Administration Expands ATF’s Power to Seize Property = Your Firearms - Page 3

Administration Expands ATF’s Power to Seize Property = Your Firearms

This is a discussion on Administration Expands ATF’s Power to Seize Property = Your Firearms within the In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly forums, part of the The Back Porch category; THis is nothing new. Local and federal agencies have been using forfieture laws for years. They can seize anything from a gun to a home. ...

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 43 of 43
Like Tree27Likes

Thread: Administration Expands ATF’s Power to Seize Property = Your Firearms

  1. #31
    VIP Member Array Secret Spuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    3,187
    THis is nothing new. Local and federal agencies have been using forfieture laws for years. They can seize anything from a gun to a home.

    My question is.... what does the ATF have to do with narcotics investigation?


  2. #32
    Member Array glocknug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    15
    I guess that since I dont deal drugs, I am okay.

  3. #33
    Member Array glocknug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    15
    "My question is.... what does the ATF have to do with narcotics investigation? "

    Believe it or not... there is a connection between guns and drugs. All of us who say, "if you outlaw guns, only the bad guys will have em". Well... dont we want to stop the bad guys from having them?

  4. #34
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by glocknug View Post
    I guess that since I dont deal drugs, I am okay.
    Exactly what I was talking about earlier. The attitude that only other folks will be denied due process. It will never happen to me.

    Michael

  5. #35
    VIP Member
    Array msgt/ret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    7,722
    Quote Originally Posted by glocknug View Post
    I guess that since I dont deal drugs, I am okay.
    Being both a gun and a coin collector it worries me in that I sometimes have between $1000 to $3000 dollars in cash on me. Who’s to say I could not be accused of dealing in drugs and forced to forfeit the cash I have intended for lawful use.
    When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.
    "Don't forget, incoming fire has the right of way."

  6. #36
    Member Array randian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    201
    Quote Originally Posted by msgt/ret View Post
    Who’s to say I could not be accused of dealing in drugs and forced to forfeit the cash I have intended for lawful use.
    Who's to say? It's already happened. Guy takes cash to buy inventory for his legitimate business. Gets stopped on the road, the cops take his cash even though he had a bank receipt for it. He'd burn up most or all of that on legal fees (which will not be reimbursed if he won) trying to get the cash back.

  7. #37
    Ex Member Array Adrenaline's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    138
    Quote Originally Posted by packinnova View Post
    Both the DOJ rule signed by Holder and the EO from 2011 that gave them the power to make their own rule signed by OBummer are linked to on the Federal Register site in the original article.
    DOJ Rule
    https://www.federalregister.gov/arti...iture-2012r-9p
    EO
    https://www.federalregister.gov/arti...ulatory-review
    Did not see those in my cursory review. Upon review of the rule and it's various impact statements, the rule can more than likely be challenged and prevailed upon by a party through a challenge of DOJ's self-determination that the rule is not subject to The Administrative Procedure Act.

    The rule change by DOJ states that:

    "Notice and comment rulemaking is not required for this final rule. Under the APA, “rules of agency organization, procedure or practice,” 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(A), that do not “affect[] individual rights and obligations,”Morton v. Ruiz, 415 U.S. 199, 232 (1974), are exempt from the general notice and comment requirements of section 553 of title 5 of the United States Code. See JEM Broad. Co. v. FCC, 22 F.3d 320, 326 (D.C. Cir. 1994) (section 553(b)(A) applies to “agency actions that do not themselves alter the rights or interests of parties, although [they] may alter the manner in which the parties present themselves or their viewpoints to the agency”) (quoting Batterton v. Marshall, 648 F.2d 694, 707 (D.C. Cir. 1980) (internal quotation marks omitted)). The revisions to the regulations in 28 CFR part 0 are purely a matter of agency organization, procedure, and practice that will not affect individual rights and obligations. This rule does not expand the government's ability as a matter of law to effectuate forfeitures; it simply authorizes the Director of ATF to effectuate such forfeitures. Internal delegations of authority such as in this final rule are “rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice under the APA”."

    The APA determination by DOJ is incorrect in that it does not "affect[] individual rights and obligations." They are attempting (and successfully so until challenged) to attach forfeiture power to another agency by essentially saying that since forfeitures occur through other agencies the power is simply being executed by another agency as an administrative matter. It is important to note that any victory here would likely be short lived since the law requires a Joint Resolution of Disapproval by Congress in order to stop the rule from being implemented.

    DOJ is counting on asset seizures to be uncontested (after all, why would a drug dealer contest a seizure unless said drug dealer has several legitimate businesses in which he may attempt to claim the assets are a part of).

    "An uncontested administrative forfeiture can be perfected in 60-90 days for minimal cost, including the statutorily required advertisement and notice by registered mail. Conversely, the costs associated with judicial forfeiture can amount to hundreds or thousands of dollars and the judicial process generally can take anywhere from 6 months to years. In the meantime, the government incurs additional costs if the property requires storage or maintenance until a final order of forfeiture can be obtained."

    DOJ is saying this great because we don't have to deal with the courts. We can handle it ourselves (so long as it is uncontested).

    DOJ, like the laws in Tennessee, know that the average Joe (drug dealer or true innocent) does not have the intelligence or the means to challenge an asset seizure and thus they more than likely have accurately surmised the law will not be challenged. A state law in Illinois was challenged in Alvarez v Smith but the matter was dismissed as moot when the parties reached agreement and assets were either returned by the State of Illinois or accepted as forfeited by Alvarez, et al. As far as I am aware Alvarez was the recent case that would have directly addressed forfeiture nation wide. The Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act addresses some remedies for asset forfeiture but it is more than likely an avenue that cannot be navigated until such time as the administrative remedies through DOJ have been exhausted.

    While I don't believe most of the posters here would ever come into being impacted by this rule I do have several reservations on asset forfeiture that I hope are resolved by the US Supreme Court sooner than later.

  8. #38
    VIP Member Array Smitty901's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    3,461
    Quote Originally Posted by glocknug View Post
    I guess that since I dont deal drugs, I am okay.
    No you are not . You do not have to do the dealing. If they are investigating your third cousin, some guy that lives next to you. They can make up a reason.
    Even if they are 100% wrong you still have to have the cash to take them to court and fight it you will be broke long before it is over.
    Read what it says and how it has already been used in other agency's.
    You buy a fire arm do everything right 3 years latter they are checking up on the shop they show up grab your weapon. Not a darn thing you can do.

  9. #39
    Member Array bootslxa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by dukalmighty View Post
    Dang Pirates have all the luck,I lost mine playing poker with a buncha boy scouts
    Best boy scouting trip ever.
    pgrass101 likes this.

  10. #40
    Ex Member Array Adrenaline's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    138
    Quote Originally Posted by Smitty901 View Post
    No you are not . You do not have to do the dealing. If they are investigating your third cousin, some guy that lives next to you. They can make up a reason.
    Even if they are 100% wrong you still have to have the cash to take them to court and fight it you will be broke long before it is over.
    Read what it says and how it has already been used in other agency's.
    You buy a fire arm do everything right 3 years latter they are checking up on the shop they show up grab your weapon. Not a darn thing you can do.
    It is a common misperception that you need to spend big money to represent you in court. For those willing to take the time and search the internet you can find just about any information you need to assist you. Every jurisdiction by this point posts the Court's Local Rules, every state posts the Rules of Evidence, Rules of Civil Procedure, and Rules of Trial Procedure. Most every state's numbering system for the rules mirror the Federal Rules of the same.

    If your weapons are seized without proper justification you can and will prevail. It takes time, a cool head, and resolve.

  11. #41
    Senior Member Array Chesafreak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Chesapeake, VA
    Posts
    627
    This goes even further than gun grabbing. While the article talks about guns, in reality any posession can be taken, like cash, your home, car etc.

    The ATF has been given the authority to “seize and administratively forfeit property involved in controlled substance abuses.” This means that anyone suspected of substance abuse can now have their firearms seized without even being arrested.

    According to the Times, this gives the federal government the power to seize the guns of citizens, even if they are merely suspected of substance abuse. These citizens do not have to be officially charged or arrested. Hell they don’t even have to be guilty.
    Obama Administration Passes New Order Making it easier to seize guns without due process
    "I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery." - Thomas Jefferson

  12. #42
    VIP Member
    Array MrBuckwheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Down Incognito
    Posts
    6,727
    Quote Originally Posted by Adrenaline View Post
    It is a common misperception that you need to spend big money to represent you in court. For those willing to take the time and search the internet you can find just about any information you need to assist you. Every jurisdiction by this point posts the Court's Local Rules, every state posts the Rules of Evidence, Rules of Civil Procedure, and Rules of Trial Procedure. Most every state's numbering system for the rules mirror the Federal Rules of the same.

    If your weapons are seized without proper justification you can and will prevail. It takes time, a cool head, and resolve.
    yeah but! time ... the timing is never good! and even with resources you may need somebody with experience. and that my friend is what costs money

  13. #43
    Ex Member Array Adrenaline's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    138
    Quote Originally Posted by MrBuckwheat View Post
    yeah but! time ... the timing is never good! and even with resources you may need somebody with experience. and that my friend is what costs money
    I disagree. The rules are there. Most of the pre-trial ones are straightforward enough.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

2nd amendment guns grants pass batf

,

atf executive order

,

atf firearm seizures

,

atf gun seizures

,

atf powers

,
auto forfieture law in illinois
,

did doj grant atf permission to revoke 2nd amendment?

,

doj expands atf

,

doj gives atf power to seize guns

,

executive order atf

,

obama administration expands atf?s power to seize property

,

second amendment guns grants pass forum

Click on a term to search for related topics.