Don Beyer Goes Full Turnip on Guns

Don Beyer is my Congressman – elected to replace the violent jackass we had representing Virginia’s 8th District until January 2015.

convenience storeAnd when I say, “my Congressman,” I use that term very loosely, because much like his predecessor, Beyer has surpassed full retard when it comes to guns, sped right past full potato, and has gone full turnip in the Washington Post. That hardly represents my views.

You see, Beyer wants to call our so-called “bluff.” He wants to give more power to the ATF to infringe on the rights of law-abiding gun owners, and he thinks he will accomplish this by somehow challenging legislators who block further attempts to infringe on our rights to put their money where their mouths are, and “enforce current gun laws” by giving the ATF more authority over us.

Yeah. The same ATF that “walked” thousands of illegally-purchased firearms from the United States across the border to Mexico and into the hands of violent drug cartels. That ATF.

The truth is that Congress routinely blocks the power of the federal agency responsible for overseeing and investigating firearms sales: the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). The ATF is unable to carry out its mission because of the multiple obstacles placed in its path. For example, a 2004 budget amendment blocked the agency from providing data on the tracing of guns used in crimes for any state license revocation action or civil lawsuit. Gun-trace data are critically important for sourcing illegally trafficked firearms and identifying corrupt gun dealers. Another amendment that year banned any requirement that gun dealers keep a physical inventory of their wares. In 2012, Congress said that the ATF couldn’t deny applications to import any shotgun simply because it lacked a sporting purpose. The list goes on.

Actually, the Tiahrt Amendment limits the release of trace data to law enforcement agencies and prosecutors in connection with a criminal investigation. The link Beyer himself provided says exactly that, but I’m betting this jackass hopes no one will read it.

For FY2003-FY2009, a rider on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) appropriations has prohibited that agency from disclosing firearm trace data (based on firearm transfer records maintained in part by licensed gun dealers) and multiple handgun sales reports data for any purpose other than supporting a criminal investigation or agency licensing proceeding. (emphasis mine)

And by the way, Beyer is a lying prick, because the release of trace data can actually harm the ATF’s mission, because it could jeopardize ongoing investigations. See ATF vs. City of Chicago.

According to ATF, it is agency policy to withhold certain information in both the Trace and Multiple Sales Databases for a certain number of years in order to protect against the possibility of interference with an open or prospective investigation. In addition, ATF withholds indefinitely the individual names and addresses of all firearm purchasers, manufacturers, dealers and importers in both databases for privacy reasons. ATF claims that FOIA Exemptions 6, 7(A) and 7(C) allow for the withholding of this information for privacy and law enforcement purposes.

Preventing the disclosure for trace data, so every assorted anti-gun shitbag can go harass legitimate dealers, and limiting it to law enforcement functions only does exactly what it’s supposed to do: prevents abuses while still allowing the information to be used for law enforcement purposes.

Additionally, the idiotic “Gun Dealer Accountability Act” Beyer refers to that would have allegedly required gun dealers to keep an annual inventory of their wares was not only dangerous, but also superfluous. The Bill would, among other things, “authorize temporarily greater scrutiny of Federal firearms licensees who have transferred a firearm unlawfully or had 10 or more crime guns traced back to them in the preceding 2 years.”

Any smart business owner already keeps an inventory of his wares, and probably more than once per year. An ATF spokesman told the New York Times in 2008 that “in his experience many gun dealers did take inventory annually, or even more frequently, although not required to do that by federal law.” So why would this regulation be needed, again?

Oh, yeah! So the federal government could harass business owners, who by law are protected – much like any other industry – from frivolous lawsuits.

No thanks, jackass.

But Beyer will not give up. He promises to introduce legislation to give the ATF MOAR POWER AND MOAR AUTHORITY!

Tuesday I will introduce the ATF Enforcement Act, which would restore the agency’s ability to enforce existing gun laws by removing legislative limitations on its operations, enforcement and day-to-day functions. My bill would also allow the person picked to be ATF director to bypass the Senate confirmation process by moving the appointment power to the attorney general. For years, congressional allies of the gun lobby have blocked nominees by both Democratic and Republican presidents. Only one nominee has been confirmed since the position was made subject to Senate approval in 2006.

Translation: Beyer wants to give the Executive branch the authority to bypass the American people and appoint gun-grabbing assholes who have no problem infringing on rights of the American people – the same people who put Beyer in power – the same people to whom he should be accountable – the same people over whom he wants authority.

What Beyer is talking about has nothing to do with “gun safety,” which is the new buzzword to replace “gun control” to make it more palatable to those who are too ignorant or lazy to see what’s really going on. This isn’t safety. The ATF already has the ability to use trace data in criminal investigations, but what Beyer wants is to bypass We the People and the nomination process, thereby giving the Executive Branch more power to infringe on our rights, while weakening the system of checks and balances meant to limit executive power.

Nope. Sorry. That’s a no-go.


24 responses

  1. he appears to be ignorant (or perhaps just lying) of the difference between ‘criminal’ and ‘civil’. though to be honest, many gun grabbers and other hoplophobes parrot the same schtick, even when they have a law degree.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. JAF: Just Another Fascist.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. How DARE Congress stand in the way of a federal agency. Turnip is right.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Every member of the gun control industry, works towards a policy of complete civilian disarmament…regardless of the strategies or rhetoric they employ. They have but one goal, and as evidenced by the distinct lack of actual gun safety advocacy…….their smokescreen is thin and laughable.


  5. I saw this elsewhere, and my first thought was “I’ll bet Nicki knows who this asshole is.”

    My second thought was “This asshole failed Civics in high school, didn’t he?” (If teaching Civics in high school is even a thing anymore.)


    1. Yeah, unfortunately said asshole is what the commies in Arlington elected to represent them after the abhorrent Jim Moran finally retired. :-\


  6. “The truth is that Congress routinely blocks the power of the federal agency”

    That about sums it up. The Fascist-Democrat Party does not believe in the Constitution or the separation of powers. Federal agencies should be able to do what they want and Congress should have the power that the Queen of England has: none.


  7. Isn’t the NRA all about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals? Hell, they favor the currently existing background check regime. (No, they didn’t settle for it in a political compromise…don’t read that in to what they say when they brag about it. They FAVOR it.) This gives them NO rationale for opposing UBCs. If it’s proper to require background checks on a dealer to individual transaction, how can it be improper to require checks for person to person transfers? Won’t that help keep guns out of the hands of criminals?

    (The answer, of course, is that the premise is false; it is NOT proper to require dealer-to-individual sales to have a background check.)

    If you grant that government should have the power to “keep guns out of the hands of criminals” then you cannot oppose this sort of shit. Not and be consistent. This is why I won’t join the NRA, in spite of all the “good” it has done (and I will admit it has done us some favors).

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I’m a SAF member precisely because I can’t understand the inconsistency and illogic of some NRA positions. I would like them to challenge the UBC lobby, and ask point blank – how would the State know if I conducted a UBC in selling a firearm to my friend or neighbor?

      When the obvious yet muddled response would be “we wouldn’t”, the NRA would then circle the square by asking what the point of UBCs were then?

      But unless I’ve missed it…..they’ve fallen flat on this issue.


      1. Might want to read this.


        1. I’d seen that before…a long diatribe against Gottlieb’s business practices and managerial style. But results is results.


        2. I think the dialogue below it is more relevant.


        3. And don’t get me wrong – I actually like Alan quite a bit.


        4. Yeah, the comments seem very educational….but I’m currently supposed to be looking like I’m working, so I’ll have to read through those later. Thx!


      2. Didn’t the 2AF (i.e., Gottlieb) also support UBCs? As in Manchin-Toomey?

        Gottlieb has done WONDERFUL things in court–more so than the NRA, but on the legislative side, he stinks worse than the NRA.


        1. They did. That’s why a lot of us aren’t real thrilled with SAF.


        2. Oh…and I forgot to correct it. It wasn’t *Gottlieb* who did that wonderful stuff in the courts, it was Gura. Still to 2AF’s credit.

          If 2AF were to drop all lobbying and just sue in court…I might be able to support them.


    2. The NRA is America’s oldest and largest citizen disamanemt organization. They have written or at least signed off on every infringement of our arms rights.


  8. StevenCO, I’m a life member of NRA, but “we” do some stupid shite from time to time.
    I’m also a member of Gun Owners of America. Check them out. When NRA pusies out, GOA is still in the fight.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. How effective is GOA? I know they take a lot of credit for things…but how effective are they, truly?

      I’d also like to see them laying off other issues not related to firearms.


  9. Steve, not sure what you mean by “laying off other issues not related to firearms.”

    GAO is very effective at getting members to clog congress’s e-mail. Their postcard blasts seem like they really work. The GAO Foundation has helped gun owners in court cases.
    And they seem to file a lot of briefs with the SCOTUS.



    1. laying off other issues not related to firearms

      When my e-mail was clogged with Obamacare and immigration e-mails from GOA, that’s when I figured they needed to narrow their focus a bit.


  10. There is only one thing that stops our government from going full court press tyranny on us, and that is the private ownership of guns. And that is what infuriates them.


%d bloggers like this: