SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  Suppressed Weapons    ATF Elimination Act
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
ATF Elimination Act Login/Join 
Member
posted
Well this is interesting...

http://sensenbrenner.house.gov...px?DocumentID=398088


_________________________________________________________

This is where my signature goes.
 
Posts: 615 | Location: Cary, NC | Registered: June 04, 2015Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of CandyMan.45
posted Hide Post
Just want you though the HPA was going to be hard to get traction... this is even slimmer !
 
Posts: 927 | Location: The Edge of Nowhere... | Registered: April 05, 2013Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Bills like this are presented every year. They're done more for their symbolism and as a conversation starter than anything else. I personally find them kind of frivolous and distracting.
 
Posts: 1943 | Location: Iowa | Registered: February 24, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Proud member of
the vanning collective
Picture of Black92LX
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by DaBigBR:
Bills like this are presented every year. They're done more for their symbolism and as a conversation starter than anything else. I personally find them kind of frivolous and distracting.


Possibly the point to help move the HPA through??


--------------------------------------
Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards.
Soren Kierkegaard
 
Posts: 17638 | Registered: September 06, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Sigforum K9 handler
Picture of jljones
posted Hide Post
As much as people like to bag on ATF, I'm not sure that this is a great idea. Taking enforcement from one agency, and give it to another who still has little or no oversight on how the laws are enforced is simply taking a train off one set of tracks going over a cliff at 100 mph, and putting it on another set of tracks at 98 mph.


_______________________________________________________________________
www.opspectraining.com
Check out our customer appreciation class
http://sigforum.com/eve/forums...1105858/m/7790088624

"Make it a shooting, and not a gunfight" LSP552 02/19/2011

"There are only two reasons why a proven technique doesn't work under stress: the shooter isn't adequately trained in it's application, or he/she doesn't really believe it will work because he/she is programmed for failure to begin with." BG

 
Posts: 30369 | Location: Logical | Registered: September 12, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Freethinker
Picture of sigfreund
posted Hide Post
I have never understood the simplistic view that if we don’t like the laws an agency enforces or administers that we should abolish the agency rather than change the laws.

“Abolish the IRS” because we don’t like taxes is a perfect example. We may want to lower taxes, eliminate some, and change how tax law is enforced, but without an agency to collect the necessary taxes, the country would descend into a cesspit that we can’t begin to imagine.

There are laws that the ATF enforces that need to be enforced. Again, we may legitimately object to the unnecessary ones or how the necessary ones are enforced, but to think that the way to satisfy our legitimate objections is to abolish the agency is moronic. Even transferring its mission to another agency is something that we should be hesitant to wish for. It might save some money, but probably not much and when agencies or individuals are suddenly given new tasks to perform they often don’t do them well.




“Most men … can seldom accept the simplest and most obvious truth if it … would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions … which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabrics of their lives.”
— Leo Tolstoy
 
Posts: 36903 | Location: 10,150 Feet Above Sea Level in Colorado | Registered: April 04, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Black92LX:

Possibly the point to help move the HPA through??


My guess would be not the actual intent, but perhaps a side effect. Like telling your wife you want two new guns and settling on one, for those that have to negotiate.
 
Posts: 1943 | Location: Iowa | Registered: February 24, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Oriental Redneck
Picture of 12131
posted Hide Post
Read again what he's trying to do. He's not trying to abolish the ATF and just leave everything in a vacuum.

quote:
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner reintroduced the ATF Elimination Act, legislation that would dissolve the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and merge its exclusive duties into existing federal agencies.

Additionally, the Act calls for an immediate hiring freeze at the agency and requires the Department of Justice (DOJ) to eliminate and reduce duplicative functions and waste, as well as report to Congress with a detailed plan on how the transition will take place. Further, it would transfer enforcement of firearms, explosives and arson laws to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and illegal diversion of alcohol and tobacco products would be transferred to the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA).

Under this bill, the DEA and FBI would be required to submit to Congress a plan for winding down the affairs of the ATF after no more than 180 days, and field offices, along with other buildings and assets of the ATF, would be transferred to the FBI. It would have one year to report excess property to the General Services Administration (GSA).

