More liberal hypocrisy

[Ronin13]

No, I think it was pretty clear that I was not making that comparison.

If it was clear I wouldn't have called out on that... just saying.

Admittedly, it was a bad idea. Unfortunately, you don't always know it's a bad idea until you try it.

So... "Hey boss, we're going to make these FFLs sell guns to straw buyers who will in turn sell them to the cartels... but we're going to do our best to track all of them." How does that not sound like a terrible idea from the get go?

I clearly accept this. Question for you: were guns willingly sold by FFLs in Arizona, legally, to straw buyers in Arizona who it turn sold them illegally to the Mexican drug cartels happening before either of the ATF sting operations in the Bush and Obama adminstrations took place? It's obvious that they were, or the ATF wouldn't have gotten involved in the first place. Regardless of whether Operation Wide Receiver or Operation Fast and Furious had taken place, guns would have flowed to the cartels, and the scumbags that killed our agents would have possessed guns.

Partially true. It wasn't as prevalent as with F&F. Sure there will always be a few bad apples, but when an ATF agent comes into your business and says "Go ahead and sell to this guy" that basically spells disaster. So not, I don't think it was nearly as big of a problem that the BATFE had to get involved at such a high level and conduct such a stupid operation.

It's not illegal for the authorities to not arrest folks in a criminal act. That's how stings operate. It's not illegal to keep covert operations covert. Lying to Congress is illegal, and we have due process to account for that. OF&F was a stupid operation, but not an illegal one. Unfortunately, lives were lost. Unfortunately, lives were lost during the war in Afghanistan, too. We're fighting a War on Drugs, remember?

I won't get into the argument about the War On Drugs, I stand against it, and think it's a pointless waste of man hours and money. But I will say ordering FFLs to sell guns to known straw purchasers, then let the guns "Walk" right into the hands of the cartels sounds pretty fucking illegal to me, but I'm not a lawyer, I just watch them on TV.

I agreed. I wasn't claiming that the two were the same - I was presenting different ends of the issue, and asking opinions for where the line was drawn. While the direct superior is certainly responsible for his/her immediate subordinates, many commands have been lost by actions that the commanders could have have reasonably controlled. Let the JOD put a cruiser on sandbar while the Captain is asleep and see who keeps their job.

Obviously a line needs to be drawn, but from what we learned this went all the way to the top, so thus we should punish as far as that goes. The DOJ is not above the law, they're supposed to enforce it, and if one of their big wigs does something so blatant as this, he should be facing a nice, long, relaxing vacation in a federal prison.

But, again, derail aside, I think that people who call out the right need to first look inward and see that their party is fairly bad too. No one is perfect, but people need to practice what they preach and expecting one candidate to be accountable for his speech/actions/policies but not pointing out their candidate/incumbent's shortfalls in the same regard is just idiotic, and shows how hypocritical they are.

[stevelkinevil]

Not defending liberals at all, but people on both sides are hypocrites and do that crap

Sincerly,

This Libertarian who thinks you're all nuts

Make that 2 of us!

[hollohas]

"Accountability Mr. Romney, is that too much to ask?"

What do they want to hold him accountable for?

[Ronin13]

What do they want to hold him accountable for?

No clue... I didn't want to stop and be late for work trying to figure out the mental workings of a libtard... that and I didn't want to start bleeding from the ears.

[stevelkinevil]

What do they want to hold him accountable for?

You shut up! they dont need to know the answer to that, just tune in to John Stewart and he will tell you.

[Teufelhund]

Not defending liberals at all, but people on both sides are hypocrites and do that crap

Sincerly,

This Libertarian who thinks you're all nuts

Make that 2 of us!

Three.

[Rucker61]

No, I think it was pretty clear that I was not making that comparison.

If it was clear I wouldn't have called out on that... just saying.

I will endeavor to write more clearly

[quote]

Admittedly, it was a bad idea. Unfortunately, you don't always know it's a bad idea until you try it.

So... "Hey boss, we're going to make these FFLs sell guns to straw buyers who will in turn sell them to the cartels... but we're going to do our best to track all of them." How does that not sound like a terrible idea from the get go?

