Jump to content

NRA Files Comments Opposing Shotgun Import Ban


Recommended Posts

Wow that is a comprehensive response. I wish I was capable of putting something together like that. I can't remember if it was here or on calguns but someone had posted that the NRA's silence was deafening in regards to the study, and I had agreed at the time but I see now that they were just crossing their I's and dotting the T's.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Too much too little too late.

Now is the time to post the name,address, phone number,web address, photograph and office address of everyone at BATFE involved in this bullshit. Some folks just might want to have a 'personal' conversation with them!

Anonymous bureaucrats have a lot less incentive to respect the will of the people than those who are known publicly

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Too much too little too late.

Now is the time to post the name,address, phone number,web address, photograph and office address of everyone at BATFE involved in this bullshit. Some folks just might want to have a 'personal' conversation with them!

Anonymous bureaucrats have a lot less incentive to respect the will of the people than those who are known publicly

They went wrong by waiting so long to try to ban the saiga 12. The time would have worked back when they first started being imported and before the Heller vs DC case as well as before the Saiga community started. Now they wait until a whole saiga community is formed and the pardignm of 2nd Amendment opinion in this country shifts in favor of personnal gun ownership for protection.

 

The BATFE are creating enemies that they really don't need right now!! They have enough problems without looking for trouble. I find it funny that they want to collect comments as if they really care about gun owners opinions.

 

What they really want are the names and addressess that people have to submit with those comments so that they can build a personnal files.

Link to post
Share on other sites
NRA Files Comments Opposing Shotgun Import Ban

 

Friday, May 06, 2011

 

 

On Sunday, May 1, the NRA filed its formal comments on the "ATF Study on the Importability of Certain Shotguns." The "study," (http://www.atf.gov/publications/firearms/012611-study-on-importality-of-certain-shotguns.pdf) published in January, proposed to ban the importation of any shotgun, regardless of action type, if it has one or more supposedly non-"sporting" features.

 

In a cover letter accompanying the comments, NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox made clear that the NRA strongly disagrees with the "sporting purposes" test for firearm importation: "We believe that fundamentally, the study asks and answers the wrong question, because the Supreme Court has now made clear that 'sporting purposes' are only one reason the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms," Cox wrote.

 

Even if the "sporting purposes" test was the right standard for firearm importation, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives "working group" that produced the study continued a long agency history of abusing that test to ban guns that actually are "particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes." Specifically:

 

* In 1989, the BATF suspended the importation of several dozen types of semi-automatic rifles it had previously approved for importation, and that had been imported for many years. The BATF ultimately banned the rifles' importation because they external attachments such as a pistol-type grip, a folding stock, or a flash suppressor.

 

In its attempt to justify the ban, the bureau's report took a remarkably narrow definition of "sporting purposes," arguing that "target shooting" meant only "organized marksmanship competition" and did not include "combat-type competitions." The report also excluded all recreational target practice, which it dismissed as "plinking" -- defined, in turn, as shooting at "bottles and cans."

 

* In 1993, the BATF banned the importation of the Heckler and Koch SP89 and Uzi Pistol. Both had previously been imported, and each gun easily qualified for importation under the bureau's longstanding "Handgun Factoring Criteria," under which points are awarded for "sporting features such as size, weight, caliber, and adjustable sights.

* In 1998, the BATF expanded the 1989 rifle import ban by banning guns that had been made specifically to comply with the earlier ban. The Clinton White House boasted at the time, "We're taking the law and bending it as far as we can to capture a whole new class of guns."

 

The new ban was based on the rifles' ability to use magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition, although rifles of the same type are overwhelmingly used in organized marksmanship competitions such as the National Rifle Championships and National Rifle Matches every year. As in 1989, the BATF ignored extensive comments from organizations and individuals documenting the widespread use of the banned rifles for competition and hunting.

