You are at netAirspace : Forum : The Combustion Chamber - Off-Topics : General Off-Topics

In front of a run-down shack in north Houston, federal agents step from a government sedan into 102-degree heat and face a critical question: How can the woman living here buy four high-end handguns in one day?

The house is worth $35,000. A screen dangles by a wall-unit air conditioner. Porch swing slats are smashed, the smattering of grass is flattened by cars and burned yellow by sun.

“I’ll do the talking on this one,” agent Tim Sloan, of South Carolina, told partner Brian Tumiel, of New York.

Success on the front lines of a government blitz on gunrunners supplying Mexican drug cartels with Houston weaponry hinges on logging heavy miles and knocking on countless doors. Dozens of agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives — sent here from around the country — are needed to follow what ATF acting director Kenneth Melson described as a “massive number of investigative leads.”

All told, Mexican officials in 2008 asked federal agents to trace the origins of more than 7,500 firearms recovered at crime scenes in Mexico. Most of them were traced back to Texas, California and Arizona.

Among other things, the agents are combing neighborhoods and asking people about suspicious purchases as well as seeking explanations as to how their guns ended up used in murders, kidnappings and other crimes in Mexico.

“Ever turning up the heat on cartels, our law enforcement and military partners in the government of Mexico have been working more closely with the ATF by sharing information and intelligence,” Melson said Tuesday during a firearms-trafficking summit in New Mexico.


Firearms dealers visited

The ATF recently dispatched 100 veteran agents to its Houston division, which reaches to the border.

The mission is especially challenging because, officials say, that while Houston is the number one point of origin for weapons traced back to the United States from Mexico, the government can’t compile databases on gun owners under federal law.

Agents instead review firearms dealers’ records in person.

People who are legally in the United States and have clean criminal records, but are facing economic problems are often recruited by traffickers to buy weapons on their behalf in order to shield themselves from scrutiny.

Knocks at the door of the shack that looked to be the definition of hard times went unanswered.

“I am out of here,” Sloan said a few moments later, as a pit bull lazily sauntered from the back yard. “I don’t like pit bulls walking up behind me.”

Link

ATF jack booted thugs wrote:In front of a run-down shack in north Houston, federal agents step from a government sedan into 102-degree heat and face a critical question: How can the woman living here buy four high-end handguns in one day?

I don't know, but since it isn't illegal to do so you can get off of her lawn until you come back with a warrant.

high-end handguns

They didn't have to be shy, they could have just come right and and said they were Sigs. At least the lady had good taste.

And the BATFESOB's, shouldn't worry as much about the four handguns as they should about the M18A1 Claymore mines and tripwire she has placed across the front of the house.

Click Click D'oh wrote:

ATF jack booted thugs wrote:In front of a run-down shack in north Houston, federal agents step from a government sedan into 102-degree heat and face a critical question: How can the woman living here buy four high-end handguns in one day?

I don't know, but since it isn't illegal to do so you can get off of her lawn until you come back with a warrant.

You do not need a warrant to knock on the door.

ANCFlyer wrote:You do not need a warrant to knock on the door.

Readers digest story:

ATF: Knock Knock
Citizen: May I help you?
ATF: Hello Mr/Ms X, we're from the government, we're here to help.
Citizen: *blink* *blink*
ATF: Did you recently purchase four handguns sir/ma'am?
Citizen: Do you have a warrant?
ATF: No ma'am/sir, we're just hoping that you are stupid enough to implicate yourself in some sort of crime that we are fishing for, even though the question we just asked you isn't criminal activity in any way.
Citizen: Go away or I'll call the cops.
ATF: We are the police ma'am/sir.
Citizen: Good, then you can write each other tresspassing citations on your way off my lawn. *closes door*

Roll credits.

Click Click D'oh wrote:

ANCFlyer wrote:You do not need a warrant to knock on the door.

