Klinton's Gun Confiscation team!

Elker_43

New member
I pulled this from a "Brother in Arms" recent post:

Federal Team Will Seek 1,700 Guns Sold to Ineligible Buyers By Charles Babington
Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, September 10, 1999; Page A12.

The Clinton administration has assembled a special 60-person law enforcement team to
locate and retrieve up to 1,700 guns that were sold to felons and other ineligible buyers because the FBI did not complete their criminal background checks within the mandatory three-day limit.

The administration, which gun advocacy groups have accused of insufficiently enforcing existing gun regulations, said yesterday "the quickest possible recovery" of such firearms is a top priority for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. To help the bureau, 20 agents each have been assigned, for at least 60 days, from the Secret Service, Customs Service and Internal Revenue Service, all divisions of the Treasury Department.

The new program, outlined yesterday in a 17-page Treasury Department report, touches on two sensitive issues for advocates of gun ownership. On one hand, they have opposed
new gun control proposals by arguing that the government has not tried hard enough to
enforce laws already on the books. But the image of federal agents knocking on someone's door to collect a gun raises deep-seated fears among those who contend that confiscation is the ultimate goal of gun control advocates.

"This validates one big concern that we have about any government background checks:
That it will lead to gun owner registration and even confiscations," said John Velleco,
spokesman for Gun Owners of America. "The law says the government has up to three
business days to do the check, or the sales goes through, period. . . . This is not law
enforcement, this is government abuse of liberty."

ATF officials say their targets are not innocent owners entitled to keep their firearms. A prohibited buyer, they say, would have to falsify a purchase application in order to obtain a gun with the help of a delayed background check.

Under the five-year-old Brady law, someone seeking to buy a gun from a licensed firearms dealer must undergo a criminal background check by the FBI. Felons, illegal drug users and illegal aliens are among those barred from buying guns.

Most background checks are completed within two hours, thanks to a computerized "instant
check" system inaugurated seven months ago. But some take longer, and if a check has not
been completed within three business days, the dealer is instructed to make the sale.

In about 2,000 cases thus far, the delayed background checks concluded that the purchase should have been barred. ATF has retrieved about 300 of those guns, and now is "committed to retrieving all such firearms from prohibited persons," according to yesterday's report, Implementation of the Brady Law.

ATF spokesman Jeff Roehm said his agency is aware that critics have accused the
administration of lax enforcement of gun laws. "We are always trying to enforce what we have on the books," he said, adding that the 2,000 "delayed denial" purchases are a recent phenomenon. "This is a new avenue that the violations are coming to our attention," he said.

Asked if some felons could pose a danger to officers seeking to retrieve their guns, Roehm said: "Any time you approach a person who is prohibited from purchasing a firearm" but has done so anyway, "you have certainly created a dangerous situation." But agents prepare carefully for such possible confrontations, he said. "We certainly don't just run out on these things. A lot of background work is done."

Yesterday's report said a recent "delayed denial" gun purchase in Ohio was made by a
Crips gang member, whose criminal record should have kept him from buying a gun. "The
firearm was used less than 24 hours after its acquisition by the gang members to commit an armed robbery of a restaurant," the report said.

President Clinton yesterday urged Congress to renew the law giving the FBI three business days to conduct background checks. The seven-month-old "instant check" system has already blocked about 100,000 prohibited purchases from going through, he said in a White House ceremony.

The president also announced that the federal government will spend $15 million in and around public housing areas to buy guns from residents, a move to get more firearms off the streets. The program will provide local police agencies up to $500,000 each to buy guns, which will be destroyed, for a "suggested price" of $50.

Clinton said Americans under 15 are nine times more likely to die by accidental shooting than children in the 25 other industrialized nations combined. "Every gun turned in through a buyback program means potentially one less tragedy," he said.




[This message has been edited by Elker_43 (edited September 15, 1999).]
 
But agents prepare carefully for such possible confrontations, he said. "We certainly don't just run out on these things. A lot of background work is done."

