Tyranny of the ATF

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solkern

And there is no right to deny a felon or someone with mental problems from owning a gun either.

---

Actually, there is a lot of history, text and tradition at the time of the Bill of Rights to do just that. So, it passes the test. Next fallacy you want to try and defend taking people's rights away with?

BTW, those already doing it as a part time job are already covered by the current rules. This is trying to apply it to EVERYONE just because they feel like it.

Again, how much of my rights have to be sacrificed to ineffectively assuage your feelings?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ~Rocktar~

Actually, there is a lot of history, text and tradition at the time of the Bill of Rights to do just that. So, it passes the test. Next fallacy you want to try and defend taking people's rights away with?

BTW, those already doing it as a part time job are already covered by the current rules. This is trying to apply it to EVERYONE just because they feel like it.

Again, how much of my rights have to be sacrificed to ineffectively assuage your feelings?

---

But it doesn’t, maybe if you read it, you’d see that, instead of making baseless assumptions.

It doesn’t cover existing rules because private sellers required zero checks federally, now they do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solkern

So let me get this right. A store requires mountains of paperwork, yet a private citizen requires zero, and you are ok with this?

But I can tell, you actually didn’t read anything about the rule changes. Because if you did, you would know this doesn’t effect a random jobber from selling his daddy’s gun.

Dealer. Any person engaged in the business of selling firearms at wholesale or retail; any person engaged in the business of repairing firearms or of making or fitting special barrels, stocks, or trigger mechanisms to firearms; or any person who is a pawnbroker. The term shall include any person who engages in such business or occupation on a part-time basis. The term shall include such activities wherever, or through whatever medium, they may be conducted, such as at a gun show or event, flea market, auction house, or gun range or club; at one’s home; by mail order; over the Internet; through the use of other electronic means (e.g., an online broker, online auction, text messaging service, social media raffle, or website); or at any other domestic or international public or private marketplace or premises.

Maybe you should actually read it?

---

Let's just say for the sake of argument that I agree with everything you're saying, except for this one small part you posted that I'm a little confused about, and I am asking for you to clarify:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solkern

While I think the ATF is going overboard and it’s too much, but it does not infringe or stop a person who has a right to own a gun, from purchasing or own a gun at all.

---

What specifically is the ATF doing that you consider to be "too much?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solkern

Occasional doesn’t mean the amount, but means how often. You aren’t in the business of buying and selling guns.

You’re selling to either enhance, or dwindle your current collection, it’s not your business.

But I agree the rules still need to be clarified.

---

Clarification is only one small issue. The whole rule is illegal and an infringement on our rights.

The ATF is a bureaucracy. They don’t have the authority to make new laws. Only Congress can do that. They don’t have the authority to redefine and/or interpret the law. That is the job of our judicial system. Why did Biden direct the ATF to implement universal background checks without Congress? We both know why. It’s the same reason for student debt forgiveness. Because Congress won’t pass a bill to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

Let's just say for the sake of argument that I agree with everything you're saying, except for this one small part you posted that I'm a little confused about, and I am asking for you to clarify:



What specifically is the ATF doing that you consider to be "too much?"

---

I don’t think private sellers should be required to get a license, but should be required to get a background check for anyone that buys a gun from them. I’ve already said that. Also they should be required to keep records of all sales.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solkern

I don’t think private sellers should be required to get a license, but should be required to get a background check for anyone that buys a gun from them. I’ve already said that.

---

Do you think our government should have a registration list of firearms? How would they enforce universal background checks without one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

More steps = infringement

Again, if I were to say you need to register and pay a tax to publish something you would not be cool with that. You can’t tax a natural God-given right. The first amendment says nothing about publishing, and yet it still would not be ok.

---

Delay is not infringement. Process is not burden. Verification is not an invasion of privacy. I don't know why it's such a monumental effort to wrap your brain around the idea that reasonable efforts to regulate firearms as defined by the second amendment is by means somehow a violation of 'god-given' rights. Someone out of their mind wanting to purchase a firearm to commit a crime being 'burdened' by forms a dealer has to fill out, or having harder to find access to a black market driven further underground by federal enforcement? GREAT. You're treating what is little more than the equivalent of waiting in line at the DMV to register your vehicle as some authoritarian invasion of your rights and it is hilarious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solkern

I don’t think private sellers should be required to get a license, but should be required to get a background check for anyone that buys a gun from them. I’ve already said that. Also they should be required to keep records of all sales.

---

Go watch the film Red Dawn. Watch the original 1984 version and not the crappy watered down remake. What is the first thing the invading communists did after they took control of the area? They paid a visit to all the local FFLs to seize their form 4473s.

This might be my favorite thread of the year so far.

Thank you Suppressed Poet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Delay is not infringement. Process is not burden. Verification is not an invasion of privacy. I don't know why it's such a monumental effort to wrap your brain around the idea that reasonable efforts to regulate firearms as defined by the second amendment is by means somehow a violation of 'god-given' rights. Someone out of their mind wanting to purchase a firearm to commit a crime being 'burdened' by forms a dealer has to fill out, or having harder to find access to a black market driven further underground by federal enforcement? GREAT. You're treating what is little more than the equivalent of waiting in line at the DMV to register your vehicle as some authoritarian invasion of your rights and it is hilarious.

---

Ok cool. Yeah let’s make it a rule that to register to vote you have to visit your local DMV in person with all the appropriate identification to verify you are eligible to vote. The process to receive a federal voter registration card may take up to 2 years. You are also required to pass a literacy test & take a course on the civic responsibility you have with voting. You also need to pay a tax of $200 for the process of registering to vote. Every poll center across America must verify your voter registration card in person for you to legally cast your ballot in any federal election.

That’s not infringement, correct?