It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

FR Doc. 2011-10355 Filed 4-28-11; 8:45 am: Obama Admin Wants to know if you buy a rifle!

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 09:26 AM
link   
Overview of This Information Collection


(1) Type of Information Collection: New.
(2) Title of the Form/Collection: Report of Multiple Sale or Other
Disposition of Certain Rifles
(3) Agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the
Department of Justice sponsoring the collection: Form Number: ATF F
3310.12. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
(4) Affected public who will be required to respond, as well as a
brief abstract: Primary: Business or For-Profit. Other: None. Abstract:
The purpose of this information collection is to require Federal
firearms licensees to report multiple sales or other dispositions
whenever the licensee sells or otherwise disposes of two or more rifles
with the following characteristics: (a) Semi-automatic; (b) a caliber
greater than .22 (including .223/5.56 caliber); and (c) the ability to
accept a detachable magazine, to the same person at one time or during
any five consecutive business days. This requirement will apply only to
Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) who are dealers and/or pawnbrokers in
Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas.
(5) An estimate of the total number of respondents: ATF estimates
that 8,479 respondents will be subject to the reporting requirement.
However, ATF anticipates fewer than 30% of the potential respondents
will be required to report multiple sales of the subset of rifles that
is the subject of this collection. This estimate is based upon the fact
that, during fiscal year 2010, 2,509 FFLs in the affected states
submitted reports of multiple sales of hand guns. ATF estimates that a
similar number of FFLs are likely to submit reports of multiple sales
of the subject rifles.

See the proposed legislation here

So what does this all mean???

Due to the violence down in Mexico. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has sought to tighten reporting requirements in Arizona, Texas, New Mexico and California.

Under the proposal, dealers would have to report sales of two or more rifles to the same person at one time or during any five business days if the rifles are semi-automatic, with a caliber greater than .22 and detachable magazines. Wonders if they will be reporting on themselves for selling those 2500+ weapons to known gunrunners???
So far this law would only effect the 4 border states, about 8,500 dealers. but we all know it's only a matter of time before they feel the need to expand said program.

This bill first surfaced back in Dec This second round of comment taking, is typical for new regulations.

OMB recommends that written
comments be faxed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
OMB, Attn: DOJ Desk Officer, Fax: 202-395-7285, or e-mailed to oira_
submission@omb.eop.gov.

Personally I wondered when and what form the Obama Admin would take in the gun control issue seems this is their opening move.

The issue of gun control will also likely be a theme during the 2012 presidential campaign. President Barack Obama last month sought to bring together differing sides to discuss ways to make gun laws more effective...
in other words let the gun grabbing begin...

Well you know what I have to say about this... so tell us your thoughts?...
edit on 29-4-2011 by DaddyBare because: (no reason given)

edit on Fri Apr 29 2011 by DontTreadOnMe because: IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS




posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 09:34 AM
link   
Hopefully the learned how not to do it from Canada.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by DaddyBare
So far this law would only effect the 4 border states, about 8,500 dealers. but we all know it's only a matter of time before they feel the need to expand said program.


This says it all right there. If I were a bad guy and was making plans to do something bad with said guns and now that I know the law. My plan would be, 1) I would not be in any great rush and would just go to these states and purchase within the limits until I got the number of weapons I needed, or 2) I would just go to another state not listed. But hell, I would be a bad guy and could care less about the law and would probably just steal them or get them off the black market.

So, effectively this law is already a failure.

edit on 29-4-2011 by Skewed because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Skewed
 


your very right in that there are tons of weapons stolen every day... many of those sold on the black market...
but thanks to wikileaks we now know that US guns make up less than 17% of all the weapons taken from cartel members... that tells us their not coming here for our blue light K-Mart specials.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by DaddyBare
 


Meh.. typical... Maybe if the ATF didnt stand by and watch mexican nationals enter the US, go to some gun stores, buy guns, and then cross back into Mexico we wouldnt need this annoyance.

