Biden says he wants to ban assault weapons, but his own ATF Director Steve Dettelbach can’t even define what they are: “I’m not a firearms expert” pic.twitter.com/v50ElLnBG3
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 18, 2023
[T]he head of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms can’t define what the very instrument of death IS that he is so desperate to ban.
Seriously, dude. If you want to make 10s of millions of Americans felons for owning something that is a constitutional right, you should probably have some sort of parameters set before you attempt that, no?
Or at least a hazy picture in your head?
…During questioning from Republican Texas Rep. Jake Ellzey, Dettelbach said he supported a radical “assault weapon ban” similar to the policies espoused by his boss, Biden, and many other gun-grabbing Democrats, when he unsuccessfully ran for attorney general of Ohio in 2018.
Black, scary, and pew pew pew won’t cut it, dude, especially now that the GOP has the House back. Some of those representatives know a little bit about weapons, and I’m not just talking about the guys who’ve been shot by Bernie bros at ballgames. There’s Jake Ellzey, the chrome-domed congressman conducting the questioning when Dettelbach admits he’s clueless. He’s also an Annapolis grad and former F-14/F-18 Naval aviator.
As for those Democrats reviled but hard to describe exactly what they are AR-15-types? By 2020, there were estimated to be over 20 million in the hands of citizens, purchased for any number of reasons. Self-defense is a primary one. …
The ATF chief and his gun-grabbing compadres would dearly love to shut those sales down stat and force you to give yours up.
— Beege Welborn in ATF Head “I’m No Firearms Expert” – Can’t Define Assault Weapon but Wants Yours
Reminds me of this classic line… “I’m not a doctor, but I play one on TV.”
This should be not surprise coming from those who can’t define gender!
The anti-2A don’t want a definition, they don’t want to limit themselves, their end goal is complete disarmament of civilians.
Speaking of the ATF, today is the 30th anniversary of the Waco catastrophe…
A moment of silence to contemplate the effects and outcome of that shitshow
, today is the 30th anniversary of the Waco catastrophe…
Waco MASSACRE… Fixed that, time sure flies when you’re having fun…
They can’t define it but they’ll know it when they see it.
As long as these clowns are operating every gun owner has the sword of Damoclese hanging over their heads. Will what’s legal today be legal tomorrow? Will you wake up a felon by virtue of bureaucratic decree? Nobody knows.
They can’t or won’t define an “assault rifle” or “assault weapon” because the definition can be flexibly interpreted to whatever they want at the time.
Rest assured they’ll know it when they see it.
if a woman
who biden put on the scotus
cant define what a woman is
why should the atf director
need to be able to define
what an assault rifle is
Not assault rifle, “assault weapon.”
The terms are mutually exclusive.
Assault rifles are automatic.
“Assault weapons” are not automatic.
“Assault weapons” share only one feature with assault rifles: they are black, and Democrats are such racist bigots that they think black means “scary evil thing that must be banned because it’s black!”
All weapons are assault weapons if used for assault. The antis want nothing less than complete civilian disarmament. If they manage to achieve this they will move to ban all self-defense inducing baseball bats, rocks, and even bare hands if it comes to that. That’s how it is in the UK and increasingly in canadia too.
Well, an F-18 is an “ASSAULT” weapon, an Aircraft Carrier and a Battleship are “ASSAULT” weapons, a nuclear warhead is an assault weapon, but none of them fall under the purview of Braindeads “AFT”… It is the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco “FIREARMS” and Explosives and the FIREARMs in question are indeed the AK and AR platform RIFLES… He IS described as a “gun-grabbing” Democrat…
Heading states: The ATF Director Can’t Define the ‘Assault Rifles’ He Was Hired to Outlaw and Confiscate
Dettelbach said he supported a radical “assault weapon ban” similar to the policies espoused by his boss, Biden, (Biden not only wants ARs/AKs he wants semi-auto handguns and “high-capacity magazines banned as well) but in this context the question was in reference to rifles…
BATFE commonly know as ATF is a relic of times long gone, Alcohol has been legal for 90 years, almost nobody uses Tobacco anymore, and Firearms have been legal since the birth of America, without firearms, America would not exist. The FBI could possibly be tasked with the explosives part of the BATFE and of course the criminal use of firearms. We don’t need some goobermint letter agency telling us what kind of beer to buy, what cigars to smoke or what guns to own. Time to retrain the ATF agents into oil-rig workers, and find them jobs in the petroleum industry private sector, they will finally earn a honest living. Oh yeah, FJB too.
teach them to code.
No. Hand them a shovel, a bucket, and make them shovel the human feces out of the streets of San Francisco.
There are just enough agents to be able to do it properly.
As long as Gun Control is not defined by its History Confirmed roots in racism and genocide the Second Amendment will always be under the microscope.
