Printable View
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Otterbatcat
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
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".
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
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.
They will quote.......
https://youtu.be/6coaj-qWtj4
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jhood001
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.
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
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.
Yep, due process required.Quote:
Originally Posted by Great-Kazoo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big E3
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?