Yep. They get an unsigned warrant, kick in the door of the wrong house, and kill whoever happens to be there.

How much more careful can you get?

Now excuse me whilst I go regurgitate my lunch...

------------------
"Taking a long view of history, we may say that
anyone who lays down his arms deserves whatever he gets."
--Jeff Cooper
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Felons, illegal drug users and illegal aliens are among those barred from buying guns.[/quote]
Wrong! Make that Felons, drug users, all aliens, those ever treated for simple depression or anxiety, those ever convicted on a misdemeanor "domestic" charge, those under a protective order, those dishonorably discharged from the armed services...the list goes on and grows.

Any doubt that this was a bit more than a simple oversight on the part of the reporter?

Any doubt that John Velleco's (GOA) response has been cleverly parsed, making it appear that we support the right of prohibited persons to purchase firearms if they're not caught in a 3-day records check? Note where the "..." falls.

I fear that Charles Babbington's bi-ass is showing. "Charles Babbington": Great name for someone who knows what's best for the "unwashed masses". Shoulda been named Charles Grover Babbington IV.
Rant mode off.
Rich


[This message has been edited by Rich Lucibella (edited September 15, 1999).]
 
Elker_43..... I (and a collegue) have been given a "Delay" each and every time we purchase since last November (some 16 times for us both). Each time they do not call back...... I cannot get the FBI to tell me why this is happening.. so I went to my sherriff.(our county has to get a permit for a handgun before purchase, and it has been that way since 1944) ... They tell me two things (this first one relates to me only)... in 1968 a person with a simular name was arrested and convicted in PA on burglery charges....they did not keep SSN's at that time... and when they (the sherriff dept) submit me for a check the fbi grants an OK of the purchase because they seem to know that that person is not me,.... BUT when I go to the FFL and I submit for a background check (yellow form) it flags me.... turns out that he and I have name,MI that are the same and Bdays that are only 10 days apart in the same year.... However... they do not seem to check the race info when doing a check... the sherriff asked about the race and they said "OH... OK... not the same race" and then gave an OK to the sherriff ....but the FFL check on me always gets a delay. My collegue gets no problems with his check at the sherriff office (different county) but he, also, gets a delay from the feds......and he does not have a name problem from someone else.... so I asked my sherriff again if he could help me discover why I always get delayed..... after several days.. he says that he was in formed that I & my collegue were delayed because (get this now....) these two have previous fbi files on them.... when the sherriff pressed to find out why we had files (he wanted to spring an arrest or two i'm sure) they said that it was because we have TS/SBI clearances....... what a crock..... serve..your country for 22 years and get suspected of being a criminal because of a clearance filed with the fbi years ago..... to me it sounds like they are playing fast and loose with the data base file structure (good guys mixed in with the bad guys) and that could means that those numbers the Klintonistas are using for "we found the bad guys" justification are wrong and badly skewed......
 
Once again, they've missed the entire point! ... how can the guns be illegal? It is the ownership of them by a certain class of individuals that is illegal. They're going after the guns! They should be going after the people! Of course, I know they will get the people, too, but the way the first paragraphs ar written you'd think it was the guns that were the criminal. Sheesh!

They make it sound like, "oops, do-over!" ... the people that purchased these should be who they go after (altho, if after three days they haven't found it, I figured it was a default thing, more on that later) ... after all, they've commited a felony, haven't they?

As for the "delayed denial" - it's a bunch if BS in my mind. After all, the law states that they aren't supposed to keep the records, so now they are looking back through them to find illegal purchases? and what else? If there is going to be a background check, the records of it should be destroyed upon approval, or at the three day limit. Period. Of course, that if there is a constitutional basis for having a background check ... opps, a whole 'nother can of worms!

[This message has been edited by TR (edited September 15, 1999).]
 
Let me get this straight...

Were these 1700 people flagged simply because they received their firearms after three days because the checks were not finished or were these people identified as possible ineligible purchasers first?

The way I understand the law...

