Hiring 300 More ATF Agents Part II

  • Thread starter Thread starter RR
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

RR

New member
Y'all wait a minute and think. The ones that do the dirty work-answer the phones on gun checks, do the raids etc, are working class smucks like the most of use (I assume). What they do, and how they do it, are beyond their control. Now, who gives them their marching orders, their supervisiors, District attorneys (elected), States attorneys (appointed by elected govenors), Federal Attorney (appointed by president, and elected offical). The laws are made by elected legislators. The funding for the district attorneys, states attorneys, etc., by elected officals. Money talks!!

I'll bet that most LEOs don't want to having anything to do with arrests for personal possession of THC, growing THC for own use, firearms laws (except those in possession by a felon and reckless use etc). In my opinion, most LEOs are not in favor of THC use or possession, but they don't want to be spending their time of bust involving personal use. Crack,Meth, Heroin, and other drugs they view as more worthy of their time.

Again, money talks. Funding for enforcement has an effect. The line cops do their job, personal opinions aside.

For all you Y2K and other "end of the world "paranoia" adherents, it ain't the line officers you need to worry about (they will be protecting their families and f***k the goverment), its the 18-20 year old army etc who will be the cannon fodder.

Who passes the laws. YOU DO by who you elect!!! And how many of you vote????? Nuf said!!
 
The man makes a valid point.

Remember that those that make the rules never ever have to pay for the mistakes. How many will die because of fiats of Schumer, Feinstein, et al?
How many have died and will die because Clinton wants to have hair on his chest?

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"
 
I agree. It either comes from, or is in some manner approved by, our Congress and our President. Democrats and Republicans.
 
Members of the Nazi army (an Army that 'kicked *ss and took names' in many respects), even the low life Concentration Camp gaurds were working class smucks too.

In states that torture and carry out rape campaigns, the people who participate are working class smucks too.

Added at Edit: Just a note, I'm not calling the posting LEOs Nazis. Even if some of the work that you do probably is Facist in nature. Hell I've worked Welfare, and I wasn't a Communist.




[This message has been edited by Prichard (edited July 06, 1999).]
 
Repost from the previous thread as per Pharoah Lucibella's instructions. So let it be written, so let it be done.


Dr. Quest and all of the anti-drug bunch: It ain't your business what I put into my body.
It's that simple. Yes, if I get so stoned, high, drunk or buzzed off ingesting whatever
chemical and thereby cause injury to others, it is still my fault. It doesn't matter if it's pot(ooh, scary), beer or Suphedrin. Unless I have the hemp growing in my front yard next to the street, law enforcement is going to have to violate my right to privacy to find out if I have it. Again, what I put into my body is my business, and is my right as guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Dr. Benjamin Rush, signer of the Declaration of Independence, wanted specifically to add medical freedom to the Bill of Rights, because he had the foresight to understand that eventually anything not explicitly protected in the BoR would be criminalized. Still, given how the rest of the BoR is being trashed, it probably wouldn't have done us any good.

To get to the point, Benton, don't think all of us feel comforted when you tell us your
camo outfits and full-automatics are for fighting the war on drugs. Ask yourself this
question: "Why is it that we can federally criminalize the use of some drugs without an
amendment to the Constitution, yet it was necessary to amend the Constitution to ban
alcohol?"

The war on drugs is being fought on American soil, against the American people. If we had
not created the black markets by criminalizing drugs, we would not have the turf wars and their attendant violent crime. You'll notice that Budweiser and Miller rarely have shoot-outs over which company gets to have the official beer of the Indianapolis 500. Those darn free marketers.

The tragedies at Ruby Ridge and Waco were caused by the moronic methods used by the
feds at the beginning of each. Koresh had invited ATF agents to come inspect his guns.
Why did no one think of knocking on the front door and showing a warrant? Weaver was
first entrapped, then given a false court date, then he purposely missed the date he had in order to make a point. Why did no one think of knocking on his door with a warrant?
Yeah, we sure need 300 more ATF agents. Maybe one of the them took the "Advanced Preliminary Application of Digital Joints in Repeated Contact with Entry Blocking Device
101" class down in Quantico. Oh, I forgot, the FBI doesn't teach that, either.