I think we need legislation calling on the heads of the ATF, and anyone in a supervisory position who knew rifles were being watched going across the border, to strip them of their positions and either charge them with a crime, or extradite them to Mexico and let their legal system deal with them.

I also urge people to contact your reps and touch base to find out where there position on the legislation might be, and urge them to vote against this piece of crap law.
edit on 29-4-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by DaddyBare
 


I also urge people to contact your reps and touch base to find out where there position on the legislation might be, and urge them to vote against this piece of crap law.


Meh, I would, but I am in Kentucky and the only thing people are worried about here is whether or not the basketball team will make SEC/NCAA. If it does not revolve around a coach or basketball, nobody gives a damn.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 02:30 PM
link   
its none of the atfs business what i buy.

its my business and noone elses.

you can not legislate intent of anything but they do sure try dont they.

obama running on gun control i hope he does it will definatley seal his fate of becoming a 1 term president and i do use that term loosely.

for crying outloud does the us constitution mean noting to a constitutional lawyer- off course not.

nazis pure fascist nazis. liberal fascism in all its glory.
edit on 29-4-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 02:38 PM
link   
Could they be doing this to us, to try and catch someone invovled with the mexicans? you know, somoene works or is with the mexicans, buys a rifle, and then uses it agasint the good guys? track em that way.
of course, knowing our governemnt and the NWO, it could be used to track those uf us innocent of crimes ones, to know they have em, and to take em away..us legal taxpayers always getting screwed byt he FED

see what the ATF did in wacko texas? i remember watching that live on tv news. slwoed down, when that tank came in...it appears the tank was shooting fire in the room, like naplam or something..some say the ATF was responsable for starting that fire too.
the 3 ATF guys that went on the roof. one goes in the window..its only after he goes in the window, thiers gunfire shot at the other 2 ATF guys....suspiscion.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 02:39 PM
link   
And of course, thier was an infamous picture taken, some ATF or FBI guy smiles as he stand posing for apicture, with whacko burning behind him . a trophey shot* sick, especailly knowing many kids died and burned to death under the circumstances



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Sadly enough, SCOTUS has ruled that in addition to the 2nd amendment being an individual right, Congress does have the authority to regulate how guns are bought, sold and manufactured.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
www.huffingtonpost.com...

Let's start with publishing a report on just how man rifles US federal operation "Fast & Furious" sold to the Mexican cartels under Obama's watch.

The government needs to remove the longbeam from their eyeball before they worry about any splinters in the finger of Joe Citizen. Conversely, Joe Citizen needs to find other, less tracked, less federal report happy outlets to purchase his firearms as well as learn how to reload his own ammunition immediately. These mandatory dealer reports will be the first roadmap the feds utilize when the day of gun grabs occurs.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by ziggy1706
 


Sadly that already occured. The ATF was running their operation where they tracked mexican nationals entering the US, followed them to gun stores, observed these mexican nationals buying rifles, packing them back into their cars, and crossing back over into Mexico.

The ATF agents complained about it, but were told by higher ups to continue the investigation. It wasnt until a US Border Patrol Agent was shot and killed on the US side while confronting illegals crossing that the ATF agents began to contact media about it. The gun used to kill the agent was one of the weapons ATF agents watched a mecian national buy and take across the border.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 02:49 PM
link   
Isn't this unconstitutional right off the bat because it applies unequally to the states? I didn't think Federal Law could be made to apply to some states but not others? That would sort of be "State Law"...?



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 


I am curious as to what is going to happen in either Wisonsin or MInnesota.. I forget which state is going down this road, but one of them came up with the idea to allow wepons to be made within the state, where all of the resources are in the state (not brought in from outside of the state or country), and allowing them to be sold outside of Federal, Law.

Since nothing is crossing state lines to manufature the item, it does not fall under FEderal Jurisdiction to regulate.
Ill dig around and see if I can locate the article.. It was from sometime last year or 2009.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by ararisq
Isn't this unconstitutional right off the bat because it applies unequally to the states? I didn't think Federal Law could be made to apply to some states but not others? That would sort of be "State Law"...?


