Why is the BATFE stuck in the last century?

Vehicle weapons and static display accessories
User avatar
lt.luke
G-General
G-General
Posts: 8809
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 8:56 am
Location: O K lahoma
Contact:

Re: Why is the BATFE stuck in the last century?

Post by lt.luke » Wed Dec 06, 2017 1:33 pm

Chuck Lutz wrote:
Wed Dec 06, 2017 11:40 am
Let's review....

I heard they allowed one AK-47 in each household in Iraq....maybe moving to that "civilized" country is an option? It seems to work there, right?
They (WE) allowed one firearm. You take your pick & I'm keeping the rest. And you go on and move over there. I don't think you'll like it.

Oddly...the ones that obeyed and only had one weapon were not the ones we worried about. Just like here.
Luke Sparks
MAJ, FA

GPW Script 12078 viewtopic.php?f=95&t=102532
2 WWII 1/4T
Dog Pack

User avatar
raymond
G-Lieutenant General
G-Lieutenant General
Posts: 7203
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:53 pm
Location: God's country, Clarksville Mo.

Re: Why is the BATFE stuck in the last century?

Post by raymond » Wed Dec 06, 2017 6:37 pm

Chuck

I think you should have to print your response to this topic on handmade paper, using a hand crank, hand set, moveable type, printing press, or voice your opinion verbally from the proverbial "soap box" in the village square as those were the only ways to express one's first amendment rights to free speech in the late 18th century.

Raymond
Modern journalism is all about deciding which facts the public shouldn’t know because they might reflect badly on Democrats

Radtech
G-Major General
G-Major General
Posts: 2802
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2003 8:55 pm

Re: Why is the BATFE stuck in the last century?

Post by Radtech » Wed Dec 06, 2017 10:05 pm

It is just fortunate that the BATF does not have the funding that the FBI group of crooks have.They would be the 21st century American Gestapo.The BATF can be beaten in court but it costs time and money.But then again the US government could never confiscate all of the 300 million personally owned firearms,that they have records of,and many millions more imported before importers were required to mark imports on Jan.1,1969.Prior to Jan.1,1969 importers were not required to turn over import records of firearm imports to the government when they go out of business as they are today so there is no way to trace any of those weapons by the importer as they can today.We certainly do not want the BATF to catch up to the 21st century.

User avatar
Mark Tombleson
MZ Radio Operator
Posts: 9198
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 9:58 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Re: Why is the BATFE stuck in the last century?

Post by Mark Tombleson » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:06 am

The way I read this is that everyone not in the government is the militia... as for well-regulated:

1714: "The practice of all well-regulated courts of justice in the world."

1812: "The equation of time ... is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well-regulated clock and a true sun dial."

1848: "A remissness for which I am sure every well-regulated person will blame the Mayor."

1862: "It appeared to her well-regulated mind, like a clandestine proceeding."

1894: "The newspaper, a never wanting adjunct to every well-regulated American embryo city."

The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it. http://www.constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm

What the Framers said about our Second Amendment
Rights to Keep and Bear Arms http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/quotes/arms.html

"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."
-- Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188
If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual State. In a single State, if the persons entrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.
-- Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28
"That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms ... "
-- Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at 86-87 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)
"[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
--James Madison, The Federalist Papers, No. 46
"To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws."
--John Adams, A Defense of the Constitutions of the United States 475 (1787-1788)
"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive."
--Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).
"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."
--Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
"Whereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it."
--Richard Henry Lee, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms."
-- Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:373, Papers 12:356
"No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
-- Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J. Boyd, Ed., 1950]
"The right of the people to keep and bear ... arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country ..."
-- James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789
MB-NAVY-MZ-1 352625 - 07/20/44 (DOD est.)
U.S.N. 133818
2nd place Restored Class 2008 Portland Convention
MVPA Hall of Fame - 2013

ng19delta
Sergeant Major of the Gee
Sergeant Major of the Gee
Posts: 468
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 10:36 pm

Re: Why is the BATFE stuck in the last century?

Post by ng19delta » Thu Dec 07, 2017 3:59 am

Chuck Lutz wrote:
Wed Dec 06, 2017 11:40 am
Let's review....

I don't think anyone would have a problem with you guys having all the musket loaders you could carry in a dump truck if that's what scratches your itch, but letting every Tom, Dick and Harry run around with full auto weapons does not work in any country where that "Wild West" attitude is currently happening. After all, the Founding Fathers saw the need for a "WELL-REGULATED MILITIA" and phrased it that way, not a bunch of gun-huggers in some doomsday bunker or some kids shooting up their high-school. Hell, the only thing "well regulated" is the gun/accessories mfgers funding legislation favorable to market share and the hell with any reasonable limitations on crazy bastards having firearms...and gutting the BATFE budget is a pretty obvious example of that.

