Anyone who is familiar with firearms and the bureaucracy associated with them also recognize the ATF as the bunch of bastards that have thrown some into jail because of putting a ‘Y’ instead of “Yes” on their 4473s.
Well in an article released by the DOJ yesterday it was found that they themselves cannot even adhere to their own bureaucracy.
Not only did they lose a total of 418 laptops over a 59 month period, but a total of 76 weapons were lost as well. How in the hell do you LOSE a weapon. Then again when it appears that the weapon may in fact prove someone’s innocence it’s probably easier for them to disappear the weapon and then make up the results.
“274 ATF laptops were identified as missing during periodic inventories. These losses represent approximately 66 percent of all lost, stolen, or missing ATF computers… The primary reason was that managers believed the computers were returned to the supplier, exchanged for newer models, or donated to schools after becoming obsolete. However, managers could not demonstrate that this had occurred, because they could not produce the required documentation for such returns, exchanges, or donations.”
Of the 76 weapons, 35 were reported stolen, 19 lost and 12 missing from inventories, investigators found. Of the 418 missing laptops, 50 were stolen, 8 lost and 274 could not be found during inventory. Another 86 laptops were unaccounted for because ATF had either destroyed or lost documents showing where they were, the audit concluded.
Two weapons reported stolen were used to commit crimes. In one instance, a gun was stolen from an ATF car parked outside the agent’s home and later used to shoot through the window of another residence, the audit found. In the other, a stolen ATF gun was taken from a burglary suspect.
Additionally, ATF employees did not report 13 of the 76 lost weapons, or 365 of the 418 missing laptops, to internal affairs as required. ATF officials also did not report much of the lost equipment to the Justice Department.
So let me get this straight, they will prosecute and convict someone over placing a ‘Y’ instead of “Yes” but when it comes to following their own procedures they’re above the law. If there was ever any evidence that an agency is too high on its own power, this definitely takes the cake. Not to mention that Mayor Bloomberg was going after gun stores for selling weapons used in crimes. The ATF seemed to have facilitated it, but he seems to love them. Oh that’s right bigots usually see eye to eye, and another bigot could do no wrong!
I haven’t written much lately because I’ve been tied up with work and making sure I graduated from college. Not to mention the fact that I’ve been trying to benefit my blood pressure by avoiding things that just flat out piss me right the hell off. Well I stumbled across something today that pushed my button so hard I can’t stand it.
“In 2004, while running for the U.S. Senate, he[Obama] promised to bar citizens nationwide from receiving concealed-carry permits.”
WHAT!? Oh so now states aren’t good enough to determine how best to serve and protect their own people. No one in this fine country except those “you” Mr. Obama deem fit is capable of carrying a firearm. I know for a FACT from talking to my local Sheriffs and Police force that I get considerably more range time than they do. Not only that I have a larger ammunition budget for just myself than the whole department. So you can NOT give me that crap that they are better trained.
Your statements basically say that we must depend upon the police for our protection when it has been stated by the Supreme Court that “The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation.”
Obama is nothing more than a bigot who hates gun owners because they believe in doing things themselves and not depending on a socialist government for survival. Every person, and I mean everyone has a god given right to self defense with any weapon that man has created. “The right of self defense is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever … the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.”
Criminals don’t follow the laws, only the law abiding. We see what his ban’s on concealed carry have done to different places, why must he force us to all be complacent victims.
The media is just as much to blame however for the misconceptions about concealed carry. I just found this link. In it they list the arrest of the Appalachian School of Law shooting was due to students tackling him. I wasn’t aware that using a firearm was now called “tackling”.
Came across a nice article on concealed carry that says yet again what has been said so many times.
Concealed carry could save your life
Every time I read about a school massacre or other shooting by criminals or crazies, when someone mentions giving the right to carry a concealed weapon on or off campus, I wonder why so many oppose this solution….
It’s good to know I’m not the only one; especially with all the B.S. in Seattle.
