Posted on 05/18/2006 6:22:58 AM PDT by freepatriot32
Traders Sports, one of the biggest gun dealers in the state, hopes a hearing in U.S. District Court next week will keep them in business.
Traders has been under scrutiny for several years by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), which is trying to shut down the gun dealer. The ATF decided to revoke Traders gun permit on June 1. After an audit in 2003, the ATF claims that Traders can’t account for 1,767 weapons, and that guns sold at Traders turn up in crimes at an alarming rate.
ATF spokeswoman Marti McKee said she couldn’t comment on the hearing, which is coming up next Thursday, May 25 in San Francisco before Judge Vaughn Walker.
Traders’ owner Tony Cucchiara also declined to comment on the hearing, deferring questions to his lawyer, Malcolm Segal.
The gun shop claims the ATF’s figures don’t add up because of human error, filling out paperwork wrong. They also say the ATF is unfairly targeting the store and going beyond reasonable annual inspections.
“The law allows one inspection a year — that’s a law passed by Congress — and the ATF inspected twice in one year,” said Segal.
Segal said the ATF decided to close Traders after their own hearing in which they used records going back 30 years.
“The errors they claim are really human errors,” Segal said. “Any time there are thousands of transactions with serial numbers in dozens of digits, there is always bound to be human error.”
The ATF initially claimed in its audit that Traders couldn’t account for 7,477 weapons, but the number in the final account was reduced to 1,767. Customers going to Traders this week tended to be on the gun shop’s side.
“I don’t like what they’re doing because it’s a good store,” said Sonny Verde, who comes from Marin County to shop at Traders. “They should go after the criminals not the gun stores.”
Last week the U.S. Department of Justice filed papers saying that guns sold by Traders have been recovered in a crime at a rate of nearly one per day.
About one in every eight guns sold by Traders between 2003 and 2005 has wound up in a crime, the second highest number of guns traced to crimes of any dealer in the nation, according to the Department of Justice.
In 1994, Muckraker magazine featured a story on Traders, listing violations found by the ATF going back to 1970, including sales to people who couldn’t legally buy guns and “straw sales,” which is a purchase by a legal buyer who turns the gun over to someone who can’t legally buy a gun.
A firearm in the hands of a well trained 8 year old is no more dangerous than a drafting compass. The absurdity is liberals trying to child-proof the world instead of world-proofing their children.
"Well regulated"
http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndmea.html
This leaves us with "to adjust to some standard..." or "to put in good order." Let's let Alexander Hamilton explain what is meant by well regulated in Federalist Paper No. 29:
The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, nor a week nor even a month, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry and of the other classes of the citizens to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people and a serious public inconvenience and loss.
--- See The Federalist Papers, No. 29.
"To put in good order" is the correct interpretation of well regulated, signifying a well disciplined, trained, and functioning militia.
When people defend themselves from crime I applaud when they shoot innocent people not so much. In any case a real criminal would likely have murdered the old lady before she could even get to her gun.
Training is required for Concealed Carry permits and though I am sure that would be an onerous "infringement" to you I fully support the requirement.
Those enemies of gun rights will never be defeated as long as people like you believe people like me are the enemy.
They were not allowed to bring them into classrooms which is what I spoke of.
God willing, it will never come to that.
Gun bans take away access to a tool. As do restrictive carry laws. It doesn't do anything to stop criminal behavior by those so disposed and in fact makes it easier for criminals to victimize the general public.
But, by your own words... if it saves one little girl playing with dolls from a gangbangers stray bullet... then all the preventable rapes, murders, assaults, and thefts from victim disarmament are worth it.
For any interested in accuracy rather than your distortion I have stated that not EVERY person should be allowed to possess EVERY type of weapon in EVERY locale. It is not guns which are scarey but people who are scarey when they have a gun. People like you are apparently scared of EVERYone.
Since January 1, 2003 until this moment, Wednesday, May 24, 2006 4:13:33 PM GUNS have already been used in SELF DEFENSE 8238801 times. Think about it...
Nope. In fact, Joe posts all kinds of stories about civilians taking up arms to fight off their attackers. Most of them older folks.
People like you ARE the enemy. You do not believe a Right can be absolute, and nor do you believe that the lack of such a Right invites more abuse than the abundance of it ever could. Until you get your head right about those issues, you are playing right into the VPC's hands. Your sentiments on this thread alone could have been voiced by Ted Kennedy himself.
It is not I who distort what others write trying to secure Brownie points from the Claque.
I didn't ask you for the argument of the former Attorney General but for any source of discussion during the Constitutional Convention or the ratifiction or amendment debates wrt firearms.
Reading is a breeze as long as you confine yourself to the words actually written rather than those you THINK are there or the INTERPRETATION you place on them. Try it.
Your words are there for all to see. I need lie about nothing.
There is nothing illogical about recognizing the vast increase in firepower and killing ability of modern weapons. Not a week goes by without a story of an innocent killed inadvertently by bullets passing through walls or a ceiling. But reality has no meaning to fanatics.
I insinuate nothing. But boldly state that "shall not infringe" obviously can be infringed not merely for those who have lost rights but also for public safety. There is no right to carry a firearm into a public school, sports venue or even a bar.
As I said there is dispute as to whether the qualification of the First amendment was intended to apply to the others. BTAIM the Law of the Land only applies to those laws enacted under the Constitution by the federal government.
I rest my case.
Apparently you are not even aware of what you say if you do not recall calling me a "pervert". I will admit I have never been called that on FR though just about every other epitath has been hurled at me. At least you are unique.
The Constitution addresses the Militia "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress." Any time there was a likely call-up the militia drilled otherwise it would have been useless as a military force.
Once again you misstate and distort what I wrote. I said that the BoR did not apply to the States and that John Marshall's Court was the source for that belief. Since I agreed with him rather than such a renowned legal scholar as you I get lied about, called names, compared to Stalin and labelled a "pervert". Thanks for showing your true colors to any who didn't know what they were.
There we have it in a nutshell, folks.
Eight year olds are not mature and finding one well trained in firearms is a bit unusual. Mozart wrote symphonies by that age but you shouldn't expect to find many others.
Presumably you believe that to be news or an argument against something I wrote.
Either dispute what is clearly written or it will be universally understood that you do not try because you cannot.
In other words you are simply wrong.
American Rifleman posts stories every month so what?
You have already admitted the right can be removed and therefore is not absolute.
And I care not what name you call me for stating my views which are in no way similiar to Teddy's. But your love of LYING blinds you to such things.
Have you even bothered to read the definitions at the links?
Your arrogance of ignorance is amazing.
That is consistent with Hamilton (and Washington's) disdain for the militia as a military force against professional armies. They were plagued by their inconsistency and unreliability during the Revolution.
The only practical value of one was as a means of defending against Indian attack.
LoL. You just cannot resist distorting and wildly exaggerating my words can you. It has become an obsession.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.