Red Dave wrote: ↑Fri Dec 08, 2023 1:46 pm
..."Honest and not self serving" is NOT a description anyone I know that has experience with government alphabet agencies would use.
I have policy-making experience at the Assistant Secretary level and below. Most of the folks that I worked with fit my description to a tee. Most of the exceptions were political appointees-- from both Parties-- although some of the political appointees were good, too.
America is very fortunate to have a solid apolitical civil service to dampen the extreme ideas that political appointees bring with them. That's got us through ~250 years pretty successfully.
But back to the point of my original post: I made folks aware of one of the extremist ideas concerning gun ownership that are being peddled now. I hope folks who cared about that took action and responded to the proposed rule, rather than merely complaining.
The regulations promulgated by the various departments have the force of Federal Law. You can be arrested, fined and serve prison time for violating them, even though no Congressman, or Senator ever voted on it. The bureaucrats who wrote the regulations are not elected, they are hired and can serve for decades, injecting their own biases into regulations that affect US Citizens throughout all 50 states, and most possessions. They are a permanent government within the government, which is often referred to as the "Deep State".
Although I have not worked in the process of the rule making, I have read just enough to believe the entire mess needs to be simplified and rethought. This is the reason that term limits on congress, although I believe they would be a very good idea in themselves, will never solve the problems or issues with our government. We need term limits on every department in DC so that these non elected people who are indeed self swerving and way too untouchable can be fired, replace and held accountable to the people of the US.
Oh well, I do not believe the USA will be here much longer the way we are heading.
Always try to be the best but, never think you are the best.
I "know a guy". This guy knows a ton of people. My guess is that he sells 3-400 guns a year. He only buys off the record, cash only. He only buys up estates, mostly collectors, or old farmers who have passed on and the wives sell the mans guns . Things like that. Occasionally he might get a new gun, but most are older ones. There are are millions of people who buy and sell guns as a hobby.
Like many things, they shouldn't pass rules they cannot enforce.
Trump banned "bump stocks" and they were all supposed to be turned over to the government or destroyed ( and documented to prove they were destroyed). I think last I heard about 7 may have been surrendered. So, again, making laws you cannot enforce is pure grandstanding.
My two cents worth. And the US cent is probably worth less than Jim's Centavos.
GeneMO wrote: ↑Mon Dec 11, 2023 3:12 pm
I "know a guy"...My guess is that he sells 3-400 guns a year. He only buys off the record, cash only...
I think your friend is exactly the kind of guy the Feds are hoping to get.
I don't imagine they'll be actively looking for such sellers, but I do imagine that if any folks like that come to light-- either because a seller or buyer of theirs talks too much, or one of the guns gets used in a serious crime and the police really investigate it-- then they'll do everything they can to make an example out of him. (I have an extended family member who owned a large gun store in a major city in a very blue State. He was forced out of business and lost just about everything over some minor record-keeping errors in the store, but the Feds decided to make an example of him...not a very good outcome for him, but he was certainly collateral damage in the anti-gun political war.)
Some of the comments point out the facts that the Federal Register process is both arcane, flawed, and run by un-elected professionals.
My strong opinion is based on that is the reason why citizens should be tracking and commenting on issues/topics that are important to them. This is because another fact is that well-written comments, in sufficient quantity, often lead to changes/improvements to draft Federal Rules.
And Dave's point about the difficulty of watching the Federal Register yourself is quite valid--which is why I have other folks watch for me...for instance, the NRA, GOA, and Maryland Shall Issue all send me emails warning me whenever there are any new Federal or Maryland gun rules or laws proposed. Other organizations will do the same for their interests (Veteran's organizations, AARP, unions, etc etc).
So there isn't a lot of work involved in monitoring; it's just a matter of looking at emails and deciding when it is time to make a comment yourself. Or even call your own Congressman about a proposed rule.
I believe these kinds of action are very useful in keeping both elected and non-elected representatives in check.
Bkeepr wrote: ↑Fri Dec 08, 2023 11:39 am
By the way, Paul: thanks for letting this "apolitical" thread go awhile.
If it does happen to go South, I honestly appreciate the attempt!
I think Paul said a few years ago that most anything goes. Us missfits know each other, and kind a closed in group, so not too much chance of us getting out of hand. Plus, I think most of us lean about the same way.
I think the Federal Register is simply a process put in place that makes it appear that the Federal agencies have "Legally ran it past the citizens". 99.9999% of the citizens dont even know it exists, and they sure as Hell dont look at it. I would like to see the stats of how many rules were put in the Federal register, then later dumped due to adverse public opinion. Probably about 1 in a million. If any.
I worked my whole career in the Government crop insurance program in one way or another. So we always had deadlines for proposed changes to rules and new rules so they could make it into the Federal register in time to meet the deadline. So I am vaguely familiar with the process. Dont recall anything every coming back stamped NO!
GeneMO wrote: ↑Mon Dec 11, 2023 3:12 pm
I "know a guy"...My guess is that he sells 3-400 guns a year. He only buys off the record, cash only...
I think your friend is exactly the kind of guy the Feds are hoping to get.
I don't imagine they'll be actively looking for such sellers, but I do imagine that if any folks like that come to light-- either because a seller or buyer of theirs talks too much, or one of the guns gets used in a serious crime and the police really investigate it-- then they'll do everything they can to make an example out of him. (I have an extended family member who owned a large gun store in a major city in a very blue State. He was forced out of business and lost just about everything over some minor record-keeping errors in the store, but the Feds decided to make an example of him...not a very good outcome for him, but he was certainly collateral damage in the anti-gun political war.)
I am sure that if things went south on something, they could catch him. And I am not naive enough to assume that he is too smart to be caught. A shame when the government makes crooks out of honest people. But that is what happens when laws become unfair.
Talking about the guy I know selling guns off the record. I can almost guarantee that no gun he ever sold was used in a crime. None. Bet most gun shops dont have that good of a record, and those folks get checked by the FBI instant background check thing. But then again, you can go to Columbia Mo. ( Little Chicago) and I will bet I could send a black friend over there and he could buy a stolen gun in a hour. I would have to send a black friend, cause all the crime over there is mostly black, and they aint gonna sell to an old white boy farmer. Think I was a "plant"