I heard they allowed one AK-47 in each household in Iraq....maybe moving to that "civilized" country is an option? It seems to work there, right?
Sorry Chuck, But the "Well regulated militia" part is NOT the operative phrase of t he Second Amendment: It is PREFACE, and NOT related to the statement directly! "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." To paraphrase into MODERN English "Despite the need for a standing military to protect the security of a free state(nation), this shall not be taken as cause nor excuse to infringe upon the rights of the individual to keep and bear arms"

The Founding fathers had a VERY SPECIFIC cause in mind- The cause of the PROTECTION of the LIBERTY of the people- they had just fought a war to free the colonies from an oppressive government- and wanted to make darn sure that if the need ever arose again, THE PEOPLE would be adequately armed TO DO SO. And the Founding Fathers were WELL AWARE of weapons developments- in their time they had seen Pillbox pistols, matchlock to wheel lock to flintlock rifles; the "Puckle Gun" and many OTHER innovations. They KNEW that weapons would continue to develop. So don't even try playing THAT card. And as to the "wild west mentality"- THAT is simply a scare tactic created by a complicit media in an attempt to scare people about guns. You have a MUCH better chance of electrocuting yourself with a toaster than getting shot in this country... Better familiarize yourself with reality...

Scott


User avatar
W. Winget
LTC, U.S. Army
LTC, U.S. Army
Posts: 1735
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2002 12:37 pm
Location: USA, Virginia, Carrollton
Contact:

Re: Why is the BATFE stuck in the last century?

Post by W. Winget » Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:26 am

How about we keep it G503...related
Because it's just as easy for someone to say do away with those unsafe antique vehicles just like we should do away with those unsafe firearms.

No seatbelts
no pollution control systems
poor brakes
no protective airbags
poor lighting
no turn signals
inefficient gripping tires
too slow for the road
should be outlawed or limited to "off road use only"

Anything you own or do can be abused or berated, and there's always going to be someone that doesn't like what the other person does or has. Arguing for more regulations (of any kind) is basically an argument to take something away from someone else. That's as simple as the argument gets.

Winget
Looking for 1918 Standard B 'Liberty' truck parts

Chuck Lutz
Gee Addict
Posts: 23502
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 8:00 am
Location: Novato, CA

Re: Why is the BATFE stuck in the last century?

Post by Chuck Lutz » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:24 pm

While I agree that keeping it "G503 RELATED" is something I fully support and the title of this Forum even states that, some people can't resist the urge to start arguments by posting about things like the content and title of the original post, you sure as hell will get an opinion on that if you do.

So...keep this stuff on the FAKE NJ Klub Forum where you hafta join to engage and keep the stink that inevitably arises from these pissing-matches THERE.
Chuck Lutz

GPW 17963 4/24/42 Chester, PA. USA 20113473 (USA est./Tom W.)
GPW 108552 4/17/43 Louisville, KY. USA 20371278 (DOD est./Tom W.)
Bantam T3 4582 10/29/42 USA 0173499 (est.)

Kim Sievert
G-Second Lieutenant
G-Second Lieutenant
Posts: 599
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 7:18 pm
Location: Downtown USA

Re: Why is the BATFE stuck in the last century?

Post by Kim Sievert » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:26 pm

Apology to the good BATF folks,,, , apology to those who understand the laws and do not believe in administrated BS

But,,,,,,,,,, exceptional budget = abuse of power. The numbers game,,,, justifying their budget from low quality violations (honest mistakes)
I personally saw the "abuse of power" at a gun show, when they had a abundance of funds and nerd agents. (1980's) I believe President Reagan cut there budget in half to curb the abuse.

Hint, Hint, that is why their budget is so small.

ALSO
The BATF supported the failed program called "Fast and Furious" program President Barack Obama and his Attorney General Eric Holder cooked up.
Operation Fast and Furious, a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) operation in which the federal government allowed criminals to buy guns in Phoenix-area shops with the intention of tracking them as they were transported into Mexico. But the agency lost track of more than 1,400 of the 2,000 guns they allowed smugglers to buy. BATF also allowed other contraband items to go over the boarder.

As a result of a dispute over the release of Justice Department documents related to the scandal, Attorney General Eric Holder became the first sitting member of the Cabinet of the United States to be held in contempt of Congress on June 28, 2012. Earlier that month, President Barack Obama had invoked executive privilege for the first time in his presidency over the same documents.

Fast and Furious was cooked up, as a response to longstanding criticism of the bureau for focusing on relatively minor gun violations while failing to target high-level gun smuggling figures.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

Kim Sievert
G-Second Lieutenant
G-Second Lieutenant
Posts: 599
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 7:18 pm
Location: Downtown USA

Re: Why is the BATFE stuck in the last century?

Post by Kim Sievert » Thu Dec 07, 2017 1:14 pm

Relevance to our MV world

DOD wanted funding to De-Militarize any "war related equipment / vehicles / parts" released to the public.
(Most MVs and most MV parts can be considered as "war related material")

Known to us MV'ers as the "De-Mill Bill"

DOD never got $$$$$ funding for it and existing budget is not enough to chase everybody around to meet conformance to the NEW standards.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

User avatar
Bill H.
G-Lieutenant General
G-Lieutenant General
Posts: 4750
Joined: Sun May 31, 1998 9:00 pm
Location: Yonna Valley, Oregon
Contact:

Re: Why is the BATFE stuck in the last century?

