on your high horse?
Some of us don't enjoy tilting at windmills. As I said earlier, eliminating the laws is the real goal. Treat the disease, not the symptom.
45_auto
Member
it's just more political games.
No different than introducing 3 almost identical term limit bills.
A different 33% of them can vote for each bill, but that means 66% vote against and all the bills fail.
Yet 100% of them can say that they voted for term limits.
No different than introducing 3 almost identical term limit bills.
A different 33% of them can vote for each bill, but that means 66% vote against and all the bills fail.
Yet 100% of them can say that they voted for term limits.
dogtown tom
Member
Really? Based on what?
Fact check: ATF has less employees now than it did in 1973
And that doesn't count those employees who were tax collectors that moved to the TTB)http://www.atf.gov/publications/factsheets/factsheet-staffing-and-budget.html
It wouldn't "free up" anything because those Federal gun laws are still in effect and ATF is required by law to enforce them. Changing ATF to another Department doesn't change the obligation and requirement to enforce Federal law.
Doubtful. Agents (and their supervisors) would merely shift laterally.....Just like when ATF enforcement moved from Treasury to Justice.
You seem to ignore the fact that unless the NFA and GCA are repealed, firearms law enforcement will continue to exist.
The idea that ATF agents and supervisors will make an exodus to the unemployment line like a poof of smoke is pretty darn funny.
There has been no substantive improvement in efficiency, budgeting or operations by the movement of responsibilities of a Federal agency from one department to another.....you and our pandering congressman offer nothing but an "I wish".
Where have you been the last dozen years?
The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) remained with the Treasury Department when ATF's Enforcement duties went to the Justice Department in 2003.
And Lord help us if the FDA regulated firearm manufacturing......we would still be shooting muzzleloaders.
And you REALLY want local authorities having enforcement authority? That seems to be working quite well in California.
Yeah.......since 2003 ATF hasn't had one thing to do with collecting tobacco taxes.
Lets see............
DOT already regulates transportation, so no change there.
ATF doesn't collect taxes, so no change there.
Both EPA and OSHA are neck deep in manufacturing operations already.
Homeland Security regulating sales and use?............who do you think will do that? Repurposed TSA officers?
Lord help us all if your plan comes anywhere close to fruition.
CoalTrain49
Member
There's a lot of food for thought here. I see some defending the ATF, and who knows, maybe those that do work for the BATFE, or what ever they call themselves these days.
The fact is gov't doesn't work like a private business. Gov't agencies exist to spend tax dollars. Corporations exist to make the owners a profit. You can't expect the fed to function like a corporation because the source of the money that sustains it doesn't come from consumers, it comes from tax payers. Consumers have a choice as to where they want to spend their money, taxpayers, for the most part don't. Sure, you can vote, but the final decision on how the money is spent lies with a politician who swears they will do this or that during a campaign and do something 180° from that when they vote. The only accountability is when they don't get re-elected.
Now we get back to the BATFE. The problem isn't the BATFE, NFA or GCA. The problem is with congress and the administration. They just want to continue to spend more money than our economy can generate. It took the UK and the USSR out of the game and it's about to take us out too. Eliminating the BATFE wouldn't even scratch the surface.
The fact is gov't doesn't work like a private business. Gov't agencies exist to spend tax dollars. Corporations exist to make the owners a profit. You can't expect the fed to function like a corporation because the source of the money that sustains it doesn't come from consumers, it comes from tax payers. Consumers have a choice as to where they want to spend their money, taxpayers, for the most part don't. Sure, you can vote, but the final decision on how the money is spent lies with a politician who swears they will do this or that during a campaign and do something 180° from that when they vote. The only accountability is when they don't get re-elected.
Now we get back to the BATFE. The problem isn't the BATFE, NFA or GCA. The problem is with congress and the administration. They just want to continue to spend more money than our economy can generate. It took the UK and the USSR out of the game and it's about to take us out too. Eliminating the BATFE wouldn't even scratch the surface.
ConstitutionCowboy
member
The only real positive I see is one less agency creating 'situations' to justify its existence. That would be enough for me.
Woody
Woody
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