Congressman Sensenbrenner: “Despite our country being trillions of dollars in debt, government spending continues to rise. Common sense budgeting solutions are necessary, and the ATF Elimination Act is one measure we can take to reduce spending, redundancy, and practice responsible governance. The ATF is a scandal-ridden, largely duplicative agency that has been branded by failure and lacks a clear mission. It is plagued by backlogs, funding gaps, hiring challenges, and a lack of leadership. These facts make it a logical place to begin draining the swamp and acting in the best interest of the American taxpayer.”

*********************************************
*********************************************

Tell me again how the DHS and the TSA are anything but bloated wasteful federal bureaucracies.






 
Posts: 12850 | Location: TEXAS | Registered: September 04, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Political Cynic
Picture of nhtagmember
posted Hide Post
what actual benefit does the country get from the ATF?



Peace is not the absence of conflict, but rather when you have your foot firmly on the enemies neck

"I'm only myself when I have a guitar in my hands." - George Harrison


 
Posts: 44640 | Location: Arizona | Registered: January 16, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of johnronin
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by sigfreund:
I have never understood the simplistic view that if we don’t like the laws an agency enforces or administers that we should abolish the agency rather than change the laws.

There are laws that the ATF enforces that need to be enforced. Again, we may legitimately object to the unnecessary ones or how the necessary ones are enforced, but to think that the way to satisfy our legitimate objections is to abolish the agency is moronic. Even transferring its mission to another agency is something that we should be hesitant to wish for. It might save some money, but probably not much and when agencies or individuals are suddenly given new tasks to perform they often don’t do them well.


I'm curious as to what laws the ATF need to enforce that every other law enforcement agency already doesn't?
Without the NFA, To me their only legitimate function is to regulate manufacturing Firearms and Firearms licensing. As a federal employee I see them as redundant and incompetent law enforcement entity.


_________________________
"Earrings are for Women."
Me
"I can't respect a grown man who wears a Flat Bill hat with stickers on it, it is the epitome of douchebaggery."
Me

 
Posts: 636 | Location: Republic of Texas | Registered: March 30, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Alea iacta est
Picture of exx1976
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by johnronin:
quote:
Originally posted by sigfreund:
I have never understood the simplistic view that if we don’t like the laws an agency enforces or administers that we should abolish the agency rather than change the laws.

There are laws that the ATF enforces that need to be enforced. Again, we may legitimately object to the unnecessary ones or how the necessary ones are enforced, but to think that the way to satisfy our legitimate objections is to abolish the agency is moronic. Even transferring its mission to another agency is something that we should be hesitant to wish for. It might save some money, but probably not much and when agencies or individuals are suddenly given new tasks to perform they often don’t do them well.


I'm curious as to what laws the ATF need to enforce that every other law enforcement agency already doesn't?
Without the NFA, To me their only legitimate function is to regulate manufacturing Firearms and Firearms licensing. As a federal employee I see them as redundant and incompetent law enforcement entity.


Wow, how narrow-minded.

There are two other letters in ATF. They handle all the licensing, taxation, enforcement, and all the other bullshit that goes along with those other two letters as well.

Transfer the duties to the FBI and DEA? All that's going to happen are the people working for NFA and the F enforcement are going to be hired by the FBI, and the folks handling the A & the T will be hired by the DEA.

It's not going to save a damn thing except maybe letterhead and windbreakers.




Every time you make a typo, the errorists win.
 
Posts: 15652 | Location: Location, Location  | Registered: April 09, 2012Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Freethinker
Picture of sigfreund
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by exx1976:
There are two other letters in ATF.


I was wondering if anyone would point out the obvious. Thinking that all the ATF does is enforce Federal firearms laws is stunningly ignorant.

But it’s actually three letters; the third is E for explosives. I don’t really care much about how tobacco and alcohol are regulated, but explosives started to be controlled in this country in the 1970s after leftist antigovernment terrorists started using them here, and that’s perfectly fine with me. There are other ways of making bombs than walking out of the local hardware store with a case of dynamite, but they’re a lot more difficult and dangerous to the builder, and are less effective. In places where military or commercial explosives are readily available, that’s what terrorists use. Elsewhere they use other things and that tends to keep the casualties down.

And it’s not just regulation and control. The ATF, like the DEA, serves as the experts when it comes to investigation of specific crimes. Yes, investigation of those crimes could be transferred to other agencies—including right down to the local sheriff’s office—but there are benefits to having specialists who actually know what they’re doing and have the tools and equipment to do it properly.




