SSCC #353 – ATF

Rochester police and federal agents made a mistake in Charlotte this week that has one woman baffled and frightened. She wants to know how they could mistake her house for one they were supposed to raid in a drug bust.

Simple really, they don’t hire the best and brightest.  Tyrannical bureaucrats don’t want enforcers who can think, much less read and tell the difference between the address on the warrant and the house they just arrived at.

How close was this almost a fatal screw up for the ATF as well as the home owner?

“My son had heard me arguing with this man and it was not a voice he’d recognize. My son is a hunter, he put a bullet in the chamber of his gun. They heard that, they yelled down long gun, at that point there he told another ATF agent that was with me, handcuff her and take her out,” Dominicos said.

However the real take away is the following:

“I’m still terrified. It’s almost like a P.T.S.D. experience, you keep hearing things. You think oh my God I hear a door slam, I hear someone pulling into my driveway. I see a light it’s like oh my God are they back?”

That’s the point.  Law enforcement and the government want us to live in fear.  Their actions exercise the very definition of the word terrorism.    The best part of the story though is the discrepancy between the home owners story, which is considerably more believable, and the statement released by police.

“Upon encountering an elderly resident, the team realized that they were at the wrong location at that time and left the premises.”

No you did not, you put her in cuffs and took her outside until someone bothered to read the house number and street name and noticed it didn’t match the warrant.

Considering this can happen to anyone, anytime, and quite easily can have dire consequences, why is this considered acceptable?  Especially since unsurprisingly the bad guys pretend to be cops.  At this point it’s better to just let the bullets file and sort it out afterwards.  Maybe if cops would knock first and be civil about it this wouldn’t be a problem.  If you think the screw ups are rare:


View Original Map and Database

Don’t give me the line about how serving a warrant is dangerous because the majority of warrants served are for non-violent offenses.  When the criminal is actually dangerous, they negotiate him to come out to reduce collateral damage.  There is the argument about the destruction of evidence, well if we weren’t serving warrants over victimless crimes involving nouns that wouldn’t be a problem now would it?

Even better though, with the consistently increasing use of SWAT teams in unnecessary circumstances, the number of people caught in the middle who are innocent continues to increase.  You can not use the service more and expect it to also become more accurate about it’s use, if anything it will become less accurate.

No knocks, like the TSA, need to be done away with.  They have both grown since September 11th and it’s eroding and destroying the last semblances of freedom and liberty.  The police state is here and we need to put an end to it.

State Sponsored Criminals 353: The ATF

Because it’s not the job of the swat team to read the warrant or make sure they’re at the right house.  If there’s collateral damage, the law-abiding citizen should have just behaved, he had no reason to defend himself.

via Uncle.

SSCC #352–Dallas

The district attorney is considering criminal charges against a Dallas County sheriff’s deputy who resigned last week.

The Dallas Sheriff’s Department is reeling because Deputy James Yarbrough potentially put his fellow SWAT officers in grave danger when he told a man that they were coming to his business with a warrant.

So if you or I had discovered a raid was about to happen to a friend and we called to warn them, would the DA only be “considering” charges in that case? 

Yeah I don’t think so either.

State Sponsored Criminal #352: James Yarbrough

Because tipping off your buddies to a “lawful” raid is perfectly acceptable if you’re “anointed”.

via Bob S.

SSCC Honorable Mention–New York

A New York Police Department officer has been indicted in the shooting in February of an unarmed man who was pursued into his Bronx home amid a crackdown on street corner drug dealing, according to a law enforcement official.

Well at least he’s being charged.  The person shot is yet another victim on the war on nouns.  While there certainly appears that there was some chaos in that apartment, this definitely should be heading to a jury.  It’s not quite accountabilibuddyable as he hasn’t been terminated from the department yet.  There were no weapons found, however drugs were found according to an older article.  It also appears that even their superiors were questioning their actions from the beginning.

The Bronx district attorney and the Police Department’s Internal Affairs Bureau are investigating the shooting, but in interviews, more than a half-dozen police officials — from detectives to commanders — picked apart the decisions made that day by the members of the Street Narcotics Enforcement Unit, known as S.N.E.U., and raised troubling questions about their actions.

