Speaking of ATF troubles
I just listed some, but here’s another:
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives no longer routinely checks the addresses of some buyers at gun shows after being accused of slowing sales at a show in Richmond in 2005, the Justice Department reported yesterday.
And your tax dollars at work:
The U.S. attorney’s office in Alexandria found that the checks “were resource-intensive and rarely resulted in prosecutions for only providing a false address on federal firearms transaction documents.”
The JD does say there was a valid investigation. And Helmke tells a whopper:
Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said studies show that as many as 40 percent of firearms sales at gun shows do not involve background checks.
Which studies, Paul? Wintemute’s debunked “study” that only proved Wintemute doesn’t know gun laws? Or some other fictitious piece?
Update: David Hardy summarizes: it was proper, but we won’t do it again
July 3rd, 2007 at 1:49 pm
“As many as 40%” includes “almost zero percent” (“zero’s a percent!”).
Aren’t weasel-words great?
July 3rd, 2007 at 2:19 pm
Maybe a lot of private sales (up to 40%)… nothing wrong with that either.
July 3rd, 2007 at 3:07 pm
His “up to 40%” came from a “study” (read poll) that included gunshows, private sales, and all other commerce that didn’t go through FFL dealers. It’s more selective editing by the Brady Bunch.
July 3rd, 2007 at 6:17 pm
I like statistics! Especially these:
100% of what Paul Helmke says is bovine scatology.
0% of what Paul Helmke envisions is constitutional.
…and I don’t even need to use any weasel words!
July 3rd, 2007 at 8:57 pm
It is my opinion that law enforcement officers should be the only people allowed to have any guns at all. I have no need for them and I think the world would be better if guns were not available to the public.
July 3rd, 2007 at 9:15 pm
Obviously John N hasn’t been reading the site.
July 3rd, 2007 at 10:34 pm
When someone makes a 24/7 government bodyguard that is as dependable and affordable as my AK47, I will gladly switch.
July 5th, 2007 at 8:56 am
John N is relying on the fact that others around him will use them to protect him and his family. 911 is in effect a call for a man or woman with a gun to eventually turn up and take over his neglected responsibility to protect those in his care. When out in public, he is probably a lucky recipient of the uncertainty that exists due to concealed carry by others.
With that worldview, I would rather he didn’t have a gun anyway.
July 5th, 2007 at 10:46 am
Even if the world was 100% safe, I would still enjoy hunting and target shooting. So, basically, John N and anyone who thinks like him can kiss my chocolate starfish.
In a world without guns…I’d make my own.
John N is just another liberal pantywaist who, cowering and insecure in the knowledge that he is completely unable to protect himself from harm, wishes to put everyone else at the same disadvantage. It’s standard leftist thinking – they think the same way about earning power. Leftist politics is all about equality of outcome rescuing them from their own inadequacies. If they can’t excel, at least they bring everyone else down to their level.
July 7th, 2007 at 5:20 pm
If Paul Helmke ever told the truth it was by accident!