Good question.. I think they are going to try to get around that by blurring the line of international commerce. SCOTUS says the feds can regulate the manner in which guns are bought and sold within the US.

My issue is, why dont they just enforce existing laws on the books. Weapons smuggeling is a no no going into mexico. Its a no no smuggeling weapons outside of the US (they must be declared to customs along with some other legal restrictions on this side of the border).

Also, as foreign nationals who are not LEO / Military in the offical course of their duties, Foriegn nationals cant be in possession of fire arms while inthe US anyways.

Love how we always reinvent the wheel...



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


the ones that i know of were minnesota texas and crap i forgot the third one

all of them were trying to get a law passed that any weapons made within the states own borders were exempt from federal law.

each weapon was to be stamp with "made in **" and for use within there only.

i been looking to see if they were ever passed

but it was a great idea with the protection of state rights.

22 states introduced versions of the firearms freedom act.

heres a website following the ffa with a graphic of whose introduced and who has passed their legislation.

firearmsfreedomact.com...
edit on 29-4-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


If this works then why not just ban guns out right in states with Democratic majorities in the legislature? It wouldn't be challenged and they could incrementally disarm the public?



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by ararisq
 


They cant outright ban guns because of the 2nd Amendment. For the longest times, and for lack of a better term, anti gun groups / politicians tried that. They have been arguing since the early 20's that the 2nd amedment applies to the states and not the individual.

In the last 2 years the US Supreme Court (The first ruling involved Washington DC, the 2nd involved Chicago IL) that the 2nd amendment applies to the individual. The only restriction imposed is the Governments ability to regulate the manufature and sale of those items within the US.

They cant outright ban manufatureers from making guns, because they would be overstepping their authority and misusing the commerce clause. Any attempt on the Governments part now to ban / restrict weapons sales is going to be an uphill battle because of those court rulings.

So they are using the only tool they have left - regulating the sale of those items.

Which brings us back to my point.. There are laws already on the books that do EXACTLY what the feds are trying to do. Where the FEDS get in troubles is they pass laws and forget they pass them. Then they go back and instead of researching, just start over.

The other thing we need to watch is individual state laws. Michigan for example requires a private person to register their handguns, but not rifles. Missouri for example does not require you to register either with the state.

I have not read the entire legislation yet, so right now this is just my opinion based on what I read in the OP. If the feds go to regulate the rifles from the aspect of international commerce, and can provide information that shows border states are selling weapons to foreign nationals, then they most likely will be able to pass leislation that just targets border states. Its not creating any undue burden on those states, nor is it punishing those states.

What will happen if it passes, is you will see foreign nationals driving farther inland to other states, or simply just burglarizing gun shops (no stereotyping intended, just stating a possibility).

Either or, we need to keep and eye on it and see what the final version will be if it makes it out of committee. Keep in touch with your reps and keep them on their toes.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
They cant outright ban guns because of the 2nd Amendment. For the longest times, and for lack of a better term, anti gun groups / politicians tried that. They have been arguing since the early 20's that the 2nd amedment applies to the states and not the individual.


I think they could - they could pass a law which effectively makes it illegal or impractical to own weapons all together. It would stand so long as its not challenged and the courts will throw out any challenge by anyone outside the state and probably by any citizen within the state for having no grounds to challenge - just like with the Obama BC court cases. No challenge = get away with anything.



posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 06:18 PM
link   
reply to post by ararisq
 


Thats just it though.. That scenario you described already occured in Washington DC and Chicago, 2 places that had the strictest gun control laws on the books. Both laws were thrown out as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

Ive said it before and Ill say it again.. If some law was ever passed that outlawed guns, and my department ever gave an order to enforce it and collect them, my chief will have my resignation on the spot.

Obama and his people need to fix the rectal-cranial inversion they seem to be having, and enforce the laws on the books instead of making new ones. By all means though, lets waste time on crap like this instead of fixing the 14 trillion in debt.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join