“Most men … can seldom accept the simplest and most obvious truth if it … would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions … which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabrics of their lives.”
— Leo Tolstoy
 
Posts: 36903 | Location: 10,150 Feet Above Sea Level in Colorado | Registered: April 04, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of johnronin
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by exx1976:
quote:
Originally posted by johnronin:
quote:
Originally posted by sigfreund:
I have never understood the simplistic view that if we don’t like the laws an agency enforces or administers that we should abolish the agency rather than change the laws.

There are laws that the ATF enforces that need to be enforced. Again, we may legitimately object to the unnecessary ones or how the necessary ones are enforced, but to think that the way to satisfy our legitimate objections is to abolish the agency is moronic. Even transferring its mission to another agency is something that we should be hesitant to wish for. It might save some money, but probably not much and when agencies or individuals are suddenly given new tasks to perform they often don’t do them well.


I'm curious as to what laws the ATF need to enforce that every other law enforcement agency already doesn't?
Without the NFA, To me their only legitimate function is to regulate manufacturing Firearms and Firearms licensing. As a federal employee I see them as redundant and incompetent law enforcement entity.


Wow, how narrow-minded.

There are two other letters in ATF. They handle all the licensing, taxation, enforcement, and all the other bullshit that goes along with those other two letters as well.

Transfer the duties to the FBI and DEA? All that's going to happen are the people working for NFA and the F enforcement are going to be hired by the FBI, and the folks handling the A & the T will be hired by the DEA.

It's not going to save a damn thing except maybe letterhead and windbreakers.


Wow.. Narrow minded? You still made no valid argument as to what they do that isn't already done by other agencies in fact you almost made my point.
So you think that no other agency can handle taxation? Go on and tell the IRS that no one else can impose and enforce taxes except them. The ATF started as part of the IRS.
You think No other agency can handle enforcement? Better tell the local county, state, and city police that they can't enforce any laws related to firearms or explosives.
You think no other agency can handle explosives? You should probably let the FBI know that they are doing the job of the ATF when it comes to bombings and they might interfere. Make sure you let the FBI explosives Unit know so they can stop any investigation involving homemade explosives or improvised explosives. Or and tell arson investigators they can't investigate any arsons.
And of course the DEA or any county or state alcoholic beverage commission could not possibly handle any extra duties in relation to alcohol and tobacco in which they already do. Do you honestly believe that we need a federal agency to enforce buttlegging and bootlegging?
You didn't exactly help yourself other than stating the obvious which is that it is a redundant agency.. You should probably look up "redundant" because it seems like it's been lost on your narrow mindness.
The same thinking plagues my visits to the VA and at work where we have a people who's responsibilities are so pinpoint that they cannot possibly do any other jobs other than those they are assigned and no matter if another person is trained and qualified to perform that particular task it cannot be done by anyone else because it is the assigned job of some other gov worker.
Try and find some examples of where the ATF did something worthwhile.. PLEASE!
Their claim for notoriety comes from all of their incompetence, Ruby Ridge, Waco, fast and furious, etc.. You both seem to imply that the ATF is good at what they do and highly efficient which is laughable.


_________________________
"Earrings are for Women."
Me
"I can't respect a grown man who wears a Flat Bill hat with stickers on it, it is the epitome of douchebaggery."
Me

 
Posts: 636 | Location: Republic of Texas | Registered: March 30, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Political Cynic
Picture of nhtagmember
posted Hide Post
ten ATF is the regulatory definition of transgendered - it doesn't fit in anywhere



Peace is not the absence of conflict, but rather when you have your foot firmly on the enemies neck

"I'm only myself when I have a guitar in my hands." - George Harrison


 
Posts: 44640 | Location: Arizona | Registered: January 16, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of RichardC
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by sigfreund:
I was wondering if anyone would point out the obvious. Thinking that all the ATF does is enforce Federal firearms laws is stunningly ignorant.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fw3Ro-vlXzw

Huh, huh. Huh, Huh.