 

To read the NRA's comments, click here (http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/ShotgunBanCommenttoBATFE_FINAL.pdf). The NRA strongly opposes any new import ban, and we'll keep you informed of any agency or congressional action on this issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how everyone just comes in and bashes the BATF, like they had damn choice in the matter. For those of you who don't know, this came from way up and from an outside source and got thrown on the BATF's doorstep. You think that the majority of the BATF actually agree with this study, or even have a say in it. Of course not. It works like any other LE agency or political regime, the decisions are made by people that are not professionals in the matter. And the decision is based upon who gets to move his chess piece in the best place for his agenda. Yep, thats it. Someone way up believes that this move will generate a fatter wallet or a seat in some senate somewhere. Sad but true. If you think that a personal conversation with ANY of them is gonna change anything, you are sadly mistaken.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how everyone just comes in and bashes the BATF, like they had damn choice in the matter. For those of you who don't know, this came from way up and from an outside source and got thrown on the BATF's doorstep.

What do you understand the source to be?

 

Politcians my friend.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how everyone just comes in and bashes the BATF, like they had damn choice in the matter. For those of you who don't know, this came from way up and from an outside source and got thrown on the BATF's doorstep.

What do you understand the source to be?

Senator Fienstein out of California is the one who got this ball rolling.

Pat

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what % of people actually gave their current address?

I gave mine. I have a C&R FFL and I'm about to put in a form 4 for a can.

 

Just like Kevin said, if they want to find you, they will.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what % of people actually gave their current address?

I did. It matches the one on my form 4.

 

The ATF can find virtually anyone who posts on this forum if they want to and can articulate to a judge why they should know.

 

 

I wonder what % of people actually gave their current address?

I gave mine. I have a C&R FFL and I'm about to put in a form 4 for a can.

 

Just like Kevin said, if they want to find you, they will.

 

I was not suggesting that one should lie, I was only wondering what % of people actually did give their current address.

I think that anyone with half a brain knows that the government can find you if they want. :smoke:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what % of people actually gave their current address?

I did. It matches the one on my form 4.

 

The ATF can find virtually anyone who posts on this forum if they want to and can articulate to a judge why they should know.

 

 

I wonder what % of people actually gave their current address?

I gave mine. I have a C&R FFL and I'm about to put in a form 4 for a can.

 

Just like Kevin said, if they want to find you, they will.

 

I was not suggesting that one should lie, I was only wondering what % of people actually did give their current address.

I think that anyone with half a brain knows that the government can find you if they want. :smoke:

Yea, after 10 years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how everyone just comes in and bashes the BATF, like they had damn choice in the matter. For those of you who don't know, this came from way up and from an outside source and got thrown on the BATF's doorstep. You think that the majority of the BATF actually agree with this study, or even have a say in it. Of course not. It works like any other LE agency or political regime, the decisions are made by people that are not professionals in the matter. And the decision is based upon who gets to move his chess piece in the best place for his agenda. Yep, thats it. Someone way up believes that this move will generate a fatter wallet or a seat in some senate somewhere. Sad but true. If you think that a personal conversation with ANY of them is gonna change anything, you are sadly mistaken.

That sounds like ATF talk. Are you one of them?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how everyone just comes in and bashes the BATF, like they had damn choice in the matter. For those of you who don't know, this came from way up and from an outside source and got thrown on the BATF's doorstep. You think that the majority of the BATF actually agree with this study, or even have a say in it. Of course not. It works like any other LE agency or political regime, the decisions are made by people that are not professionals in the matter. And the decision is based upon who gets to move his chess piece in the best place for his agenda. Yep, thats it. Someone way up believes that this move will generate a fatter wallet or a seat in some senate somewhere. Sad but true. If you think that a personal conversation with ANY of them is gonna change anything, you are sadly mistaken.

That sounds like ATF talk. Are you one of them?

 

He's a spy!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah it's true. People don't join the feds so they can run guns to Mexican drug rings. Or to burn down houses with dozens of little kids in them. Or shoot running kids in the back with an SMG. Or to shoot nursing mothers in the head. I'm not sure exactly how that transformation occurs, but all too often it does. I suspect it comes from insane promotion policies that ends up putting power crazed wackjobs in positions of authority.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Comrade Feinstein did suggest this particular "study" at the beginning of the year in her never-ending quest to destroy the parts of the Constitution she doesn't personally "like".

