On Thursday, the Senate Appropriations Committee rejected an amendment to a spending bill (HR 5672) by anti-gun Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) that would have granted mayors like New York City's Michael Bloomberg access to ATF trace data. The best argument for limiting the data to law enforcement:
Bloomberg's recent ill-advised use of data to conduct so-called "stings" of out-of-state dealers to create evidence for a civil lawsuit.
Bloomberg's publicity stunt interfered with as many as 18 ongoing criminal investigations, possibly imperiling the lives of law enforcement officers, witnesses and law-abiding dealers.
No bud , sadly they cannot , he has " limited immunity " for his stunt since no one can really show ( imho ) that he did not set the whole thing up in " good faith " trying to limit the illegal guns in NYC . Its another case where the good faith exception works against common sense . Also i should say that the " good faith exception " for Gvt officals is not only a good idea , but necessairy . Blumburg just uses it tho for his own ends .
No bud , sadly they cannot , he has " limited immunity " for his stunt since no one can really show ( imho ) that he did not set the whole thing up in " good faith " trying to limit the illegal guns in NYC . Its another case where the good faith exception works against common sense . Also i should say that the " good faith exception " for Gvt officals is not only a good idea , but necessairy . Blumburg just uses it tho for his own ends .
If he were doing this in good faith, why didn't he use cops instead of private investigators?? There are limits to the good faith doctrine, and I believe a case could well be made for him exceeding it. Crossing state lines, hiring non-LEO's for sting operations, committing multiple federal and state felonies, not reporting the information to the ATF before the press conference, all point to a lack of good faith.
Not that I think anything will ever be done to him, but still.
I'm not so sure that Bloomberg has immunity. Immunity generally only applies against claims by private parties. I don't think that local officials have immunity from federal prosecution, (although Federal officers do have some immunity from state prosecution, think Lon Horiuchi.). The question really is whether there is a federal statute which he broke, and I would guess that there is. The problem is that the feds probably won't prosecute as the chances of getting a conviction probably aren't that great and it would be expensive beyond belief.
All the best,
Joe
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Defensive Carry
5.4M posts
117.5K members
Since 2004
A forum community dedicated to defensive firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about everyday carry, optics, holsters, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!