Lately the idea of living on the west side of Washington has become more and more displeasing. I have been seeing Strong examples of the differences between myself and those hippie feel good tree huggers.
I haven’t written much lately due to the fact my writing would have been clouded by anger, most of this from the city of Seattle. First time I knew something was going to be blogged was after the Folklife shooting. I’m not going to discuss it much because many of the details I feel important and relevant still haven’t come out, such as why the argument started and what actually occurred. All we have is the biased output of the media which only focuses on him ignoring the other party. Not to mention the fact he by no means represents the majority of concealed carry permit holders, and there are many things that make me wonder why he was issued a permit.
Instead I’ve discovered that Mayor Nickels is going with a knee jerk reaction and is disregarding state law and imposing restrictions on concealed carry by licensed permit holders. Instead of actually getting to the root of the problem, he feels it better to impose restrictions on law abiding citizens. What’s worse is the method by which he is doing it. Instead of this being handled by the city council, which policy such as this should be, his issuing an executive order; thus by passing public discussion and outcry. It has been shown in state after state Concealed carry lowers crime rates, and now in an “effort to go forward” he wants to go backwards.
From this we see who’s side Mayor Nickels is on which is to provide a safe working environment of rapists, murders, and thieves. Not to mention he is as much a criminal as any other jack booted thug by his own blatant disregard for the law.
“Much of the social history of the Western world over the past three decades has involved replacing what worked with what sounded good.”
— Thomas Sowell, Is Reality Optional?, 1993
It seems to me that there’s been a push to believe that theory, which often sounds good, always works, and disregard the fact that theory is created in “a perfect world.” Case in point, many feel safer in gun free zones, I on the other hand feel defenseless because it only affects the law abiding. -B
“If Guns cause Crime, then Matches cause Arson.”
I think that’s self explanatory.
Thomas Sowell is an economist and excellent writer who frequently writes articles that are aligned with my view of the world. He recently wrote an excellent article on self-defense and the media repose. What really caught my attention was the following:
“People who are full of excuses for criminals– bad childhood, unemployment, unfair world– sit in the safety and comfort of their editorial offices and presume policemen to be guilty until proved innocent. And they concoct clever headlines about killing an “unarmed” person, as if someone trying to run you over with a car poses no danger.”
In a previous article I wrote about someone who charged the police with a pellet gun. In that case the media statement was to point out that it was a pellet gun in the title, but ignore the fact is was manufactured to look real. There was a response from the community based on 20/20 hindsight. Again something Mr. Sowell points out strikes me:
“Such people seem to have no sense of the tragedy of the human condition, that there are times when decisions have to be made and acted upon immediately, whether or not we know as much as we would like to know or can carry out our decisions as perfectly as we wish we could.”
There is a reason it is called 20/20 hindsight. Often you learn and discover things after the fact that would have altered your actions and resulted in a different outcome. My problem is the same as Mr. Sowell’s; these people often speak without any knowledge of the subject, and refuse to be educated even though they realize they have no understanding. Often we have to act upon assumptions based on the data available. Often however you gain more data that charges the assumptions, however when this happens after the decision is made, only the information leading to it should matter.
For instance if someone breaks into my house in-the middle of the night I assume him to be armed. Here’s why: small cramped space with a single entry/exit. This makes the assumption he is armed because I have no way to retreat, and due to the cramped space I will have little reaction time. If he does what I tell him when I tell him, I will have no reason to shoot; if however I cannot see his hands and he doesn’t cooperate I must shoot because I have no other option to ensure my wife’s safety and my own. Because of the situation, a 20/20 scenario is likely, however if I don’t react I could easily end up dead. To those that think dead is an option, it is not, he came in my house and I am the one guaranteed to leave under my own power.
I used the above merely as an aid in illustrating how decisions must often be made by assumptions and not just pure data.
I was having some issues with different services reading my blog. I discovered that there were some issues internally in the site. I have since spent my evening redoing the site and porting over all my old data. This is more of a test blog to make sure everything is back up and running correctly.
Should this work you’ll see more up tomorrow.