Post by Bill H. » Thu Dec 07, 2017 4:24 pm

Kim Sievert wrote:
Thu Dec 07, 2017 1:14 pm
Relevance to our MV world

DOD wanted funding to De-Militarize any "war related equipment / vehicles / parts" released to the public.
(Most MVs and most MV parts can be considered as "war related material")

Known to us MV'ers as the "De-Mill Bill"

DOD never got $$$$$ funding for it and existing budget is not enough to chase everybody around to meet conformance to the NEW standards.
Once again, government over reach! It's been going on since the early 1920s! Disband the BATF&E and let folks get on with their God given freedoms and rights!
Bill H.

Welfare, a modern day career choice.

1962 AMC M422A1
1965 Stevens M416B1

2 Timothy 3:1-5

User avatar
raymond
G-Lieutenant General
G-Lieutenant General
Posts: 7203
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:53 pm
Location: God's country, Clarksville Mo.

Re: Why is the BATFE stuck in the last century?

Post by raymond » Thu Dec 07, 2017 7:25 pm

Chuck Lutz wrote:
Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:24 pm
While I agree that keeping it "G503 RELATED" is something I fully support and the title of this Forum even states that, some people can't resist the urge to start arguments by posting about things like the content and title of the original post, you sure as hell will get an opinion on that if you do.

So...keep this stuff on the FAKE NJ Klub Forum where you hafta join to engage and keep the stink that inevitably arises from these pissing-matches THERE.
Colt M16A1s are inherently related to G838s which are one of the vehicles in this forum. Mine still wears the bolt holes from the M16 rifle holders.

Raymond
Modern journalism is all about deciding which facts the public shouldn’t know because they might reflect badly on Democrats

User avatar
Bill H.
G-Lieutenant General
G-Lieutenant General
Posts: 4750
Joined: Sun May 31, 1998 9:00 pm
Location: Yonna Valley, Oregon
Contact:

Re: Why is the BATFE stuck in the last century?

Post by Bill H. » Thu Dec 07, 2017 7:49 pm

Typical! When presented with real and true facts the chief BSer and proponent of curtailing rights calls fowl! Whatever!
Bill H.

Welfare, a modern day career choice.

1962 AMC M422A1
1965 Stevens M416B1

2 Timothy 3:1-5

Radtech
G-Major General
G-Major General
Posts: 2802
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2003 8:55 pm

Re: Why is the BATFE stuck in the last century?

Post by Radtech » Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:34 pm

The fact that my M38 has a government issued rifle holder, which would have carried a US issue rifle or carbine,attached and these firearms are weapons means any thing on the topic of my right to carry real M1 Garand in it or any government organization that wants to take away my 2nd Amendment Right to carry an M1 Garand in my M38 is fair game.Firearms are weapons which places them in this forum. Fortunately in the state of Texas one can still carry a rifle or carbine openly in a vehicle.

Chuck Lutz
Gee Addict
Posts: 23502
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 8:00 am
Location: Novato, CA

Re: Why is the BATFE stuck in the last century?

Post by Chuck Lutz » Fri Dec 08, 2017 12:03 pm

Funny story...

Ronnie Van Zant was a typical good ol' Southern boy who owned a pistol and a Winchester. He was a marksman who used them frequently to kill small game and protect his family from snakes and other intruders in his house at 4am, He once wrote a song about how the cheap $20 "Saturday Night Specials" were good for nothing but killing a man. Which is true and I doubt many here have them except for curiosity sake, no one would consider a cheap piece of crap like that good enough to protect their family or themselves from snakes or two-legged intruders at 4am or good for "hunting" either.

Your friends over at NRA HQ got so incensed that his aversion to cheap handguns that weren't made for nothing, but put a man in a hole would be misconstrued as some kind of "gun control" that they banned him for life from NRA membership.

Actually on face value he was doing the gun companies that own the NRA lock-stock-and-barrel a big favor....the cheapos were usually imports from companies those NRA guys did not own so in a way, Van Zant was voicing an opinion that if you wanted a good firearm, then the $20 "Saturday Night Special" was not the way to go...leaving the option for purchase of weapons made by the NRA BoD.

In essense, that song should be the walk on music for Wayne La Pierre when he takes the stage to promote the mfgers running the NRA as "good companies" to buy from.
Chuck Lutz

GPW 17963 4/24/42 Chester, PA. USA 20113473 (USA est./Tom W.)
GPW 108552 4/17/43 Louisville, KY. USA 20371278 (DOD est./Tom W.)
Bantam T3 4582 10/29/42 USA 0173499 (est.)

User avatar
lt.luke
G-General
G-General
Posts: 8809
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 8:56 am
Location: O K lahoma
Contact:

Re: Why is the BATFE stuck in the last century?

Post by lt.luke » Fri Dec 08, 2017 1:04 pm

It seems pretty comical that Chuck hangs out here on this forum, him being so anti and from Kalifornia etc. When I find something that bothers me as much as guns bother ol' Chuck, I shy away from it. I keep scrollin'!
Luke Sparks
MAJ, FA

GPW Script 12078 viewtopic.php?f=95&t=102532
2 WWII 1/4T
Dog Pack

Post Reply

Return to “Weapons”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests