-
Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.
We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.
Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103
BLACKPOWDER - BUYING & SELLING PER ATF
- Thread starter roundball
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
An excellent point...and you don't even have to sign for it...they just leave it!Don Powell said:
Also makes me wonder about all the fuss over "storage magazines" when a whole case or two can be shipped to me cross-country, handled/loaded/unloaded no telling how many times...left in hot trucks, left in the sun on a front porch...all in a simple cardbord box.
Guest
rubincam said:
Get over it! :shake:
DOUBLEDEUCE 1
69 Cal.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2008
- Messages
- 4,165
- Reaction score
- 877
Thanks for putting forth your effort for the rest. And thanks Paul for your input.
The best advice might be to wait and see if and when ATF replys.
We cannot forget that the police deal in law enforcement issues on a daily basis. Someone doubted the cops know the law, or laws. Take into account the shear numbers of laws, State and Federal. And then there are the various codes, Health and Safety, Business and Professions, Welfare and Institution, traffic and municipal codes. Henry Ford supposedly once said if he didn't have the answer immediately, give him an hour and he would have one.
The laws are written in black and white. Somewhere in between, there is a gray area which might be called "reasonableness". That is where the police work most of the time. Poor attitudes on the part of some people shift things from the gray to the black or white part, often with results you might not find favorable. Asking for help or an explanation regarding something that is unclear is not a sign of guilt or weakness or even criminal intent.
There has to be a starting point for an understanding. :thumbsup:
The best advice might be to wait and see if and when ATF replys.
We cannot forget that the police deal in law enforcement issues on a daily basis. Someone doubted the cops know the law, or laws. Take into account the shear numbers of laws, State and Federal. And then there are the various codes, Health and Safety, Business and Professions, Welfare and Institution, traffic and municipal codes. Henry Ford supposedly once said if he didn't have the answer immediately, give him an hour and he would have one.
The laws are written in black and white. Somewhere in between, there is a gray area which might be called "reasonableness". That is where the police work most of the time. Poor attitudes on the part of some people shift things from the gray to the black or white part, often with results you might not find favorable. Asking for help or an explanation regarding something that is unclear is not a sign of guilt or weakness or even criminal intent.
There has to be a starting point for an understanding. :thumbsup:
paulvallandigham
Passed On
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2006
- Messages
- 17,537
- Reaction score
- 89
My first answer is: ask roundball.
But yes, I would rather defend the guy who has the letter from ATF.
The problem is that we are all assuming that ATF will send a letter agreeing with us! :shake: :nono: AND, we assume they will actually respond at all.
Apparently, everyone including roundball thinks no lawyer has ever thought of asking for an opinion letter from the Government agency, or the Attorney General.
That is another false assumption.
I stopped sending such requests years ago, when older members of the bars began laughing maniacally when they heard I had actually written a letter to any government agency expecting to get a response. Well--- actually---- I quit about a year later when I still had not received a response, or even an acknowledgement that they had received my request! I was young, actually believed that some people working in the government were okay, etc. They are, but they aren't in charge!
There is some truth to the often repeated line that the last thing you want to hear when answering a knock on the door is:
" Hi! I am from the Government and I am here to help you!"
Its nothing personal: I have officers who come to me for advice on the law when their own department lawyer( salaried) will not give them an answer! :cursing: :shocked2:
I also have had prosecutors consult me on both guns( technical) and on the law of self defense. The last time was by a Senior prosecutor who had tried more Murder cases than any other lawyer in the county, both as a prosecutor, and briefly, as a defense attorney, before returning to the prosecutor's office.
My friend's experience with ATF( now ATFE) concerning rifled barrels for shotguns is typical of the stories I have heard throughout my years of practice from other lawyers, and yes, even from prosecutors. There is not a lot of love lost between State Prosecutors and Federal Prosecutors and police agencies.
The reason I would prefer having such a letter in my client's hands is to: One. Embarrass the Prosecutor in Court; and Two. To convince a jury that my guy had NO Criminal Intent to violate a statute in doing what he did.
Receiving such a letter saying its okay to do what you are doing is not " Entrapment " under the strict concept of that line of case law, but no prosecutor wants to try a case in front of a jury while a Defense attorney calls the author of the letter to testify as a Defense witness, and also cross examine the heck out of the agent who made the arrest.
In fact, if the Government does here what they have done in the recent past, there will be a written DISCLAIMER in the letter indicating that the receiver may not rely on it as authority to do what he wishes, and that he is still subject to prosecution for any violation of the law. That is government gobbledeegook for " you act at your own peril".
