What's new
By:
Filters

Brandon Herrera for ATF Director

zlathim said:
I'm not familiar with Brandon Herrera, but I did watch some of the video posted above. After his intro, he did sound fairly intelligent. I probably wouldn't choose him, but that's just my opinion.

Two names come to mind to me with regard to director of the ATF, both of who are attorneys specializing in gun laws.

Willian Kirk



Colin Noir:

Click to expand...


William Kirk would be another GREAT choice; I forgot about him. I'd take him over Brandon.
 
Randy died last year.

Eta May 22

Very funny, Google. "Where is Lon Hariuchi now?"
Result:
1000003792.jpg
 
BillyBronco said:
If he gets the spot. Everybody can keep the “Let’s go Brandon” stickers on their truck. :smokin:
Click to expand...
Was in Fairbanks last week. Saw several FJB, Trump 2024, a trash truck with Trump sticker in the side window riding shotgun.
 
SLOWPOKE693 said:
I don't think that info will ever come out due to how guilty it makes the government look in both of those incidents. They aren't about to throw themselves under a bus just because.....
Click to expand...
Worse than the Kennedy files?
 
Mikel said:
How about abolishing the ATF?
Click to expand...
Philosophically, yes, but we need to unwind an awful lot of administrative rulemaking and shrink its role into irrelevance first. The recent Chevron deference ruling left all old untested rulings intact, so absent action, prior agency overreach is assumed legit, and would be carried-on by whatever chunk of DOJ absorbs the responsibility. Undoing policy with policy is a lot easier than through legislation, and faster than through litigation.
 
ScottRS said:
Philosophically, yes, but we need to unwind an awful lot of administrative rulemaking and shrink its role into irrelevance first. The recent Chevron deference ruling left all old untested rulings intact, so absent action, prior agency overreach is assumed legit, and would be carried-on by whatever chunk of DOJ absorbs the responsibility. Undoing policy with policy is a lot easier than through legislation, and faster than through litigation.
Click to expand...
You'd be right if they weren't already talking about throwing out all existing regulation that wasn't directly passed into law by Congress on day 1. If that happens there's zero need for what you're describing and it wouldn't be able to be undone in the future by EO, it would require Congress to reintroduce everything as law.
 
SLOWPOKE693 said:
I don't think that info will ever come out due to how guilty it makes the government look in both of those incidents. They aren't about to throw themselves under a bus just because.....
Click to expand...


It doesn't make them look guilty. It shows in explicit detail HOW guilty they are as the instigator and perpetrator of the crimes brought up on those people by janet reno and her henchmen.
 
DWT said:
It doesn't make them look guilty. It shows in explicit detail HOW guilty they are as the instigator and perpetrator of the crimes brought up on those people by janet reno and her henchmen.
Click to expand...

That's exactly why it will never be released. They are all guilty as fuck and lots of heads would roll.
 
Motorcharge said:
Basically Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo said that the agencies can no longer interpret the laws, they can only enforce as written and anything beyond that would be required to be decided by a court ruling or a change in written law.

Take vertical fore grips on guns. The law defines them as being 90*, the ATF has interpreted that as being anything close to vertical. So if I introduced an 89* grip to the market and stuck it on an AR pistol the ATF could, and likely would have come after me for it. Now they can't because the law says 90*, they'd have to take me to court and a judge would have to decide how to interpret the law or Congress would have to rewrite the law.

Same thing with 80% lowers. The ATF can no longer keep moving the goalpost on what constitutes 80% or what percentage constitutes an actual firearm.
Click to expand...
Vertical grip on an AR pistol is 100% legal as long as the gun is over 26 inches. That would require a minimum of a 12.5 inch barrel.
 
I think before we go dissolving the ATF, I think a few thousand of existing agents should be pulled from whatever bullshit they’re doing and sent to work the streets of Chicago for a month or however, reasonably long it takes to make a significant impact on gun crime / violence there, then they can go to Baltimore and do the same

Then DC, Then Camden and so on. What’s the point of an enforcement agency, that’s a little too selective on the enforcement?
 
Last edited:
Thatg9659 said:
I think before we go dissolving the ATF, I think a few thousand of existing agents should be pulled from whatever bullshit they’re doing and sent to work the streets of Chicago for a month or however, reasonably long it takes to make a significant impact on gun crime / violence there, then they can go to Baltimore and do the same

Then DC, Then Camden and so on. What’s the point of an enforcement agency, that’s a little to selective on the enforcement?
Click to expand...
Problem is that in the inner city people tend to have smaller dogs that are nimble and hard to shoot. How are you supposed to incite a reaction that justifies burning children alive with Neo the Chihuahua running around all nimbly bimbly?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Back Refresh