Asset forfeiture is another symptom of a corrupt system. The goons say you're carrying too much money. You must be a drug dealer. Prove your innocence. Good luck getting the
money back. Hey, lookee here, we "found" a joint under the "suspect's" car seat. And
whaddayknow, it's a Mercedes, too. Better seize it. Don't tell me that joint was planted, tell it to the judge. Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.
"The guilty parties were usually po-dunk departments that could have really used the revenue lift." Well, why didn't you say so? I'm sure all of us would be willing to donate
large sums of cash, automobiles and houses to small police departments in need of a revenue lift.

"All I was initially trying to say was, from my side of the badge it doesn't look that
sinister." Benton Quest. I'll bet it doesn't. Perception is reality. Try it from the citizen's side for a change if you want to see what the view's like from here.

------------------
"All I ask is equal freedom. When it is denied, as it always is, I take it anyhow."

[This message has been edited by Ipecac (edited July 07, 1999).]
 
Check out This Article &

and This Other Article &

The intrepid officers thought a 14 year old runaway's information was sufficient to stage this dynamic entry. A judge agreed. A federal jury didn't. At least in Aiken, SC the restrictions on obtaining search warrants does not seem to coincide with Mr. Quest's scenarios. The idiots that approved and conducted this raid are still employed with the Aiken Police Department and the Aiken County Sheriff's Department. They have not even received a reprimand. They have been described as excellent officers. I would hate to see the behavior of their poor officers if that is fact. They are liars and fools.

Actions such as this one in Aiken, SC and the killing of a homeowner a few months ago in Kansas City during a dynamic entry are supposed to make us safer? Of course, the killing in KC was justified-they found six marijuana cigarette butts in an ashtray and the man had the audacity to confront unknown intruders into his house at 2am with a .22 rifle.

[This message has been edited by Spartacus (edited July 07, 1999).]

(Links edited by Rich Lucibella to correct formatting problems)

[This message has been edited by Rich Lucibella (edited July 07, 1999).]
 
Any of you guys ever actually experienced an ATF raid? Nor I, but my cousin who works at a local gun shop went thru one about a year or so ago. Seems they were looking for records of LEOs purchasing weapons for personal use via Dept. letterhead.

He said it was like watching an old black and white movie of 1940 Germany. FBI, ATF, & local police rep. all came storming in with weapons drawn and badges high. As with most gun shops all working there were wearing handguns, which were quickly taken away.

They spent the best part of the day searching everything. None of the employees were allowed to come or go. The owner was allowed to call his attorney, but that was about it.

My cousin is not a shy person at all, and very cleaver. He had a good time just verbaly screwing around with the agents, in a nice way of course. All were taken into the backroom of the shop one at a time and questioned. My cousin asked if they were going to beat him with a rubber hose. He asked if they were going to play "Good cop / Bad cop". He said the FBI guys found this amusing, but the ATF not so.

He said the majority of the guys seemed pretty bored and smiled when he poked fun at them, all except one ATF guy. This guy was all business. He was most likely looking to move up the ladder and wanted to impress his boss with a successful raid. Cousin said most of the FBI guys were pretty nice. One of them gave my cousin his handgun back (without mag ) after things calmed down . This seemed to irritate the ATF showboater.

I guess the bottom line here is, we are moving very quickly towards a police state.
These guys could have quietly walked into this gun shop, shown some id and looked at anything they wanted. There was nothing to hide. It was not necessary to come storming in like marines and "CREATE" a situation. If they were afraid of those inside, they could have positioned agents inside ahead of the showing of id. It could have been handled quite differently, and more peacefully.


White Rook 2348: Clear
 
Like the FBI agents above, I've dealt with a couple years ago while undergoing a security clearance check for some work I was doing. They were mostly polite and friendly, just guys doing their jobs. The "hardasses" are the ones with the political or upper management aspirations, who have lost touch with the citizens that are paying their salaries.

And I'll also chime in that many of these dynamic raids are arbitrary or based on specuous "informants". Each judge who signs such an order, or an officer who even requests a warrant for a dynamic raid should ask themselves how they would like to be raided for the same sort of information or based on the sort of "evidence" they are presenting to a signing judge. I'm sure they wouldn't be too happy. Some of these warrants could be handled with one or two officers politely knocking on the door, but a full SWAT team looks better for the TV crews who receive a "tip" that a raid is going to take place. I would wonder how many of these "tips" are called in by department administrators who want to show that they're "tough on crime" or to try to justify their ever-increasing budgets. "You see, Mayor, we need that budget increase for more men and equipment, these criminals are dangerous!"

Yeah, right, every one of them, huh?

------------------
Don LeHue

The pen is mightier than the sword...outside of arms reach. Modify radius accordingly for rifle.
 
You know, I think I've done fairly well so far without taking off the gloves...I will try to continue, although all bets are now off.

LarryP...

Good points, all valid. If we hit your house by mistake, you'd probably have every reason to be pissed (and rightfully so). Of course, if you had time to grab an AR, my guys haven't done their job. Why 3 am?.....Hmmm...maybe for YOUR safety as well? Maybe, because that is when you are sleeping the deepest and therefore less likely to grab the AR?

So we should do it in daylight? OK...why not give you a fair chance at that AR.....Oh, I'm sorry did I ever state that we were going to play FAIR? No, no I don't remember that part.

You see our job is NOT without risk. By the way, do you think that crashing someone's door at 3 am is SAFE? Do you think that would make YOU feel warm and fuzzy inside? No...Anytime you make an entry, your chances of dying are excellent. All we are doing is trying to minimize risk for ALL involved. Including the bad guy (or in this case the poor victim).

You want the safety and security that law enforcement provides selectively. When you call 911 in the middle of the night, I bet you want us to come. Well we will, and we'll risk our lives to make sure you're safe. If it was yourself in harms way, you'd want us to provide this service. Do not question the way in which we provide it.

NOW...

Back to Waco and Ruby Ridge....sorry, my phone did not ring for consultation prior to those raids. It was not my idea.....in fact I don't think anyone on my team was consulted. Guess what? WE WOULD NOT HAVE DONE IT! You were in the military? No, I don't believe they've ever committed any atrocities....Let me lump you in with those folks...Why not, you wear the same uniform so it must be true.

On to Ipecac....

Shove the needle in a little further and enjoy....Sleep the big sleep and walk towards the light...You have obviously confused me with someone who gives a s**t. BUT...when you start endangering an entire neighborhood (with a meth lab) or start selling the stuff to kids...well, then I will be visiting you shortly.

If I were to stop you on the road with a bag of "smoking dope", I'd "wind test" it and send you on your way. Wake up. You think I got time for that crap? If you got fifty pounds of the stuff, we'll talk. Otherwise, don't bother me.

If you want to get stoned out of your mind in your own home, rock on. But if you decide to hurt others while ding it, then it becomes my business.

As far as asset forfeiture...did you somehow misinterpret my post as a glowing endorsement of such practice? If that is the case, you are grossly mistaken. If I remember correctly, I stated that our department does not take part in the activity, but you probably do not wish to let the truth cloud your perception.

And how did a Pro-Gun board turn into a Pro-Drug board?

As far as DonL....

TV crews? We do NOT call the media before a raid and if we found out that they had been called the mission would be scrubbed. Anyone who wishes such an operation televised is an egotistical amateur. I refuse to give up any information to the media that could possibly sacrifice our operational security and therefore safety.

Am I getting a little tired of being treated like the bald-heade step-child here...Yeah, a bit. To all of those people out there that are so un-trusting of authority, I invite you to never call us again. We won't mind, I assure you. No feelings should be hurt. BUT...I bet the nextime someone steals your Buick, you'll probably give us a call....or when the kids are driving up and down your street too fast, or the music is too loud, or the dog is barking......Here is my next suggestion: before you make that call the next time.....POUND SAND!

Have I left the high road? Only after everyone else did.

Several of you have a great deal of rage towards authority and hold us in utter contempt. You would be much better served by directing your anger at those that actually deserve it. The real enemy, not me.

And if you disagree....POUND SAND!!!

[This message has been edited by Benton Quest (edited July 07, 1999).]
 
Benton,
(thrup - spitting sand!) Yep, my Daddy told me, "Beware the anger of a patient man." (thrup - more sand...)

Just realize that each (thrup, spitting sand) post is the opinion of that person (thrup) - not necessarily the whole board.

(thrup, spit, spit) Now, if you'll excuse me. (thrup) I'm gonna go wash my mouth out. Then, (thrup, spit) I'm gonna have a Shiner Bock to get rid of this ugly taste. (thrup. spit. spit.)

BCNU, ;)
 
Benton, Benton, how quickly we jump to conclusions. I am not, nor have I ever been, an illicit drug user. I stick to the legal drugs, purely as a matter of preference. I would like to know, however, where in my post you got the idea that I'm pro-drug. When someone tells me I said something, I like to be able to verify it. I'm funny that way. I'm pro-freedom, and sometimes it slips through to this board. :)

I believe we all own our own bodies, with all that that implies. If I choose drugs, drugs which are much less deadly than a couple of legal drugs I might add, then you shouldn't care, as you correctly pointed out. Therefore, when adults choose to use or abuse drugs of any sort, it is a victimless crime. It's nice to see that you are enforcing these unconstitutional laws (there's a point that you didn't touch on) for the kids.

On to asset forfeiture. I merely quoted your own post. If I was incorrect in implying that you seem to be at least ambivalent toward the practice of asset seizure without due process, then I apologize. I'm glad to see that your agency does not engage in forfeiture schemes and that you do not endorse it. Of course, for my perception to remain unclouded, you might wish to, in future, state your case more clearly. Further, permit me to point out that I said, "Asset forfeiture is another symptom of a corrupt system." I just don't see your name in there, Benton. Again, my entire post was not a personal attack against you.

I have no rage against authority, merely against unconstitutional laws which are being enforced by some in positions of authority. What many of us have tired of is being told that all of these tragedies we have been discussing are simply rare incidents, and should be discounted as such. I should have made my post clearer in the section about Waco/Ruby Ridge, in that it was not directed at you, BQ.

People who call the cops for everything from kids speeding down the street to loud music are most likely not the same people you find in this forum. I don't think anybody has a problem with police doing things like catching murderers, thieves, rapists, etc.
"Do not question the way in which we provide it [safety]. BQ in response to Larry. This is where we run into problems. We do have the right to question how you provide for our safety, even to the extent of getting certain law enforcement practices banned if we find them incompatible with our constitutionally guaranteed rights.

In short, Dr. Quest (great show, BTW) if you are the type of cop who does ignore personal quantities of marijuana, who is against asset forfeiture, who strongly supports the individuals right to own firearms and who would never enforce gun bans, then we would get along pretty well. As discussed in other threads, both sides of the LEO/citizen issue tend to defend "their guy", sometimes too vigorously. I think this is what happened here. I have no interest in making an enemy of an ally. In fact, if you dropped by, I'd buy you a (perfectly legal ;)) beer.

Dennis, I think BQ was thinking of a different orifice when he said to "POUND SAND". ;)

------------------
"All I ask is equal freedom. When it is denied, as it always is, I take it anyhow."



[This message has been edited by Ipecac (edited July 07, 1999).]
 
An uncle of mine (whom I consider a real a--hole) was the head ATF agent for Austin, TX about the time of the Waco incident. He was fired shortly (more like put on suspension until he quit) thereafter for "inappropriate" comments to a female agent about her abilities. He was a big gun nut, but always reinforced what I consider to be the "us vs. them" mentality that pervades Law Enforcement. I am not sure if the guy would really support the 2nd for all law abiding citizens. Was also at the gun store yesterday, with LEOs present, when the fact that ATF are searching for large quantity of no class C fireworks stolen from local wholesaler was mentioned. One LEO commented that "those ATF guys couldn't catch the clap in a cathouse," so I'm guessing that they have a well deserved reputation for incompetence. Need 300 more to do what 30 agents from some other agency could do.
 
