ATF "gun verification"

[Mr Smooth]

I'm saying that everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Buying multiple guns is not illegal and therefore should not be grounds for warrantless contacts, searches, or seizures.

Are you saying investigating straw purchases should only be done without speaking to gun purchasers?

 

[GunRelated]

So you believe the police should have to obtain a warrant just to talk to someone?

Talking to someone and asking them to produce personal belongings are 2 different things.

 

[GunRelated]

Are you saying investigating straw purchases should only be done without speaking to gun purchasers?

I'm saying, sending federal agents to people's houses, when they have broken no laws, is certainly testing the bounds of constitutionality.

 

[GunRelated]

Let me ask the question now.

What happens when this guy refuses to produce the firearms and tells them to kick rocks?
Are we supposed to be naive and believe they will go find some rocks to kick?

 

[Mr Smooth]

I'm saying, sending federal agents to people's houses, when they have broken no laws, is certainly testing the bounds of constitutionality.

How so, the law is FFLs report multiple purchases. ATF investigates straw purchases so your saying they can't talk to the suspected straw purchaser? So the police can't talk to suspects?

 

[Mr Smooth]

Let me ask the question now.

What happens when this guy refuses to produce the firearms and tells them to kick rocks?
Are we supposed to be naive and believe they will go find some rocks to kick?

I suspect they review their evidence and determine whether to kick rocks or obtain a warrant

 

[GunRelated]

I suspect they review their evidence and determine whether to kick rocks or obtain a warrant

Why not obtain a warrant in the first place then?

 

[GunRelated]

How so, the law is FFLs report multiple purchases. ATF investigates straw purchases so your saying they can't talk to the suspected straw purchaser? So the police can't talk to suspects?

Why not investigate every multiple gun purchase?

Am I supposed to believe that individuals who straw purchase are more of a problem than the government agencies who arm the cartels and gangs?

 

[Mr Smooth]

Why not obtain a warrant in the first place then?

Because they are just doing it the easy way. If the suspect proves he or she still has the weapons case closed. If he doesn't prove the weapons exist maybe based on the ATFs evidence then they do it the hard way with a Federal Judge granting a warrant

 

[Mr Smooth]

Why not investigate every multiple gun purchase?

Am I supposed to believe that individuals who straw purchase are more of a problem than the government agencies who arm the cartels and gangs?

Yeah you are supposed believe in the law and straw purchases are a problem in the USA. Why do you think it is the first question of line 21 on the ATF 4473. It is line 21a

 

[thperez1972]

I'm saying, sending federal agents to people's houses, when they have broken no laws, is certainly testing the bounds of constitutionality.

Again, how are police supposed to determine if the person broke any laws before the police start any investigation?

Let me ask the question now.

What happens when this guy refuses to produce the firearms and tells them to kick rocks?
Are we supposed to be naive and believe they will go find some rocks to kick?

Naive implies a lack of knowledge or experience. Yet, from knowledge and experience, I can tell you the police will, in reality, go find some rocks to kick. I would say the naivety actually lies in the belief that, in general, a member of law enforcement is going to so readily open themselves up to a civil rights lawsuit.

Why not obtain a warrant in the first place then?

So you want the police to obtain a warrant before they investigate?

 

[thperez1972]

Why not investigate every multiple gun purchase?

Am I supposed to believe that individuals who straw purchase are more of a problem than the government agencies who arm the cartels and gangs?

I would say that murder is more of a problem than people breaking into cars. Yet both are crimes and I wouldn't suggest the lesser crime be excused and not investigated.

 

[GunRelated]

I would say that murder is more of a problem than people breaking into cars. Yet both are crimes and I wouldn't suggest the lesser crime be excused and not investigated.

Touche.

The difference here is that the governing body who has shown by past actions to break their own laws in order to arm the very people that they should be investigating, arresting, and imprisoning. So, maybe you can understand why some might have a little distrust in the way that they choose to enforce their laws, especially when it involves harassing people who have broken no laws at all.

 

[GunRelated]

Again, how are police supposed to determine if the person broke any laws before the police start any investigation?


Naive implies a lack of knowledge or experience. Yet, from knowledge and experience, I can tell you the police will, in reality, go find some rocks to kick. I would say the naivety actually lies in the belief that, in general, a member of law enforcement is going to so readily open themselves up to a civil rights lawsuit.


So you want the police to obtain a warrant before they investigate?

In the old days, when our rights actually meant something, we would not have to worry about federal agents popping up at our house for exercising a fundamental constitutional right. In the old days, when our rights actually meant something, in order to catch criminals, it would require some smarts, some good old fashion investigation of the criminals themselves.
Now days, we just cast a huge net out over the whole population in hopes that we nab a few bad guys to make ourselves look like we did a good thing.

 

[thperez1972]

Touche.

The difference here is that the governing body who has shown by past actions to break their own laws in order to arm the very people that they should be investigating, arresting, and imprisoning. So, maybe you can understand why some might have a little distrust in the way that they choose to enforce their laws, especially when it involves harassing people who have broken no laws at all.

Knocking on a door and asking someone questions is not harassment.

 

[Mr Smooth]

It

Touche.

The difference here is that the governing body who has shown by past actions to break their own laws in order to arm the very people that they should be investigating, arresting, and imprisoning. So, maybe you can understand why some might have a little distrust in the way that they choose to enforce their laws, especially when it involves harassing people who have broken no laws at all.

It is real simple, buy multiple guns or alot of guns in a short period of time and expect that someone from the ATF might want to ask you a rew questions

 

[thperez1972]

In the old days, when our rights actually meant something, we would not have to worry about federal agents popping up at our house for exercising a fundamental constitutional right. In the old days, when our rights actually meant something, in order to catch criminals, it would require some smarts, some good old fashion investigation of the criminals themselves.
Now days, we just cast a huge net out over the whole population in hopes that we nab a few bad guys to make ourselves look like we did a good thing.

In the good old days, good old fashion investigation involved talking to people. Now days, some people feel that the police should have to get a warrant just to ask a person a question.

 

[GunRelated]

Yeah you are supposed believe in the law and straw purchases are a problem in the USA. Why do you think it is the first question of line 21 on the ATF 4473. It is line 21a

Gonna let you in on a little secret. All gun laws are infringements. There would be no straw purchases without gun laws. Gun laws are only meant to arm the government against the people while giving the illusion of providing safety against criminals.

We can have all the gun laws we want, and all the preventive measures we can think of, but when our own government is willing to arm said criminals, none of these laws mean anything.

 

[GunRelated]

In the good old days, good old fashion investigation involved talking to people. Now days, some people feel that the police should have to get a warrant just to ask a person a question.

Talking to someone and investigating them for breaking no laws is not the same thing.

 

[Mr Smooth]

Talking to someone and investigating them for breaking no laws is not the same thing.

Seems to me the were investigating them for possibly, and I mean possibly, breaking the law.