Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
Member |
Well this is interesting... http://sensenbrenner.house.gov...px?DocumentID=398088 This is where my signature goes. | ||
|
Member |
Just want you though the HPA was going to be hard to get traction... this is even slimmer ! | |||
|
| Member |
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. | |||
|
| Raised Hands Surround Us Three Nails To Protect Us  |
Possibly the point to help move the HPA through?? ———————————————— The world's not perfect, but it's not that bad. If we got each other, and that's all we have. I will be your brother, and I'll hold your hand. You should know I'll be there for you! | |||
|
Sigforum K9 handler |
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. | |||
|
| Freethinker |
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. ► 6.4/93.6 | |||
|
| Member |
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. | |||
|
Oriental Redneck |
Read again what he's trying to do. He's not trying to abolish the ATF and just leave everything in a vacuum.
********************************************* ********************************************* Tell me again how the DHS and the TSA are anything but bloated wasteful federal bureaucracies. Q | |||
|
Political Cynic |
what actual benefit does the country get from the ATF? [B] Against ALL enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC | |||
|
Member |
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. _________________________ These Pretzels are making me thirsty! | |||
|
| Alea iacta est |
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. | |||
|
| Freethinker |
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. ► 6.4/93.6 | |||
|
| Member |
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. _________________________ These Pretzels are making me thirsty! | |||
|
| Political Cynic |
ten ATF is the regulatory definition of transgendered - it doesn't fit in anywhere [B] Against ALL enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC | |||
|
Member |
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fw3Ro-vlXzw Huh, huh. Huh, Huh. ____________________ | |||
|
| Alea iacta est |
I have neither the time nor the crayons... | |||
|
| Member |
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. | |||
|
| Member |
 | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
© SIGforum 2024