 

However, anyone who suggests that the ATF are blameless in this whole process is simply ignorant, stupid, or both.

Edited by post-apocalyptic
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah it's true. People don't join the feds so they can run guns to Mexican drug rings. Or to burn down houses with dozens of little kids in them. Or shoot running kids in the back with an SMG. Or to shoot nursing mothers in the head. I'm not sure exactly how that transformation occurs, but all too often it does. I suspect it comes from insane promotion policies that ends up putting power crazed wackjobs in positions of authority.

I suspect that someone's values and principles would have to be really screwed up inorder to want to join such an organization otherwise they would join a professional law enforcement organization like the FBI or local police departments. Why be a ATF agent when you can do something honorable such as protect and serve the community.

Edited by Crusader
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Who was it that shot the nursing mother in the head?

If I was to bet money on it, I would say an ATF agent just doing his job.

 

No, it was a guy from a "professional law enforcement organization".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Buzz. Wrong answer. FBI agent Lon Horiuchi, with the FBI HRT. Who was following FBI engagement rules that the government later admitted were unconstitutional. In an operation plan that had no negotiation annex. Following which the Government awarded the survivors a million dollars each to avoid going to trial.

 

Lon Horiuchi was also involved the FBI's next demonstration of inter-agency professionalism, the Jim "Waco" Cavanaugh barbeque.

Edited by KevinInNM
Link to post
Share on other sites

Who was it that shot the nursing mother in the head?

If I was to bet money on it, I would say an ATF agent just doing his job.

 

No, it was a guy from a "professional law enforcement organization".

You are starting to sound pro-ATF. We have to band together to ensure that we don't sell out. Everytime I start to feel pro-ATF I take a cold shower or just simply walk it off.

Edited by Crusader
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Comrade Feinstein did suggest this particular "study" at the beginning of the year in her never-ending quest to destroy the parts of the Constitution she doesn't personally "like".

 

However, anyone who suggests that the ATF are blameless in this whole process is simply ignorant, stupid,

or both.

 

Wow. You're pretty bold over an internet forum. I bet you wouldnt be so strongly opinionated to an ATF agents face. Everyone is a tough guy to the cops until theyre face to face. All these guys wanna do is what most cops wanna do , take guns outta the hands of bad guys and put bad guys in jail. It s not motivated by the ATF .. They are given a task (gather facts) and to report them to their supervisor. This repeats through the chain. What the upper echelon decides is outta of 99% of their hands.

Pls excuse errors using my phone.

Edited by incognito485
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah it's true. People don't join the feds so they can run guns to Mexican drug rings. Or to burn down houses with dozens of little kids in them. Or shoot running kids in the back with an SMG. Or to shoot nursing mothers in the head. I'm not sure exactly how that transformation occurs, but all too often it does. I suspect it comes from insane promotion policies that ends up putting power crazed wackjobs in positions of authority.

I suspect that someone's values and principles would have to be really screwed up inorder to want to join such an organization otherwise they would join a professional law enforcement organization like the FBI or local police departments. Why be a ATF agent when you can do something honorable such as protect and serve the community.

You have just proven that u know nothing about the ATF. In case u didn't know, obviously u didnt, they have done a pretty good job of recovering alot of stolen weapons and stopping alot guns from ending up in the hands of known cartels. But that has nothing to do with protecting and serving YOUR community.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...You have just proven that u know nothing about the ATF. In case u didn't know, obviously u didnt, they have done a pretty good job of recovering alot of stolen weapons and stopping alot guns from ending up in the hands of known cartels...

 

Oh yeah, they're doing a fantastic job. Just ask Border Patrol agent Brian Terry's surviving family. :rolleyes:

 

Have you never heard of Project Gunrunner?! :huh:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×
×
  • Create New...