Is the war on nouns really worth killing others over as well as basically giving police a blank kill someone over pot card?  All of this is the inevitable result of these laws.  Just because something is legal, doesn’t mean you have to do it.

State Sponsored Criminal Honorable Mention: Ramarley Graham

Because a baggie of pot totally looks like a gun and is totally worth shooting someone over because you didn’t want to wait for someone else to “steal your glory”.

SSCC #340 – BATFEieio

A mother claims Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
agents terrorized her and her 8-year-old child. She claims the person
they were seeking no longer lived there.

No warrant was issued for the raid either, but even more entertaining was this:

Griego said twice in the year before the raid she had informed police
officers that the Angela they were seeking was a previous tenant and no
longer living in the home.

I guess it’s a plus since they didn’t shoot a dog or stomp a kitten to death.

State Sponsored Criminal 340: The bATFeieio

Because police work is for all those other suckers.  When we have fancy raid equipment, we need to use it.  It justifies our budget you know!  Besides what better time to use it than when we know we’ll be safe.  Our concern is for us, not for you!

Quote of the Day–Joe Huffman(03/27/2012)

As long as people carrying books or guns into their home worry about the police breaking down their doors in the early morning hours we have more work to do.

Joe HuffmanClimbing the Clock Tower stairs with my rifles

March 25, 2012


[Sadly as great as things have gotten lately Joe nailed this problem right on the head.  Many of us still live in fear of the state randomly deciding they don’t like us anymore for one reason or another.  Some would call us paranoid.

The problem there though is if you have been paying attention you realize yes we should be concerned.  All it takes is some scared sheep calling the police to get a no knock or guns blazing visit from some officer he wants to get his rocks off.  You and I both know how that can and will probably end.  Even in the best circumstances they’ll show up and take your property without cause or warrant and refuse to return it.

I grew up in the 90s and I understood there was some fear then. What I have noticed though, strongly over the past 5 or 6 years my fear level has been steadily rising.  As much as gunnies are “coming out of the closet” we are hearing more and more of the no knock and innocent people being killed.  Back in the 90s you just worried about the state.  Now you have to worry about some puritan calling to complain about your choice of hobbies and how the inanimate objects scare them.  That’s what has changed.  Our neighbors have bought hook line and sinker in to 1800-Dial-A-Nazi in the “War on Terrorism”

We still have a long way to go.  Until police stop treating every gun owner as a second class citizen because of that puritan we are going to have to continue to fight.  It’s a two front battle though, we must first get people to stop having an irrational fear of inanimate objects.  Secondly we need to get the officers who behave in such a manner to realize we are an asset, not a hindrance. 

My local sheriff looks at the wife and I as an asset that can help him if necessary should the need require.  He knows us and he knows there is nothing to fear from us.  It is not gun owners who have perpetuated this us versus them mentality and sadly I’m not sure how to best combat it.  At least I’m not the canary in the coal mine, but I’m close enough I might as well be.  Time for new tactics. 

Please remember this even if you think those of us who worry are just paranoid, just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean no one is out to get you.  -B]

Fast and Furious, Root Cause Analysis

Currently Eric Holder is screaming that the cause of guns going into Mexico was because of a “lack of gun control.”  There’s one problem with that though, it is false.  Not only is that statement blatantly false but in light of the evidence, given Operation Fast and Furious, gun control is what allowed those guns to walk to Mexico.  While it may seem humorous and a joke, the fact is it’s true.

I have largely been silent on Fast and Furious for one major reason.  There are a lot of other people covering it better and more in-depth than I possibly could.

To start off for those who are familiar with the term, root cause analysis is something used in engineering to identify problems to come up with solutions that don’t just hide the problem.  Ultimately proper root cause analysis should trace the problem to a point where you can turn the issue on and off like a light switch.  Now we’re going to trace back through the events and find the point where we can turn this issue that would turn this problem on and off.

What was Fast and Furious?

Fast and Furious otherwise known as Operation Gunwalker, was an operation conducted by the ATF under the guise of busting Mexican drug cartels.  This was done by forcing FFLs to complete illegal firearms transactions, purchasing firearms and handing them over to known criminals, and otherwise circumventing current law for criminals.

