Posted on 01/07/2016 7:41:36 PM PST by Texas Eagle
Is the Federal government aiding and abetting terrorists within the United States? You be the judge. In April ATF made some peculiar changes in their form required for over the counter purchase of firearms, Form 4473, Firearms Transaction Record Part I- Over-the Counter. ATF requires firearm dealers to use this form for over the counter gun purchases and cites the reason for these changes to be an order by the Attorney General’s Office. These changes are stunning as they actually make it easier for illegal aliens to purchase firearms than for US Citizens. Transient aliens, which will include illegal aliens, are not required to show any proof of residency and are not required to undergo the same rigorous background checks as citizens. What is the purpose of these changes you may ask? ATF asserts that these changes are necessary to prevent STATES from creating more stringent residency requirements on aliens than those of citizens, but I believe the evidence shows much more than that.
(Excerpt) Read more at krisannehall.com ...
state-limitation
(Open Letter To All Federal Firearms Licensees, DOJ April 30, 2012)
Gun and ammunition dealers and law enforcement agents are not allowed to request proof of residency from ANY temporary aliens in order to ship, transport, possess, or receive “any firearm or ammunitionâ€. But guess what? CITIZEN have to provide this information and MORE.
It is relevant to point out that this falls right in line with the recent Supreme Court ruling in Arizona. The Supreme Court, in this ruling gave greater protections to aliens, and the DOJ and ATF are falling right in line. (For further understanding of the Arizona ruling please read here)
Aliens with nonimmigrant visas are just temporary visitors. They do not intend to obtain citizenship, express no intent to stay in this country for more than 90 days, make no application for visa, have made no profession of loyalty to the laws of this land, and have had no formal background checks. Have you tried to buy a firearm from a dealer or store lately? How many HOURS did it take you? I bought a .22 rifle built for young shooters and it took me an hour and 45 minutes just for the background checks (yes that is plural, checkS). With these new changes, the AG and ATF have made it easier for transient immigrants to buy guns and ammunition than for US Citizens. The ATF, in enforcing the AG’s standards, claims that the states have no right to do anything about this; the states cannot make more stringent requirements upon aliens than on citizens. However, there seems to be no problem making more stringent requirements upon citizens than on transient aliens.
90-20days
(Open Letter To All Federal Firearms Licensees, DOJ April 30, 2012)
The changes made by ATF and DOJ should be even more alarming when we consider the Government Accountability Office report which criticizes our visa offices for “bickering over the degree of association with a terrorist that would make a visa applicant ineligible to enter the United States.†Our government is authorizing visas to people with KNOWN terrorist affiliations and then making it easier for them to buy, ship, and transport firearms and ammunition than for our own citizens!
Another interesting change in form 4473 occurs in section 10. The updated form adds a new section and a separate question regarding ethnicity, to distinguish Hispanic or Latinos from all other races. This is in addition to the new section 10-b that requires the person to identify race, giving 5 choices.
The original form looks like this:
atf-2010
The changed form looks like this:
atf-2010a
What is the justification for this change? How does a separate distinction between Hispanics and non-Hispanics meet the intent of the Gun Control Act as claimed by the AG? What is the purpose of making this distinction? It is interesting to note that there is no box for “Arab or Middle Eastern†and no box for “Other.†The choices are so specific, how would someone answer that question if they were from Iraq or Israel or Pakistan? Does that mean aliens from Arab countries do not have to fill out this form at all?
Have we just uncovered the DOJ’s American version of gun running? Is this how they are arming our enemies within? Why else would they make it so easy for aliens with known terrorist affiliations to remain in this country and then make it so easy for them buy, possess, and ship firearms? We must know that this will only serve to dilute our 2nd Amendment rights, or at least provide gun hating legislators and organizations with the ammunition to try.
The AG has made it a point to tell us what they believe Congress’s intent is with immigrant aliens and the Gun Control Act. It would seem that it is inherent upon Congress to respond and correct them. Will the AG’s understandings ever be challenged? It is unlikely when the corrections are generally issued by the Department of Justice against the Department of Justice; the agency governing itself. If we make Congress aware of these changes, they will have the opportunity to stop the “lawful†arming of terrorists in this nation. Will they do their job, or do we have to wait for another tragedy?
***NOTE~ This is a summary of my 6 page report. To view the entire report, please go here.
New form looks like this:
Interesting addition: "Not Hispanic or Latino".
Bookmark.
From now on I’m going to be an illegal alien. The percs are too good to pass up!
Proof!: DOJ Busy Destroying the 2nd Amend & Arming Terrorists! (Posted in 2012!)
Check out article, and # 1 , # 2 , # 3 , # 6 .
The distinction is valid when the checkbox says "white" for race. The criminal statistics for hispanic and non-hispanic whites where lumped together for a long time. That diluted the contribution that hispanic whites where making to criminal activity. It is larger than non-hispanic whites and swamped by the proportions. The aim is to identify criminal activity from the white hispanics where a large proportion are illegal aliens. The difference was significant and has been retained as part of the incident reporting systems used by law enforcement. Seeing this on the Form 4473 is no surprise. It is consistent with other record keeping categories.
Thanks for posting this.
The more complex purchases e.g. SBR or suppressor require a Form 4, writing a check for $200 to ATF, paying for the goods and WAITING for ATF to process the request. There are only 6 people processing Forms 1,2,4 and some others. An eForms Form 1 was just processed and approved in 4 1/2 months. The manual Form 4 done within a day of the eForm is still not done.
Obama was yammering on about "dangerous" weapons with respect to SBR and suppressors. An SBR is just a rifle with a barrel under 16 inches. If anything, it is LESS dangerous due to lower muzzle velocity. A suppressor protects hearing. That too is less dangerous. Blame Hollywood for their phony spies with silencers doing assassinations for that stigma. A subsonic, suppressed 300 BLK SBR is a fine hog hunting rifle and much less obnoxious to people in the hunting party or nearby.
Another NFA item, the SBS (Short Barreled Shotgun) wears the label "sawed off shotgun". It was the star player in the Miller case where the claim was that the military didn't use "sawed off shotguns". Too bad Miller failed to put up a proper defense because the military does use sawed off shotguns (really SBS tactical shotguns). So much misinformation. CNN sure loves to air lies and leftist agenda.
It is a remarkable thing when illegal aliens have greater liberty than citizens.
How far has civilization come from the days of the Roman Republic where a Citizen of Rome was entitled to a trial and a non-citizen was at the mercy of the Prefect.
Basically, it’s another power grab. Illegals will have many more rights than we do as citizens before its all over. Elections this year truly will define the future of the country or if it will even exist.It appears to me there is a move to erase all borders in the Americas.
http://krisannehall.com/arizona-immigration-rulingdirect-assault-on-state-sovereignty/
“Let’s be clear. The Constitution says the federal government is supposed to establish standards so that foreign nations will not have to deal with 50 different rules. Yes, the states are bound by these standards pursuant to the supremacy clause. However, the power to create standards does not infer the ability to be the sole enforcer. Once the standards are set, then the states are bound to enforce those laws pursuant to those standards. The only time the federal government is allowed to be involved is when the states are not following those standards! This power has now been expanded from the power to create regulations to the power of sole enforcer, and Justice Kennedy has now declared that the sovereign states have no ability to enforce these laws, and therefore have no right to protect their own territories. It’s as if the US government, via the Supreme Court, has practically expelled Arizona from the Union – since, if the Federal government will not enforce the law and Arizona is NOT ALLOWED to enforce the law – then Arizona is bare and unprotected.
One need only read Justice Scalia’s dissent to discover the correct interpretation.
“ The most important point is that, as we have discussed, Arizona is entitled to have “its own immigration policyâ€â€”including a more rigorous enforcement policy—so long as that does not conflict with federal law. Today’s opinion, approving virtually all of the Ninth Circuit’s injunction against enforcement of the four challenged provisions of Arizona’s law, deprives States of what most would consider the defining characteristic of sovereignty: the power to exclude from the sovereign’s territory people who have no right to be there. Neither the Constitution itself nor even any law passed by Congress supports this result. I dissent.â€
As do I, Justice Scalia. As do I.
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.
