« Alec Baldwin sued | Main | WashPo on Justice Thomas »
Another call for abolishing BATFE
Right here These proposals go back to the 1980s, at least. They face a clear issue: unless you're willing to have the law unenforced (I find that an attractive idea, but few in Congress would), its enforcement has to be assigned somewhere. Anywhere else (FBI, Marshals, Secret Service) would result in enforcement by an agency with more prestige and power.
A related issue: what do you do with the existing agents? Most of those are good folk, it's the agency management that is corrupt and incompetent and (as usual with management in that state) is not about to promote the good ones. Presumably, relocate them to the new agency. But how do you move only the good ones and keep out the bad? Moving the bad ones over just gives them more power and prestige.
11 Comments | Leave a comment
When this was first proposed in the 80's the comment was "When you pour dirty water into clean water, you just get more dirty water".
" ... what do you do with the existing agents? Most of those are good folk, it's the agency management that is corrupt and incompetent ..."
I take issue with the assertion that anyone working for the ATF is "good folk"
Just armed revenuers. Another branch of the government tax machine used to hide government intrusion into everyday life. Get the "divera-tee" hires at the IRS off their butts and become "useful".
As for "firearms",the ATF is just a "cutout" for the creation of "regulations" against the White population while there are rarely any significant prosecution or punishment against the portion of the population responsible for violent crime using firearms. The ATF is thus just a welfare program for "racists" and useless people. Just give them EBT cards and save expense to the tax payers.
One federal law enforcement agency - the US Marshals Service.
Responsible for all armed federal law enforcement response. Limited to a size specified by congress - say 110% of what it is now. If the Treasury department, say, wants to serve a warrant and arrest someone, they get armed assistance if the Marshals have bandwidth: Otherwise they go naked, or they don't go.
As far as the 'good' agents - the ones that have been silent through this all? The ones that enabled the bad agents?
Disbarred from ever serving in a federal job - at any level, for any branch of government. No praetorian guard for Pelosi, no USSC police... They can apply for local law enforcement positions as long as they are not federally funded.
Flight-ER-Doc: "If the Treasury department, say, wants to serve a warrant and arrest someone, they get armed assistance if the Marshals have bandwidth"
How about the Treasury department has to go to the local Sheriff and convince that office that this warrant is legally sufficient, Treasury pays a bounty to the office, and then the Sheriff does it?
IANAL, but what law says that the government agency or entity that asserts probable cause to arrest has to provide the agents to make that arrest? Or is that the anti-commandeering doctrine . . .
"They can apply for local law enforcement positions as long as they are not federally funded." I'm curious if there is a single law enforcement agency that does not receive Federal funds. Hell, with Rescue Act and Paycheck Protection, even rental cops have become Federally funded.
Flight-ER-Doc: Rather than sheriffs, Constables.
Then we can discuss the overuse of dynamic entry . . .
OK with me
One of the senior IRS attorneys came over to our law firm after he retired from gov't service. This is back when ATF was part of the IRS. He said the general consensus among the rest of his IRS colleagues was that if you couldn't get a job anywhere else in the government, there was a place for you in the ATF.
Maybe things have improved since ATF moved to Justice from Treasury. But I wouldn't bet a whole bunch on it.
Maybe just fire everyone at ATF, the good with the bad, as an object lesson to good law enforcers everywhere that the good should not allow the bad to ruin the lives of the good.
Remember, it was the Marshall's service that started the shooting at Ruby Ridge. Sneaking up on the place, shot the dog, then shot the kid. I don't see them as any better than the other Federales.
I have to disagree with your assertion that Congress would be concerned with laws being unenforced. Congress loves that situation, just look at marijuana law, or illegal aliens/border enforcement. If Congress just ignores the law, then they won't have to take a vote and have a record on their position in the future; thus allowing members to claim their position is whatever the voting public wants it to be in the future.