Benton,
I dont think being on the hi-road means that people have to agree with you.
I realize and most folks probably do, that is sometimes hard to draw a line of distinction between the criminal/civilians/citizens,...but just sticking to the one issue of police authorized home invasion,....i supposed studies have been done tell when the best times are and how long it would take ya'll to get in the room and ya'll for the most part I imagine adhere to them. If I was going to invade a home I would want to do it the same way, the problem is that not every law enforcement organization does it that way, remember your not cops, sheriffs, or whatever your all leo's, for what ever thats worth so ya'll get lumped together......what recourse does a family or survivor have if by error a police raid is wrong, will the items destroyed get replaced promptly or at all?, will the medical bills be paid, the burial costs?, what if this individual who's home is being raided, in spite of all the preparation gets a shot off which kills a leo?, how will he feel?, your fellow officers?, will he survive the encounter?.....
You seem to have a view that I have to take all or nothing were law enforcement is concerned.......I dont believe that is correct, leo's do indeed have authority and most Im sure use it well, but dont think those that dont should be immune from their abuse of power--I really cant believe you would think that from reading your posts, but thats the way your last post came accross to me.....
Now ive never been an leo, and will never be one, but I realize the pressures are immense and that the people you go after can target you and your family for revenge, along with us civilians questioning leo actions can be alot to bear.....all thats part of the job I suppose, keep safe,,,,,fubsy.
 
Member Hat On:
This thread is getting real ugly real quick. Benton Quest is here, being asked to defend the entire LEO establishment, both good and bad. Each time he states his disagreement with one or another police action, he is set upon to defend yet a third or a fourth.

Thus far, he's done an exemplary job of demonstrating that all LEO's are not Gestapo, any more than all Military are baby burners or all civilians gang bangers. I don't agree with the growing use of home invasions and, as a citizen, am willing to take the risk for making No-Knock and Knock-Crash warrants illegal.

However, BQ is hardly the enemy and, in fact, has taken far more insult in stride than most of us would from any HCI type who attempted to generalize about NRA membership. Open your eyes, folks! Stop splitting your own ranks....the anti's just love to se it!

Administrator Hat On
This thread is getting real ugly real quick.
Rich Lucibella
 
I have disagreed with people on forums many times. I have never personalized it. If I cannot change someones mind with reason I drop it.There is no sense in pushing it beyond that point and when someone does it is usually because he has lost it.

I too think that Benton has done a great job, but face it-There are a lot of people who dont or wont agree with him. So there is a point when discretion truely becomes the better part of valor.

If nothing else, everybody pretty much understands how everybody else feels about it. Lets acceptthe situation and collectively see what can be done about it.

------------------
Better days to be,

Ed
 
I wasnt attempting to be personal, and Im not bashing the guy, I was just pointing out my concerns, and I think your right, there are some points that will never be agreed upon.....fubsy,
 
Benton,

Before you feel all alone and out in the cold, you should know that my ADMINISTRATOR tag keeps me on a kinda short leash when it come to LEO threads.
I've been known to piss-off the "Us vs. Them" crowd in the past and it doesn't reflect the normal professionalism of TFL when I do it.

If I had gotten to this thread before Rich said, I may have done it again, but he has made the necessary points and given you the appropriate Kudos for keeping your cool.

But, I would hate for posterity to search this thread in the future and wonder about my apparent silence:

Administrator Hat OFF
Cop Hat On:

Ipec:

IMHO, any normal person would have assumed by your previous posts that you were in favor of recereational drug use. If that is your choice, fine. But, I suggest you keep it in the house and be careful who you are buying from. If it is not your choice, you might not so vehemently defend it as a reasonable life choice.

Everyone,

In the other thread I addressed the issue of painting LE with the "Waco/Ruby Ridge" Brush. That number is getting really old, to be frank. It reeks of the same tactics the Anti's use. Blow things out of proportion, use only the facts that serve your purpose and harp on the few insurmontable indictments of LE that you can grasp. Frankly, it is embarrasing to your point.

Asset Forfiture is not something that I am a big fan of, but the theory of AF is a good one. Unfortunately, politicians have twisted and maligned a good theory into an offensive practice, one that is used far too often and in various inappropriate ways.

I also made a point about safety in the other thread. A point which Benton reiterated earlier here. Everything that an LEO does is designed so that every one is SAFE at the end of the encounter. You might be troubled, you might be embarrased, you might be yelled at, you might even get a scrape or a small bruise.. BUT, I think that is probly better that getting shot.. or than shooting a cop who was just trying to do his job. Would you guys really rather shoot a cop who was mistakenly raiding your house than you would have it happen with no one getting hurt and then get an apology? I mean REALLY?
As I sit here typing this, I am wearing a gun. If anyone came busting in my door, I might get a shot off before they did, I might even fall back into the next room and try to figure out WTF was going on. BUT, I guarentee that I would rather not shoot anyone.
OTOH, if the people next door were running a meth lab, or cutting up a big shipment of Cocaine and were sitting there with guns, I'd much rather that the officers raiding them hit with maximum speed and force, so as to avoid any unnecessary causualties on either side. If an honest mistake is made and that force ends up getting used against me.. well, I guess that is the price I pay for the privilege of having those guys out there trying to get rid of the meth labs, etc.

If you aren't willing or able to get out there and participate in the protection of the society you live in, then you really should have the decency to at least say "Thank You" to the guys that do.

------------------
-Essayons
 
Admin Hat off

I live in a county where the NTF (Narcotics Task Force) is a total embarrassment and a bunch of cowboy Rambos. The NTF has racked up more civil suits against LEO and the county than the Nuclear plant Diablo Canyon. And, even when they loose a suit its tied up on appeal. It got so bad, they were reigned in for a year...first time back out, same old thing...wrong place.
Surprise...2 months ago, they actually busted a meth lab...the right people. Flush with victory and typical arrogance (name furnished if e-mailed) the Det in charge was quoted..."I can kick down the door of the residence I want".

So, the innocents who don't get reimbursed, who loose their jobs, homes and kids are casualties of war huh? If they ever get satisfaction, it is literally years, oh yeah and they had to bear legal costs. My oh my, we must not criticize. Lets all be good little sheeple.

Your drug war is a total hand job

Goes both ways friends

------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"
 
Rob; Would you explain what you mean br painting law enforcement with the Waco Ruby Ridge brush and suggesting that it is wrong to do that?
Specific agencies and people in law enforcement did a number of things which are subject to criticism and you presumably know this. Nobody is saying that the Podunk PD did these things.It is well known who did it and the Podunk PD doesnt have to be defended against accusations that havent been made.

I dont think anyone has criticised the poeple who protect the society that we live in. Thats just the point.I expect law enforcement to protect. I feel justified in being critical of anyone who wantonly destroys members of our society.

What do you think?

------------------
Better days to be,

Ed
 
How does everybody feel about roadblocks to determine citizenship, sobriety, insurance coverage?

Detention of travelers, cavity searches, and unconsented medical procedures for fitting a profile?

No knock warrants?

Plain clothes and plain vehicle enforcement of traffic laws?

These are every day abuses by LE; I assume their are more.

Now LE also arrests spousal abusers, catches or tries to catch (though I have serious doubts about some) thieves, robbers, rapists, murderers, molestors, abusers, gets people to turn down their stereos, looks for that damn teen ager in the blue camaro hauling ass down residential streets (no doubts on that one), looks for drunk drivers the 'right way', etc. with out violating any civil rights even by my standards. And LEOs are generally very polite and apolegetic if wrong on top of this.

These are good things that LE does everyday; I'm sure that there are more.

The only problem is that I'm not worried about the good stuff, just the bad. So I tend to beat it to death when ever I have the chance.

I guess that I thank LEOs and LE for the good stuff. And p*ss on LE for the bad stuff along with the legislators, judges, and voters that support and/or allow for such bad stuff to be occurring.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top