This should go well....

[TFOGGER]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/12/04/exclusive-feds-issue-4-000-orders-seize-guns-people-who-failed-background-checks/901017001/


WASHINGTON— Federal authorities sought to take back guns from thousands of people the background check system should have blocked from buying weapons because they had criminal records, mental health issues or other problems that would disqualify them.
A USA TODAY review found that the FBI issued more than 4,000 requests last year for agents from the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives to retrieve guns from prohibited buyers.

[facepalm]

[buffalobo]

From the article -


In addition to the public safety risks, the ATF agents tasked with retrieving the banned weapons from unauthorized gun owners across the country are exposed to potentially dangerous confrontations.

Looks like the propaganda is there. "Banned weapons" was used incorrectly more than once in article. The "weapons" are not banned, the buyer is "not allowed" to buy them.

The FBI should have to go "retrieve" them. Then again, ATF are better jackbooted thugs.

[TFOGGER]

Yeah, it's USA Today, the mouthpiece of the Communist Party, so I kind of expected that.

[Great-Kazoo]

It's the feeb's fuck up, let them do it. Even now the .gov is passing the buck.

[spqrzilla]

Send the ATF to Mexico for retrieval.

[cstone]

It's the feeb's fuck up, let them do it. Even now the .gov is passing the buck.

I would expect the local PDs will be doing the heavy lift on this and no one should be surprised. What a mixed bag this will be. I pray that there isn't another Waco or Ruby Ridge anywhere in the making. What are the odds that the FBI Director or AG Sessions will suit up and join the stack at door?

[OtterbatHellcat]

I pray that there isn't another Waco or Ruby Ridge anywhere in the making.


^

I can see it developing.

[Bailey Guns]

Make the bastard Comey go get them. A bunch more than likely happened on his watch. Wouldn't be the first thing he totally fucked up.

[Gman]

It's the feeb's fuck up, let them do it. Even now the .gov is passing the buck.
They're trying to pass new laws to get funding to get the Federal orgs. that didn't report information on prohibited persons into the NICS. They're looking for more tax dollars to get the government to do the job they used our tax dollars to not do in the first place. [facepalm]

[Skip]

They're trying to pass new laws to get funding to get the Federal orgs. that didn't report information on prohibited persons into the NICS. They're looking for more tax dollars to get the government to do the job they used our tax dollars to not do in the first place. [facepalm]

And probably remove the 72 hour rule to formalize BGCs are a permission slip for 2A.

There are certain to be cases of misidentification as they confiscate, as there often are with failed/delayed BGCs.

[Ronin13]

I pray that there isn't another Waco or Ruby Ridge anywhere in the making.


^

I can see it developing.

I don't. After Waco and Ruby Ridge they're a lot more careful to avoid this. Not saying it won't happen, but a lot of lessons were learned through those failures.
Source: Counterparts in ATF I've worked with and discussed this in detail.

[hollohas]

I don't. After Waco and Ruby Ridge they're a lot more careful to avoid this. Not saying it won't happen, but a lot of lessons were learned through those failures.
Source: Counterparts in ATF I've worked with and discussed this in detail.

The Feds have been caught lying so many times regarding the Bundy et al trial, that the judge has started to drop charges for those involved one by one.

One FBI HRT agent even got caught messing with a crime scene where Levoy Finicum was killed by pocketing his brass and then all five HRT hotshots on scene lied to the state investigators by saying none of them fired their weapons in official reports and local police interviews.

So yeah, theres two recent examples of the Feds being "a lot more careful".

[OtterbatHellcat]

I don't. After Waco and Ruby Ridge they're a lot more careful to avoid this. Not saying it won't happen, but a lot of lessons were learned through those failures.
Source: Counterparts in ATF I've worked with and discussed this in detail.

Your point is well taken IMO, and I would also add that not only have the .GOV been working on what went wrong in those situations. I would also think that those of whom wish to defy .GOV have also been working on the same things. I have no problem admitting that I have spent some time running through the logistics of breach and defense thereof, among other things.

I'm one dude without that kind of training......and I really do believe that there are some groups of folks in our country that really have their sheet together, and are a lot more prepared than "authority" has anticipated or accounted for. Maybe I'm wrong, it's a gut feeling.

[MrPrena]

They will quote.......


https://youtu.be/6coaj-qWtj4

[jhood001]

I'm looking for some enlightenment here -

The Fed (despite how much you hate them) admits that some 4000 guns went to people that shouldn't have them. *shouldn't* being the key word here.

Is the issue with the terms behind what prohibits these people from having them? Or the fact that these people are walking the streets and that in itself is the problem and not their access to tools? Or should the States be handling this?