Readers digest story:

ATF: Knock Knock
Citizen: May I help you?
ATF: Hello Mr/Ms X, we're from the government, we're here to help.
Citizen: *blink* *blink*
ATF: Did you recently purchase four handguns sir/ma'am?
Citizen: Do you have a warrant?
ATF: No ma'am/sir, we're just hoping that you are stupid enough to implicate yourself in some sort of crime that we are fishing for, even though the question we just asked you isn't criminal activity in any way.
Citizen: Go away or I'll call the cops.
ATF: We are the police ma'am/sir.
Citizen: Good, then you can write each other tresspassing citations on your way off my lawn. *closes door*

Roll credits.

Drama Queen today are we Click . . .

You know, I know, you do not need a warrant to knock on the door.

Tell me, how many times have you done so? If you say none, I gotta say

ANCFlyer wrote:Drama Queen today are we Click . . .

You know, I know, you do not need a warrant to knock on the door.

Tell me, how many times have you done so? If you say none, I gotta say

About a billion times Pep, but there's a big difference. I never went knocking on someones door because they bought a couple of packs of cigarrettes and the town has a problem with minors smoking. I never went knocking on a door because the occupant bought the same color clothes that the local gang wears. I never, ever went knocking on a door hoping that a person who had done nothing at all illegal would confess to a crime.

No, we knock on doors because a real, honest to god crime happened and did you happen to witness it? Or, because a person is a suspect in a real honest to god crime and we want to talk to them without having to restort to bracelets. Buying four guns is not a real honest to god crime. Without further evidence of wrong doing it's plain and simple harassment.

Click Click D'oh wrote:

ANCFlyer wrote:Drama Queen today are we Click . . .

You know, I know, you do not need a warrant to knock on the door.

Tell me, how many times have you done so? If you say none, I gotta say

About a billion times Pep, but there's a big difference. I never went knocking on someones door because they bought a couple of packs of cigarrettes and the town has a problem with minors smoking. I never went knocking on a door because the occupant bought the same color clothes that the local gang wears. I never, ever went knocking on a door hoping that a person who had done nothing at all illegal would confess to a crime.

No, we knock on doors because a real, honest to god crime happened and did you happen to witness it? Or, because a person is a suspect in a real honest to god crime and we want to talk to them without having to restort to bracelets. Buying four guns is not a real honest to god crime. Without further evidence of wrong doing it's plain and simple harassment.

As I read above I see an attempt to gether intel and info, I don't see harrasment - in any shape.

ANCFlyer wrote:As I read above I see an attempt to gether intel and info, I don't see harrasment - in any shape.

Can you tell me what crime she was suspected of having committed then?

Click Click D'oh wrote:

ANCFlyer wrote:As I read above I see an attempt to gether intel and info, I don't see harrasment - in any shape.

Can you tell me what crime she was suspected of having committed then?

Likely none. Maybe none. Maybe a front address for other assholes that shouldn't be buying guns. I dunno. I don't care. It's not illegal, and not harassment to gather intel and ask a question(s). If you have to knock on a door to get that done, then do it. If she told 'em to fuck themselves, well - so be it. Perhaps she had no idea her address was used to register the weapons. Perhaps she bought the things herself, no harm no foul.

But the bottom line, your first reply is inaccurate. You don't need a warrant to make an inquiry - or knock on a door.

ANCFlyer wrote:But the bottom line, your first reply is inaccurate. You don't need a warrant to make an inquiry - or knock on a door.

Uh Pep, I never said that the police need a warrant to knock on a door. I just gave my standard response to what I consider to be ongoing harassment of law abiding citizens by a corrupt and over reaching government agency. It's the exact same response I would give the ATF if they came to my door... and I'm obviously LEO friendly.

Click Click D'oh wrote:

ANCFlyer wrote:But the bottom line, your first reply is inaccurate. You don't need a warrant to make an inquiry - or knock on a door.

Uh Pep, I never said that the police need a warrant to knock on a door. I just gave my standard response to what I consider to be ongoing harassment of law abiding citizens by a corrupt and over reaching government agency. It's the exact same response I would give the ATF if they came to my door... and I'm obviously LEO friendly.

Of course I know that.

Do you really think the ATF just runs around harrasing people? I've worked with them - albeit on bombings - and never had a problem.

Maybe it's Texas thing.

