Horsley said gun sales records are filed alphabetically. And each letter is filed chronologically.It could not be more clear. These thugs are extracting vengeance against Red's for daring to speak out about their rights.
But the ATF told him he cannot order files both ways.
"Is Adams before Anderson?" Young asked Horsley, to make the point that his files were not ordered alphabetically. "I said, 'Probably not.' She said, 'That's a violation if they aren't in perfect alphabetical order.' In the four previous audits this has never been in question."
Horsley said in a 2005, Agent Caleb Rushing actually "suggested" he arrange files "with the last transaction toward the front for quick and easy access."
Young told Horsley, Rushing was wrong.
I've worked in industries heavily regulated by government agencies--I wrote their audit compliance procedures--and have never seen anything this intentionally petty. It's evident this is not a matter of public safety: it's a matter of gang thugs burning out a business owner for protesting their shakedown racket instead of kissing their treasonous rear ends.
This is not a matter of ensuring compliance: it's a matter of intentional, in-your-face destruction of a family's business. It's naked abuse of power under color of authority. And it's time to start treating it as such.
15 comments:
It's time we all became Henry Bowmans. This is nothing less tan our gov't waging war on a citizen.
Perhaps there's something else we can do before it comes to a shootout?
Probably not. You see, the criminals make the rules now.
It does not appear that continuing to play a rigged game (I refer you to Pfleger, Horiuchi, and Fincher for evidence that this game is now rigged), without some broader plan in mind, is going to offer much of a return on investment.
There are two jobs to be done: first, keep liberty alive; second, work for its restoration. They sound like different points on the same vector, but I'm not sure they are. Regardless, one must evaluate one's potential courses of action with the broader goals in mind. Be sure that at least some of the other side is doing so.
Ahem...are doing so. Sorry about that.
Question answered.
Q: How does the BATFE shut down any gun shop with only two mistakes in paperwork?
A: Cite one during the first visit, site the second during the next planned visit; characterize it as "willful" breaking of the rules.
Horrible.
Anyone who obtains an FFL and chooses to be an above ground gun dealer in this day and age should just follow the rules the BATF sets, (jumping through all the hopes and smiling the entire time).
=======
Wasn't that the idea behind a recent post on this blog? One of your supporters of that post, said, "If you don't want the hassle, don't get a license."
And in the post, Mr. Codrea, you blamed gun dealers for getting shut down by, quote: "cutting corners", furthered by, "There are practices to follow..."
"...practices to follow..."; Doesn't that sound like keeping the forms alphabetical instead of "cutting corners" by keeping the most recent form at the front of the folder instead?
So, Mr. Codrea, in light of hearing the true story behind BATFU abuse at Red's Trading Post for "cutting corners", have you rethought this previous post? http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2007/05/message-for-gun-dealers-stop-being.html
Personal note: Not trying to upset you or hurt you David. I respect you and love the message you ARE getting out. I just found that post out of place, (sort of like something Zumbo might say). Peace.
No, "anon", I will not rethink my earlier position because I am right. You're just going to have to get over it-- or not. In that case, these "above ground" dealers knowingly committed a "straw sale" to undercover agents. That was stupid as hell, and my intent, as I made clear, was to caution other dealers against doing stupid crap like that in order to make a quick sale. Better let it go than cut corners over a sheer cliff. It was too late to help the shop in question, as they'd already cut a deal, pled and lost their license.
This is entirely different, as it's clear Red's has been trying to comply in good faith with all requirements.
And as I also made clear, my preference is no government regulation--but I don't have the power to make that happen, so in light of current realities, my advice--that still stands--to gun dealers who wish to stay in business-- is to not commit overt blatant violations.
It's fine and good for you to anonymously criticize this advice, so tell you what--if you believe it's a smart thing for people to violate gun laws right out in the open, there are plenty of opportunities for you to walk the walk and show me how it's done.
Thought this through and even tried giving the feds the benefit of the doubt. But it doesn't wash. This isn't a case of, well okay, we didn't comply with the letter of the law so we'll pay our fine and get on with life. This is a livelihood, and quite far beyond that when 2nd Amendment considerations are brought into the picture. As far as I can tell, there was no attempt to deceive or willfully break the law, and sure, being petty is what government workers excel at but the entire process would be far better served by allowing them to point out minor inconsistencies as a way of improving compliance, not as the means of putting an otherwise legal operation out of business. Career bureaucrats playing God is one thing.The government going full tilt after our rights is something else.
This is also a case where the BATFEces told him it was OK to do it one way on one visit (actually suggested it would be "easier"), then changed their minds on a subsequent visit. Typical federal thuggery.
When one of the forms a few years ago the gun store clerk watched carefully as I filled in each blank to see that I didn't do it wrong. Wrong being putting "St. Paul" instead of the ATF-required "Saint Paul" in a city box, or using a check mark instead of an "x" in an answer box. A "wrong" answer would have voided the form and the clerk would not have made the NICS call, although I don't remember (may not have been told) if a void form meant I would have had to start over, or would have had to go away and come back another day.
For this kind of government I pay taxes?
Everybody here suspects that this can't be corrected peacably through the organs of the law.
I'm all talked out.
David, sorry for striking a nerve. But, calling an "anon" commenter out to "walk the walk" is dangerous. You have no idea of the sacrifices I have made, or the damages caused to me and my family over my stance on gun rights.
I never commented to condemn you. Not only have I stopped telling anyone how they should live their life, (minus the tip of my nose), I also refuse to condemn others about how they choose to live their life.
Telling gun stores that they are stupid for violating gun laws, (which we both acknowledge are unconstitutional), is fine. But any blame for the resulting damages should be clearly placed on government, (specifically, the failure of our courts to be a check on these illegal powers). If we continue to comply with these regulations we only guarantee their continued existence.
Your opinion that Red's is entirely different than an BATFU setup "straw purchase" is hopeful thinking. Did you read the court documents in the other case? Did you talk to that dealer? Or did you read the one news article and assume that it was the truth because that dealer plead guilty on impossible to win charges?
Sadly for Red's, a "straw purchase" is the next thing the BATFU is planning on doing to them. Do you realize how difficult it is to prove "entrapment"? The burden of proof required means it is a worthless defense.
Then, in the court of law, and the court of public opinion, Red's will be seen as blatantly violating gun laws. Sadly, gun owners will blame them.
I won't. It's a waste of energy away from striking at the root.
Ditto. And because of those damages, I do not go out of my way to flout gun laws in front of those who would destroy me if they caught me doing so.
That is my advice to everyone, yourself included. And to gun dealers, who know they are constantly scrutinized.
"Both Keller's admitted with their pleas that they knew that the agent was the actual purchaser of the rifle."
If you have evidence to the contrary, as opposed to unfounded speculation, I'm all ears.
If, in fact, they knowingly went along with an obvious "straw purchae," I'm not saying they deserve what they got--I'm saying they should have known better and had more of a sense of self-preservation.
As an employee (and I stress employee) of Red's Trading Post I have to jump in here. I'm a qualified IT professional and have worked there for several years. I have always been one to debunk the conspiracy theorists. I have now seen the true face of the government who is supposedly there to protect us, and I'm appalled. I'll have a job no matter how this ends, but the threat to my personal rights scares the hell out of me after what I've seen and heard.
Post a Comment