There are laws (like them or not). The law dropped the ball and some guns were sold that shouldn't have been. Now an effort is being made to get them back.

What is the problem here?

Fill me in. I seriously don't get it.

[Great-Kazoo]

I'm looking for some enlightenment here -

The Fed (despite how much you hate them) admits that some 4000 guns went to people that shouldn't have them. *shouldn't* being the key word here.

Is the issue with the terms behind what prohibits these people from having them? Or the fact that these people are walking the streets and that in itself is the problem and not their access to tools? Or should the States be handling this?

There are laws (like them or not). The law dropped the ball and some guns were sold that shouldn't have been. Now an effort is being made to get them back.

What is the problem here?

Fill me in. I seriously don't get it.


Possibly the potential for johnny .gov to use this as a teaching moment. One that says the FBI is unable to give a positive yes or no approval wise thus requiring the 3 day wait before selling a firearm to be extended to 5. Possibly 10 days like CA has enacted.
I'm behind the effort 100%,...........Providing it's used as it should and not as the No Fly List is.

[DavieD55]

So we're supposed to trust a bunch of goons and thugs who are engaged in a cesspool of all sorts of corruption and scandal after scandal after scandal to go take guns away from people now...

There needs to be some indictments handed out over fast and furious and all the other corruption and criminal activity that has been going on for waaayyyyyy too long.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhiiqrp9hzQ

[Big E3]

I read through the whole article and didn't see what percentage of the purchase price the nice government agency people were paying the undocumented gun owners when they picked these guns up. I’m sure our wonderful compassionate government would never consider just taking property away from a people, after it was legally approved and purchased, without proper compensation.

Sounds to me like they are just testing the waters to see if the general public will have any concerns about confiscation without compensation. I doubt they want any part of paying for the current 350 million guns in this country when the demonrats get back in power and vote to take them all away.

[Gman]

I'm behind the effort 100%,...........Providing it's used as it should and not as the No Fly List is.
Yep, due process required.

[Great-Kazoo]

I read through the whole article and didn't see what percentage of the purchase price the nice government agency people were paying the undocumented gun owners when they picked these guns up. I’m sure our wonderful compassionate government would never consider just taking property away from a people, after it was legally approved and purchased, without proper compensation.

Sounds to me like they are just testing the waters to see if the general public will have any concerns about confiscation without compensation. I doubt they want any part of paying for the current 350 million guns in this country when the demonrats get back in power and vote to take them all away.


Speaking of Undocumented , based on the feds low return for rounding up and preventing illegals to enter the country. How well does anyone believe this is going to work?

[Skip]

Yep, due process required.

I hope but doubt it.

I just assumed on page #1 that the Feds will get some of these entirely wrong and are not prohibited persons. Which is why we have the 72 hour rule in the first place. If the gov can't figure out a BGC result in three days, they can't very well deny someone a civil right on that basis.

[crays]

Speaking of Undocumented , based on the feds low return for rounding up and preventing illegals to enter the country. How well does anyone believe this is going to work?

But these guns are documented, silly goose. That's why the .gov hates them...

[Ronin13]

The Feds have been caught lying so many times regarding the Bundy et al trial, that the judge has started to drop charges for those involved one by one.

One FBI HRT agent even got caught messing with a crime scene where Levoy Finicum was killed by pocketing his brass and then all five HRT hotshots on scene lied to the state investigators by saying none of them fired their weapons in official reports and local police interviews.

So yeah, theres two recent examples of the Feds being "a lot more careful".
I'm not touching the Bundy Matter with a 50-foot pole. That's a mess on all sides.


Your point is well taken IMO, and I would also add that not only have the .GOV been working on what went wrong in those situations. I would also think that those of whom wish to defy .GOV have also been working on the same things. I have no problem admitting that I have spent some time running through the logistics of breach and defense thereof, among other things.

I'm one dude without that kind of training......and I really do believe that there are some groups of folks in our country that really have their sheet together, and are a lot more prepared than "authority" has anticipated or accounted for. Maybe I'm wrong, it's a gut feeling.

I can't say for the Feds, but I know what the locals go through, and I constantly hope and pray that I never get called on to go head-on against some of those groups that are prepared to face "authorities"... Let's just say it won't be pretty on either side. Going after guns held by those not legally allowed to possess them is never a good task.

[CS1983]

I can't say for the Feds, but I know what the locals go through, and I constantly hope and pray that I never get called on to go head-on against some of those groups that are prepared to face "authorities"... Let's just say it won't be pretty on either side. Going after guns held by those not legally allowed to possess them is never a good task.

Just do what we did with AQI and JAM: pay them not to fight and deputize them to take out their enemies who refused to cooperate with authorities. Win-win!