I think a lot of it has to do with how the article is worded, it's either presumptuous in and of itself or it reflects the presumptuousness of the ATF agents. Either way, I don't like the thought that ATF agents might look at my place and presume it's "out of place" for someone who lives in a place like that to buy whatever it is that I may or may not have purchased.

Queso wrote:Either way, I don't like the thought that ATF agents might look at my place and presume it's "out of place" for someone who lives in a place like that to buy whatever it is that I may or may not have purchased.

Welcome to profiling.

Are firearms transactions logged, each and every one of them? I'm asking because it would obviously be tempting for someone who has lost his house due to mortgage gambling to sell a gun or two on the black market. If that private sale can legally happen anonymously, it's a perfect loophole for criminals seeking those weapons.

That would of course mean you'd have to register firearms, opening a huge can of worms, but honestly: we've had to register cars for over a century, yet we can still drive everything from a 1920s oldtimer to a modern-day hypercar. So obviously registration does not automatically lead to bans, just to more responsible ownership.

And if people hadn't balked so loudly about full registries and databases, this wouldn't be an issue as they could trace it easily. I support the constitution, but if a terrier needs registered... why shouldn't a gun?

ANCFlyer wrote:Do you really think the ATF just runs around harrasing people? I've worked with them - albeit on bombings - and never had a problem.

Read up on Cavalry Arms and decide for yourself.

The long and short of it is thus: A company in Arizona named Cavalry Arms makes synthetic AR lowers. After consulting with their local ATF branch they moved production to an off site location. ATF Washington decided that Cavalry Arms was breaking the law in doing so and raided Cavalry Arms, seizing all of their property including inventory and customer files. Several weeks later the ATF gave Cavalry Arms the green light to resume production in the same manner as they were before the raid. Since then the ATF has filed a motion for asset seizure, but has filed no criminal charges against anybody. NO property has been returned to Cavalry Arms despite the fact that the raid occured in March 2008

Stunning no?

Not the only time it's happened either. KT Ordnace got the same treatment.

How about Reds Traiding Post and their epic story of ATF harassment?

ATF, not on my good guy list.

Click Click D'oh wrote:

ANCFlyer wrote:Do you really think the ATF just runs around harrasing people? I've worked with them - albeit on bombings - and never had a problem.

Read up on Cavalry Arms and decide for yourself.

The long and short of it is thus: A company in Arizona named Cavalry Arms makes synthetic AR lowers. After consulting with their local ATF branch they moved production to an off site location. ATF Washington decided that Cavalry Arms was breaking the law in doing so and raided Cavalry Arms, seizing all of their property including inventory and customer files. Several weeks later the ATF gave Cavalry Arms the green light to resume production in the same manner as they were before the raid. Since then the ATF has filed a motion for asset seizure, but has filed no criminal charges against anybody. NO property has been returned to Cavalry Arms despite the fact that the raid occured in March 2008

Stunning no?

Not the only time it's happened either. KT Ordnace got the same treatment.

How about Reds Traiding Post and their epic story of ATF harassment?

ATF, not on my good guy list.

So this is a personal thing, and nothing related to the law . . . . as was eluded to you in your first post.

OK, I get it now.

Once again, you do NOT need a warrant to knock on someone's door. Ever. Period. End.

I can knock on doors til my knuckles bleed without a warrant. I can ask questions til I am hoarse without a warrant. I can do a LOT of things without a warrant.

Your personal disparage with the ATF doesn't prevent that.

ANCFlyer wrote:So this is a personal thing, and nothing related to the law . . . . as was eluded to you in your first post.

Uh... what?

ANCFlyer wrote:Once again, you do NOT need a warrant to knock on someone's door. Ever. Period. End.

Have I ever said anything to the contrary?

ANCFlyer wrote:I can knock on doors til my knuckles bleed without a warrant. I can ask questions til I am hoarse without a warrant. I can do a LOT of things without a warrant.

And the citizen on whose door you are knocking Pep? Don't they have the right to tell you to get lost and not come back until you have a warrant?


PS: Since you think I am disparaging the ATF, perhaps you would like to defend their actions in the cases I mentioned above?