I am sorry if this answer pops someone's balloon. I have made a practice of FULLY advising my clients of what to expect, based on my professional experiences, including information I may have obtained from other lawyers, and reliable sources. Much of the information I do receive is confidential, and I keep it that way. However, I do try to share what I can with clients, even if its not what they want to hear. I would not be much of a lawyer if I only told the client what they want to hear.
But yes, I would rather defend the guy who has the letter from ATF.
The problem is that we are all assuming that ATF will send a letter agreeing with us! :shake: :nono: AND, we assume they will actually respond at all.
Apparently, everyone including roundball thinks no lawyer has ever thought of asking for an opinion letter from the Government agency, or the Attorney General.
That is another false assumption.
I stopped sending such requests years ago, when older members of the bars began laughing maniacally when they heard I had actually written a letter to any government agency expecting to get a response. Well--- actually---- I quit about a year later when I still had not received a response, or even an acknowledgement that they had received my request! I was young, actually believed that some people working in the government were okay, etc. They are, but they aren't in charge!
There is some truth to the often repeated line that the last thing you want to hear when answering a knock on the door is:
" Hi! I am from the Government and I am here to help you!"
Its nothing personal: I have officers who come to me for advice on the law when their own department lawyer( salaried) will not give them an answer! :cursing: :shocked2:
I also have had prosecutors consult me on both guns( technical) and on the law of self defense. The last time was by a Senior prosecutor who had tried more Murder cases than any other lawyer in the county, both as a prosecutor, and briefly, as a defense attorney, before returning to the prosecutor's office.
My friend's experience with ATF( now ATFE) concerning rifled barrels for shotguns is typical of the stories I have heard throughout my years of practice from other lawyers, and yes, even from prosecutors. There is not a lot of love lost between State Prosecutors and Federal Prosecutors and police agencies.
The reason I would prefer having such a letter in my client's hands is to: One. Embarrass the Prosecutor in Court; and Two. To convince a jury that my guy had NO Criminal Intent to violate a statute in doing what he did.
Receiving such a letter saying its okay to do what you are doing is not " Entrapment " under the strict concept of that line of case law, but no prosecutor wants to try a case in front of a jury while a Defense attorney calls the author of the letter to testify as a Defense witness, and also cross examine the heck out of the agent who made the arrest.
In fact, if the Government does here what they have done in the recent past, there will be a written DISCLAIMER in the letter indicating that the receiver may not rely on it as authority to do what he wishes, and that he is still subject to prosecution for any violation of the law. That is government gobbledeegook for " you act at your own peril".
I am sorry if this answer pops someone's balloon. I have made a practice of FULLY advising my clients of what to expect, based on my professional experiences, including information I may have obtained from other lawyers, and reliable sources. Much of the information I do receive is confidential, and I keep it that way. However, I do try to share what I can with clients, even if its not what they want to hear. I would not be much of a lawyer if I only told the client what they want to hear.
flashpanner
45 Cal.
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2004
- Messages
- 564
- Reaction score
- 0
paulvallandigham said:
So who is actually in charge??? (I know the answer already, judges)
Roundball, don't let them get to you. I've inquired of the ATF several times in the past and have always received a detailed and helpful reply. Not always the reply I was hoping for, but at least I got the info I asked for. As for it being admissible in court, I have no clue. It's better to have their interpretation than only to have our speculation. I'll be looking forward to their reply. Thanks for taking the time to write them.
bajabuc
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2008
- Messages
- 141
- Reaction score
- 42
Administrations change. Decisions made by the last one might not be binding on the next...unless it's been to the courts..and then there's always that sly sucker who doesn't care what the courts say...and he has the full resource of his department to back him...how many million of dollars are you willing to spend to prove him wrong...this is the government you're talking about. you might even get a court judgement...and they might eventually pay up...to your great grand children...assuming you have great grand children.
paulvallandigham
Passed On
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2006
- Messages
- 17,537
- Reaction score
- 89
And you think I haven't heard all the lawyer jokes?
And told them? :blah: :rotf: :thumbsup:
And told them? :blah: :rotf: :thumbsup:
DOUBLEDEUCE 1
69 Cal.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2008
- Messages
- 4,165
- Reaction score
- 877
Paul, you have made several good points that nobody could argue against. If the ATF does respond, maybe their reply could be archived here and used as a point of referrence for some future misunderstanding.