If the NICs check isn't completed within three days by the government, the sale is allowed to go through.

If these people were not ineligible to purchase a firearm in the first place and now big brother is out to get those guns back simply because they received them before the checks were complete, this is a serious situation and it sets a new precedent.

Can anyone shed some light on this for me?

Joe
 
You bring a good point up NRALIFE. After really thinking about your post, what kind of real precedence does this set.

Any of you lawyers out there want to take a shot at this?


------------------
To own firearms is to affirm that freedom and liberty are not gifts from the state.
 
Elker_43,

What I am talking about is that if Kilnton is having the feds pick guns back up from eligible buyers just because they received their firearms before the checks came back, that is what is of concern to me.

The way I understand it, the FLL holder can sell you a gun if after three days the NICs check doesn't come back for some reason. A lot of the FFL holders that I have been reading about are afraid to go ahead and release the guns after three days for fear of what the BATF might say about it even though it is technically legal.

If in fact these 1700 firearms that the feds are now trying to confiscate were sold to qualified buyers and they are now being gone after, that is the precedent. Klinton may be nipping in the bud even a legal way around NICs. What is so scary, is that Klinton can pull the plug on the NICs computer or it could just mysteriously crash, but legally the sales could still go through if the FFL holders had the guts to stand up and to go ahead with the sales.

If this operation involving these 1700 guns is to prevent any sales around NICs, that is what we need to find out.

Follow? ;-)

Joe
 
NRA,
I follow you and it could become a situation affecting all of us. I also have to strongly agree with TR's post...The article is written around going after the GUNS, when they should be going after those who absolutley broke the law and attempted to purchase the firearm knowing they were breaking the law... I also would be curious to know out of the "...1,700 guns that were sold to felons and other ineligible buyers", how many were in the status of mistaken ID such as CHEMNCO917 posted? I can see it now....Kicking in some poor mistaken guys door, hauling him off to jail with his "illegal" firarms...Throw him in the slammer, "GUILTY, GUILTY, GUILTY, until he finally convinces them he is not the guy they are looking for and he was perfectly legal in his purchase of the firearm (they probably won't give his legally purchased firearm back as they have already "destroyed" his "illegal purchase") You and I both know, that those mistaken numbers of good citizens and the details will never be revealed to the public.

Man this is not a pretty picture is it!


------------------
To own firearms is to affirm that freedom and liberty are not gifts from the state.
 
and the NRA and others were saying how great this Federal computer instant check would be!Who needs it? Uncle Scam is scamming again. Remember what the Mexican Bandit said in "Treasure of the Sierrs Madre"? THat bandit was on the money.
 
I have a few questions:

1. How many of you where told these sheets never leave the store?

2. How many of you where told the government only knows your buying a gun, not how many?

3. How many of you think it's strange that they know, what type of gun, who bought it, and how many they bought?

4. Are you aware that when an FFL holder gives up a license they are required to turn all those yellow sheets over to BATF?

5. Anybody think we don't already have gun registration in this country?




------------------
Live Free or Die Trying,

Steve Moody


"Just once wouldn't it be nice to hear a politician say,"I don't believe this way, but the people do."
 
I'm just very relieved that the National Rifle Association worked so hard to get the instant background check passed. If it were not for their heroic efforts, there would be that many more illegal purchases made. Even if what they fought for kept just one fellon from purchasing a handgun from a FFL holder, the registration of all gun owners would be worth it.

After all, we have FAR more to fear from that fellon possessing a FFL purchased firearm than we could ever have from those powers that be that are just looking out for our safety. I can sleep much better knowing that we have such benevolent men in our federal govt . Thank you, for protecting my family from the bad guys. You do a far better job of protecting us than we husbands and fathers ever could. If you wish, please remove this source of danger from our homes. You have the lists of firearms. You know where to find them. Thank you for your service to our country.

------------------
"But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip; and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." -Jesus Christ (Luke 22:36, see John 3:15-18)
 
Back
Top