Click Click D'oh wrote:And the citizen on whose door you are knocking Pep? Don't they have the right to tell you to get lost and not come back until you have a warrant?

They sure do. Never said they couldn't.

Click Click D'oh wrote:PS: Since you think I am disparaging the ATF, perhaps you would like to defend their actions in the cases I mentioned above?

Nope. I think the ATF was up a ducks ass in the cases you cited. Never said they weren't.

All I said was, one more time, "I do not need a warrant to knock on someone's door". "It is NOT harrassment to do so". "I do not need a warrant to ask questions or gather intel".

ANCFlyer wrote:They sure do. Never said they couldn't.

Just making sure we are on the same page there Pep. So, to restate, the police can go knock on doors without warrants, and the residents can tell them to go away until they get one.

If local, county, state, FBI, DEA, the dog catcher, or even the school crossing guard shows up I'll talk to them. Not the BATFE though.

You don't see the events in the report as anything special and not worthy of being called harrasment, and that's fine if you view it as a stand alone event. I see it as yet another occurance in a long string of events by the ATF that follow a predictable pattern: First the ATF finds a very minor violation such as writting "Y" on a form instead of "Yes" (Red's Trading Post) or in some instances simply invents a violation out of thin air (80% recievers). Next the ATF rolls in with the full SWAT team show and seizes everything in sight, even if they know there is no need for a full up raid. Then the ATF sets in with the asset forfeiture proceedings and delays actually getting the case into court until the defendants run out of money... Usually several hundred thousand dollars for the defendant not to mention what it costs us the tax payers. Usually when it's all said and done the people that can raise enough cash get their cases thrown out of court but are up S creek financially. Everyone else never sees their property ever again, depsite never being charged.

The ATF even made the mistake of letting the public know what their true goal was.

If it were only the three cases it would be appaling. But it's not. I can pull similar cases out all day long. Dozens of them.

The ATFs got some good people out there, no doubt about that... They should go work for better people. The whole agency needs a top down restructure before I'll ever trust them again.

Click Click D'oh wrote:

ANCFlyer wrote:They sure do. Never said they couldn't.

Just making sure we are on the same page there Pep. So, to restate, the police can go knock on doors without warrants, and the residents can tell them to go away until they get one.

If local, county, state, FBI, DEA, the dog catcher, or even the school crossing guard shows up I'll talk to them. Not the BATFE though.

You don't see the events in the report as anything special and not worthy of being called harrasment, and that's fine if you view it as a stand alone event. I see it as yet another occurance in a long string of events by the ATF that follow a predictable pattern: First the ATF finds a very minor violation such as writting "Y" on a form instead of "Yes" (Red's Trading Post) or in some instances simply invents a violation out of thin air (80% recievers). Next the ATF rolls in with the full SWAT team show and seizes everything in sight, even if they know there is no need for a full up raid. Then the ATF sets in with the asset forfeiture proceedings and delays actually getting the case into court until the defendants run out of money... Usually several hundred thousand dollars for the defendant not to mention what it costs us the tax payers. Usually when it's all said and done the people that can raise enough cash get their cases thrown out of court but are up S creek financially. Everyone else never sees their property ever again, depsite never being charged.

The ATF even made the mistake of letting the public know what their true goal was.

If it were only the three cases it would be appaling. But it's not. I can pull similar cases out all day long. Dozens of them.

The ATFs got some good people out there, no doubt about that... They should go work for better people. The whole agency needs a top down restructure before I'll ever trust them again.

Sounds like our (fortunately retired) senior civil servant Dr. Brennecke of the federal ministery of the interior. Under various federal governments (both social democrat and conservative) he was responsible for writing guidelines and SOP´s interpreting the firearms laws for subordinate departments, like the BKA. He made no secret out of his opinion that his job was to remove privately owned firearms by interpreting the laws in the strictest form possible.

Jan

I'll chime in here on this one. Seems to me like the BATF did some good detective work and rolled the dice. Realistically, I don't see this as any different than checking into the public servant with a security clearance who is suddenly living way beyond his means.

The truth is, the BATF people are probably right to be suspicious but the person who purchased the weapons probably hasn't really lived in that place for years and may not even be the same person the id said she was.