_____________________

 
Posts: 8496 | Location: Florida | Registered: June 23, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Alea iacta est
Picture of exx1976
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by johnronin:
quote:
Originally posted by exx1976:
quote:
Originally posted by johnronin:
quote:
Originally posted by sigfreund:
I have never understood the simplistic view that if we don’t like the laws an agency enforces or administers that we should abolish the agency rather than change the laws.

There are laws that the ATF enforces that need to be enforced. Again, we may legitimately object to the unnecessary ones or how the necessary ones are enforced, but to think that the way to satisfy our legitimate objections is to abolish the agency is moronic. Even transferring its mission to another agency is something that we should be hesitant to wish for. It might save some money, but probably not much and when agencies or individuals are suddenly given new tasks to perform they often don’t do them well.


I'm curious as to what laws the ATF need to enforce that every other law enforcement agency already doesn't?
Without the NFA, To me their only legitimate function is to regulate manufacturing Firearms and Firearms licensing. As a federal employee I see them as redundant and incompetent law enforcement entity.


Wow, how narrow-minded.

There are two other letters in ATF. They handle all the licensing, taxation, enforcement, and all the other bullshit that goes along with those other two letters as well.

Transfer the duties to the FBI and DEA? All that's going to happen are the people working for NFA and the F enforcement are going to be hired by the FBI, and the folks handling the A & the T will be hired by the DEA.

It's not going to save a damn thing except maybe letterhead and windbreakers.


Wow.. Narrow minded? You still made no valid argument as to what they do that isn't already done by other agencies in fact you almost made my point.
So you think that no other agency can handle taxation? Go on and tell the IRS that no one else can impose and enforce taxes except them. The ATF started as part of the IRS.
You think No other agency can handle enforcement? Better tell the local county, state, and city police that they can't enforce any laws related to firearms or explosives.
You think no other agency can handle explosives? You should probably let the FBI know that they are doing the job of the ATF when it comes to bombings and they might interfere. Make sure you let the FBI explosives Unit know so they can stop any investigation involving homemade explosives or improvised explosives. Or and tell arson investigators they can't investigate any arsons.
And of course the DEA or any county or state alcoholic beverage commission could not possibly handle any extra duties in relation to alcohol and tobacco in which they already do. Do you honestly believe that we need a federal agency to enforce buttlegging and bootlegging?
You didn't exactly help yourself other than stating the obvious which is that it is a redundant agency.. You should probably look up "redundant" because it seems like it's been lost on your narrow mindness.
The same thinking plagues my visits to the VA and at work where we have a people who's responsibilities are so pinpoint that they cannot possibly do any other jobs other than those they are assigned and no matter if another person is trained and qualified to perform that particular task it cannot be done by anyone else because it is the assigned job of some other gov worker.
Try and find some examples of where the ATF did something worthwhile.. PLEASE!
Their claim for notoriety comes from all of their incompetence, Ruby Ridge, Waco, fast and furious, etc.. You both seem to imply that the ATF is good at what they do and highly efficient which is laughable.


I have neither the time nor the crayons...




Every time you make a typo, the errorists win.
 
Posts: 15652 | Location: Location, Location  | Registered: April 09, 2012Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by exx1976:
I have neither the time nor the crayons...


Exactly. This kind of stuff is all style over substance. "If we only abolish X agency, Y agency can do their job." I've seen the same argument made about the DEA. Ultimately it doesn't make a lick of sense, but everybody can get all fired up and say it's a great idea and in the end even if it happened, there would be a rough transition period and then a period that people would bitch about and then it would be "meet the new boss, same as the old boss" and everybody would hate the new entity.

If you want change, get the substance of the law changed.
 
Posts: 1943 | Location: Iowa | Registered: February 24, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by DaBigBR:
quote:
Originally posted by exx1976:
I have neither the time nor the crayons...


Exactly. This kind of stuff is all style over substance. "If we only abolish X agency, Y agency can do their job." I've seen the same argument made about the DEA. Ultimately it doesn't make a lick of sense, but everybody can get all fired up and say it's a great idea and in the end even if it happened, there would be a rough transition period and then a period that people would bitch about and then it would be "meet the new boss, same as the old boss" and everybody would hate the new entity.

If you want change, get the substance of the law changed.


Cool
 
Posts: 501 | Location: Arizona | Registered: January 31, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  Suppressed Weapons    ATF Elimination Act

© SIGforum 2017