I agree, nobody, but nobody will want to subpeona the author of the reply and question them. The reply might not even have a name attached to it. But I think just having the letterhead of the ATF on the reply would be golden, assuming the answer is favorable. It would certainly take the starch out of any overzealous prosecution. It might be a good place to start, and an Ace up the sleeve. :hmm: :thumbsup:
I agree, nobody, but nobody will want to subpeona the author of the reply and question them. The reply might not even have a name attached to it. But I think just having the letterhead of the ATF on the reply would be golden, assuming the answer is favorable. It would certainly take the starch out of any overzealous prosecution. It might be a good place to start, and an Ace up the sleeve. :hmm: :thumbsup:
SimonKenton
50 Cal.
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2004
- Messages
- 1,250
- Reaction score
- 1
I have to drive NINETY MINUTES EACH WAY to Goshen, CT to get Swiss Powder. I can also drive the same minutes to Wallingford and get GOEX. I can NOT get it in Westchester, Rockland, Orange, Dutchess or Putnam Counties and no longer in Nassau County.
I called an explosives dealer in the Bronx 30 years ago. He'd LIKE to sell GOEX, Swiss and whatever else we want. He gets less hassle storing TNT, Dynamite and whatever the Hell else they use in construction around here. You should SEE what they wanted him to do to store 50# of black powder. :cursing: :cursing: :cursing: :barf:
-Ray
I called an explosives dealer in the Bronx 30 years ago. He'd LIKE to sell GOEX, Swiss and whatever else we want. He gets less hassle storing TNT, Dynamite and whatever the Hell else they use in construction around here. You should SEE what they wanted him to do to store 50# of black powder. :cursing: :cursing: :cursing: :barf:
-Ray
SimonKenton
50 Cal.
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2004
- Messages
- 1,250
- Reaction score
- 1
If you're interested, the authorities suggested he excavate a bunker EIGHTY FEET underground and install an elevator to store 50 lbs. of black powder but his run of the mill steel bldg. was more than enough for HIGH explosives!!! :cursing:
SimonKenton
50 Cal.
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2004
- Messages
- 1,250
- Reaction score
- 1
HIS counter suggestion involved a length of rope and urination. :rotf:
-Ray
-Ray
wvbuckbuster
45 Cal.
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2007
- Messages
- 981
- Reaction score
- 55
Paul you got my vote! :thumbsup:
Walks Alone
45 Cal.
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2005
- Messages
- 923
- Reaction score
- 8
As always, thanks for your efforts for the majority on the forum roundball.
Their answer either way won't change anything with the group I run with though.
Their answer either way won't change anything with the group I run with though.
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 8,017
- Reaction score
- 1,023
RB-
While i appreciate your efforts, and i agree that if someone were to 'get jammed up,' a paper trail -or in this case an e- mail trail- would be a boatload better than claims of a telephone conversation, i don't think we should lose sight of the Regan motto: trust but verify.
My arguement is that there's no way to hold the ATFE (or any ((non-judicial)) governmental agency) to thier promise. Do i think that there's a 'dirty tricks department' at ATFE? there might be- we've seen it before. Do i think that the dirty tricks section would use the ATFE website to further their operations? probably not- it's too public and that kind of covert trickery is usually used to gain leverage on a specific individual.
So, back to the Regan quote: trust but verify, and since we cannot verify (or in this case, we cannot hold them to their word) we ought not to trust them.
While the website and any written response will provide a good insight into how they're going to act, and this is good information to have, it's not an enforceable guarantee of behavior and we shouldn't rely on it as such.
Again, i'm grateful for your work, and i think it has value; but as an indicator of probable future behavior, not a guarantor of outcome.
While i appreciate your efforts, and i agree that if someone were to 'get jammed up,' a paper trail -or in this case an e- mail trail- would be a boatload better than claims of a telephone conversation, i don't think we should lose sight of the Regan motto: trust but verify.
My arguement is that there's no way to hold the ATFE (or any ((non-judicial)) governmental agency) to thier promise. Do i think that there's a 'dirty tricks department' at ATFE? there might be- we've seen it before. Do i think that the dirty tricks section would use the ATFE website to further their operations? probably not- it's too public and that kind of covert trickery is usually used to gain leverage on a specific individual.
So, back to the Regan quote: trust but verify, and since we cannot verify (or in this case, we cannot hold them to their word) we ought not to trust them.
While the website and any written response will provide a good insight into how they're going to act, and this is good information to have, it's not an enforceable guarantee of behavior and we shouldn't rely on it as such.
Again, i'm grateful for your work, and i think it has value; but as an indicator of probable future behavior, not a guarantor of outcome.