The ATF didn’t just allow guns to flow into the hands of criminals, but actively encouraged the practice. They purposely cleared transactions that were flagged. They performed the straw purchases themselves, delivering the weapons to known criminals. They instructed dealers to go ahead with transactions the dealers could tell were not “honest”.

Often when agents had followed the firearms they were told by their superiors to let the recipients go and not to follow them.  All of these actions violated existing law, yet the cause, as purported by Eric Holder, was a lack of gun control.

How did gun control cause Fast and Furious though?

The most direct route is the fact that this whole program was done with the mind of expanding gun control.  New gun control legislation and powers were the motivator behind the program.  Even as the program crashes and burns, pushes for new legislation based of the inflated numbers of Fast and Furious keep appearing.  The results of the program were used to force the long arms registry and to bolster support for additional funding for the ATF.

However the actions of the ATF have common threads with different agencies.  It is all a quest for money and power.  So we have to look back further to where the ATF got the root of its power and what allowed them to use this power to try to gain more.

The ATF is responsible for overseeing FFLs and ensuring adherence to existing firearms laws.  The can put a business that works in firearms under faster than any other.  The agency can halt a FFLs license during an investigation which can easily put them out of business.  So when the ATF asks a FFL to do something illegal, there ATF has all the leverage to make the dealer comply.  The only other option is for the FFL to go out of business under the weight of the ATF.

The ATF gained this power and latitude under the Gun Control Act of 1968.  Unsurprisingly allegations of abuse led to the Firearm Owners Protection Act to attempt to rein in the ATF.  The FOPA also stated different registry’s were prohibited from being enacted or run by the ATF, one of which they are attempting in the wake of Fast and Furious.

The depth of the corruption within the ATF and its drive to seek power through runs even deeper back to the National Firearms Act of 1934.  This provided the ATF, which was under the department of the Treasury at the time, the ability to enforce the newly created firearms laws.  This law laid the foundation for what would become the power-hungry space the ATF occupies today.

Both the GCA 1968 and the NFA 1934 are both pieces of legislation made in the effort to regulate firearms and limit their ownership.  The ATF blatantly violated existing laws during Operation Fast and Furious and went through considerable effort to arm and traffic firearms to prohibited persons.  All the while the ATF was clamoring for more gun control.  However many law-abiding citizens were left jumping through the hoops and difficulties of the existing maze of firearms legislation despite the appearance of lax laws created by the ATF.

Conclusion, Gun Control is the root cause

The ATF completely disregarded existing laws and regulations in conducting operation gun walker.  Many of those coerced into participating were in a situation that allowed the ATF leverage over them because of existing gun control legislation.  The ATF during the operation was petitioning congress for more gun control legislation, which it would be responsible for enforcement.

The ATF was also petitioning congress for additional funding for two reasons.  The first was a claim of a lack of resources to enforce existing law, which was false since they were expending resources to actually circumvent it.  The second was that it would need additional funding for enforcement of the expanded programs.

The root cause of Fast and Furious is gun control itself.  Existing gun control legislation provided the ATF with leverage over FFLs to coerce them into transactions they knew to be criminal.  Gun control provided the ATF with the resources and power to organize and conduct the operation.  Lastly, gun control was the root cause of the operation itself.  The operation was conducted in an effort to create a crisis that would warrant the further restriction of firearms.  This restriction would either be that of ownership by law-abiding citizens, or that in preventing new purchase by a law-abiding citizen.

Without the GCA of 1968 the ATF would not have had the leverage over a FFL to coerce them into proceeding with an illegal sale.  Without the NFA of 1934 the ATF would have never been the power-hungry beast it is today.

To say that a lack of gun control allowed Operation Fast and Furious is like saying a lack of prohibition let the DEA allow drugs to be smuggled across the border.  Oh wait, bad analogy, the DEA took part in Fast and Furious too.

If a lack of gun control allowed Operation Fast and Furious then violating the law to commit a treasonous act of war against a friendly neighbor is lacking in laws as well.