[quote]

I wasn't there, so I'm not privy to all of the details included in the plan. You've presented a presumably simplified synopsis of the actual plan and operations order. Our hindsight is dead-on, though.

I clearly accept this. Question for you: were guns willingly sold by FFLs in Arizona, legally, to straw buyers in Arizona who it turn sold them illegally to the Mexican drug cartels happening before either of the ATF sting operations in the Bush and Obama adminstrations took place? It's obvious that they were, or the ATF wouldn't have gotten involved in the first place. Regardless of whether Operation Wide Receiver or Operation Fast and Furious had taken place, guns would have flowed to the cartels, and the scumbags that killed our agents would have possessed guns.

Partially true. It wasn't as prevalent as with F&F. Sure there will always be a few bad apples, but when an ATF agent comes into your business and says "Go ahead and sell to this guy" that basically spells disaster. So not, I don't think it was nearly as big of a problem that the BATFE had to get involved at such a high level and conduct such a stupid operation.

In the five years from 2007-2011, about 68,000 guns found in Mexico were traced back to the US.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...9kT_story.html

To me, that's a pretty high level.

It's not illegal for the authorities to not arrest folks in a criminal act. That's how stings operate. It's not illegal to keep covert operations covert. Lying to Congress is illegal, and we have due process to account for that. OF&F was a stupid operation, but not an illegal one. Unfortunately, lives were lost. Unfortunately, lives were lost during the war in Afghanistan, too. We're fighting a War on Drugs, remember?

I won't get into the argument about the War On Drugs, I stand against it, and think it's a pointless waste of man hours and money. But I will say ordering FFLs to sell guns to known straw purchasers, then let the guns "Walk" right into the hands of the cartels sounds pretty fucking illegal to me, but I'm not a lawyer, I just watch them on TV.

I'm not a lawyer, either. Too many folks are.

I agreed. I wasn't claiming that the two were the same - I was presenting different ends of the issue, and asking opinions for where the line was drawn. While the direct superior is certainly responsible for his/her immediate subordinates, many commands have been lost by actions that the commanders could have have reasonably controlled. Let the JOD put a cruiser on sandbar while the Captain is asleep and see who keeps their job.

Obviously a line needs to be drawn, but from what we learned this went all the way to the top, so thus we should punish as far as that goes. The DOJ is not above the law, they're supposed to enforce it, and if one of their big wigs does something so blatant as this, he should be facing a nice, long, relaxing vacation in a federal prison.

If this ever gets to trial, and he's found guilty, let's put him away. Other than following due process, I don't think there's anything else we can do at this level.

But, again, derail aside, I think that people who call out the right need to first look inward and see that their party is fairly bad too. No one is perfect, but people need to practice what they preach and expecting one candidate to be accountable for his speech/actions/policies but not pointing out their candidate/incumbent's shortfalls in the same regard is just idiotic, and shows how hypocritical they are.

Agreed, and it works both ways. Most folks standing around holding signs for any reason are wasting their time, IMO. I don't think that anything has ever been accomplished from holding a sign.

Is there anything that you'd like Mr Romney to be a bit more transparent about?

[Rucker61]

What do they want to hold him accountable for?

Mostly financial, I believe, especially with regards to tax returns and off-shore accounts.

[divideman]

To be accurate the unemployment stats used these days are not the same data points as used in the past. As far as being transparent let's begin with releasing any data associated as far as school records, thesis, scholarship data etc. Be careful what you ask for as the same will be expected of you and yours.

[Whistler]

In the five years from 2007-2011, about 68,000 guns found in Mexico were traced back to the US.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...9kT_story.html

To me, that's a pretty high level.

Not really involved in your discussion but apparently my reading comprehension is off today. The only reference I saw in that article related to FFLs and gun walking other than OF&F was down at the very end - "U.S. gun store owners in southwestern border states sued to overturn an Obama administration requirement that they report to the ATF when customers buy multiple high-powered rifles within a five-day period. A federal court upheld the requirement." Guns in Mexico traced back to US does not equal FFL sales to straws buyers and is unsubstantiated conjecture.