Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

"Multiple sources, including sources from ATF, DOJ and Congressional offices have said there is a white paper circulating within the Department of Justice, outlining the essential elimination of ATF. According to sources, the paper outlines the firing of at least 450 ATF agents in an effort to conduct damage control as Operation Fast and Furious gets uglier and as election day 2012 gets closer. ATF agents wouldn’t be reassigned to other positions, just simply let go. Current duties of ATF, including the enforcement of explosives and gun laws, would be transferred to other agencies, possibly the FBI and the DEA. According to a congressional source, there have been rumblings about the elimination of ATF for quite sometime, but the move would require major political capital to actually happen."

http://townhall.com/columnists/katiepav ... ion_of_atf

Sounds more like Holders attempt at pulling a massive CYA to keep his jewels out of the blender... Would love to see that SOB get convicted and have to do time in some sewer like San Quentin or Joliet

"Last week, ATF offered 400 agents buy outs to avoid budget cuts and is expecting 250-275 agents to take the offer through Voluntary Early Retirement. These buyouts come at a convenient time for the Justice Department, which can eliminate ATF, then say it’s because of budget cuts, when really, it’s to cover their tracks."

This was in the article...

What does this truly mean for Gun Rights though? It's something to keep a watch on. Removing the ATF means that the services go to another department, are they going to deny people access to firearms because of bureaucratic snafus, budgetary concerns, and inefficiencies?

It's an area of concern we need to stay aware.

Reverenddel wrote:What does this truly mean for Gun Rights though? It's something to keep a watch on. Removing the ATF means that the services go to another department, are they going to deny people access to firearms because of bureaucratic snafus, budgetary concerns, and inefficiencies?

Wikipedia wrote:The agency is led by Kenneth E. Melson, Acting Director[4] and William J. Hoover, Acting Deputy Director.[5] ATF has nearly 5,000 employees and an annual budget of $1.12 billion (2010).[2]

450 of the 5000...ya, ~10% is about the cuts lots of government programs are expecting this year (generally a good thing too, but across the board cuts are stupid IMHO). So in another words, they'll do the cuts that were coming anyways while renaming it and in the mean time nothing of substance really changes. I've seen the rename/reorganize troubled programs, but don't actually change what/how they got in trouble game a few times too many to be fooled by it.

Any one want to put money on the 450 employee's Holder approves to be "let go" are those who in anyway had connections to ratting them out over Project Gunrunner?

As long as Holder is in charge, I think we should do away with the DOJ.
That whole department is a huge waste of money.

I think it's a bad idea and I'm usually the first one to embrace the elimination of any agency. Here, turning over ATF's duties to DOJ is like asking the foxes to babysit the chicks.

seeknulfind wrote:I think it's a bad idea and I'm usually the first one to embrace the elimination of any agency. Here, turning over ATF's duties to DOJ is like asking the foxes to babysit the chicks.

Turning over the enforcement to the FBI, which IMHO should be the only Federal LEA, is a good thing. There are existing federal prohibitions against LEA's performing tax duties, but then again, they ignored that and the NFA is under DOJ now. That technically means that DOJ is processing what the government has legally argued is a tax return...not that anyone of importance cares what the law says.

gunderwood wrote:Turning over the enforcement to the FBI, which IMHO should be the only Federal LEA, is a good thing.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Right now, federal firearms law enforcement is handled by the laughingstock of federal LE agencies - Congress routinely ignores their requests for more money and more laws. Giving that power to the FBI - which is, rightly or wrongly, accorded enormous respect and deference by politicians - gives the FBI an incentive to lobby for more gun laws and more money to enforce them. Congress doesn't tell the FBI "no" much, because they know it'll hurt their reelection chances to go against what the top federal LE agency wants. None of them want to look soft on crime. They don't care if the targets of that "get tough" stance are gun owners, because none of them actually care about us, and the mass of voters likes getting tough on crime, versus the fringe of gunowners who'll get the shaft. And remember that the FBI has a history of killing citizens and getting away scot free (Lon Horiuchi). They will wind up hiring a bunch of those newly-unemployed ATF special agents (the ones who do the kitten stomping), and when they have the magical FBI shield, they're not going to suddenly become more conscientious in their respect for their fellow citizens.

No, getting rid of ATF before getting rid of the GCA and NFA is a dangerous move, because that creates a vacuum that will be filled, probably by something worse; and just rolling them into FBI is like giving matches and gasoline to a pyromaniac.

M'thinks Diomed has a point!

Looks to me like they're getting rid of the folks that ratted out Operation Gunrunner (ATF field personnel and supervisors) and turning their jobs over to the folks who concieved, directed and then covered up Operation Gunrunner (DOJ). DOJ is much more susceptible to political cronyism and liberal ideological pollution. So the fox kills the dog and takes over watching the henhouse. That's bad for the chickens even if the dog killed a chicken every now and then; because the fox will kill'em all just because he can.

I won't complain about the loss of ATF. DEA can go away, too. FBI can be pared down to just enough to link local LEA's together.