There is no such thing as an ‘assault’ weapon or a ‘defense weapon. A criminal uses weapon for an assault. The law abiding civilian will use it for legal defense. The difference is in ‘legal’. But will ‘they’ ever understand?
Guy, the left want to punish the legal gun owing citizens and allow the illegal thugs to go roam freely.
THE REASON the left hates the AR-15 is very simple.
Because it’s BLACK.
Mr. Dettelbach is being coy because the ATF doesn’t want a definition carved into law. They want to be able to change the definition as they see fit, to counter any modifications made by manufacturers. Essentially, it’ll be rule by decree. This will then serve as a precedent for other rights and freedoms they hate, like using “hate speech” to shut down the FA.
These people are tyrants. Quit being polite to them and treat them as such.
But they’ll know it when they see it.
Regardless of any other variable, when the director of the ATF says he isn’t a firearms expert then THAT in and of itself should automatically be grounds for termination from that post.
This is not even to mention the anti-American bent that he has.
My rifle never shot anyone. No matter what Dimscum© decide I will not give it up. Or is that Dumscum©???🙄
Exactly. An ATF Director confessing “I’m not a firearms expert” is like a Surgeon General confessing “I’m not a medical expert.”
He’s admitting he’s unqualified for his job.
Maybe he just knows a lot about alcohol and tobacco?
Hehee
“I can’t give you a definition of pornography. But I know it when I see it.”
A famous person said this once when I was a kid.
And now for the 21st century version.
“I can’t give you a definition of an assault weapon. But I know one when I see it.”
“Not a firearms expert”
Hm. Seems to be a theme with this administration. Nominee for the head of the FAA knows nothing about flying planes, or how they fly. SecTrans clearly knows nothing about transportation infrastructure design, development, maintenance, or emergency response. And so on.
The primary criteria would appear to be political correctness-related, not competence-related. Sad. Unsurprising, but sad. And very much in keeping with banana republic behavior. (Venezuelan oil industry, anyone?)
This administration is definitely not business-related. Read something that totaled up all the administration’s leader’s business experience, compared to other administrations.. it was something like 5 yrs combined for 10 or 12 people, which paled in comparison to other administrations.
These guys and gals have only “worked” in govt, were community organizers, or scholars etc.
No experience with real leadership. Obviously so, when you see them in action. Things that look good on paper often dont pan out quite so well in the real world. You find that out real quickly in business, when you have to perform or be replaced.
Well, TBF, no one can define the term because it is was created to be undefinable.
I can’t decide if the “ban-all-the-things” crowd is too stupid to realize this or if they are very crafty (or some combination). If, somehow, they are successful in banning commonplace, relatively low-powered (in the case of a typical 5.56 chambered AR – I know there are others) firearms, then the bar they have to get over to ban things with greater firepower will be lower – that would make them crafty. On the other hand, what they say, most of the time, makes it appear that they are too stupid to be able to differentiate between a boot and a shoe.
Also, to the editor, the headline uses the term “assault rifle” which has an accepted definition. The article uses the term “assault weapon” the meaningless term I am referring to.
ATF Director Steve Dettelbach can’t even define what they are: “I’m not a firearms expert”
Hey stupid, let me help you… Ever heard of the INTERNET? Type in a word and the definition will MAGICALLY appear… What a fucking moron…
as·sault ri·fle
[assault rifle]
NOUN
a rapid-fire, magazine-fed automatic rifle designed for infantry use.
I wonder if he could reccomend a good whiskey or cigar.
No he doesn’t use the products he prohibits, I mean regulates.
The left doesn’t want to pin anything down because that makes it that much more difficult to move the goal posts later.
We’ve got to stop acting as though they’re stupid and realize that they’re evil, manipulative, scheming A-holes who will do ANYTHING to put themselves at thr top of the power-pyramid.
Nailed it ^^^
Agree with your point, but being stupid AND evil are not mutually exclusive. AOC for one example.
I guess I should have clarified. 😅
The ones steering the ship aren’t stupid, most of the deck hands however….
Amen brother
It also leaves a paper trail. They learned from the 3rd Reich.
Reminds me of: “I have not reviewed this case yet, but the Police acted stupidly”!
Why wouldn’t he want some form of gun ban? The NFA is used to justify their employment and expansion of it justifies expansion of the ATF furhter.
Ellzey: “Mr. Dettelbach, please define what and ‘assault weapon’ is.”
Dettelbach: “I’m not a woman expert. I can’t define what a woman is.”
Ellzey: “The other script Mr. Dettelbach, the other script.”
GENTLEMEN, WE ARE FORTUNATE…HE IS AN IMBECILLE!!
Neither my AR’s nor my AK have ever been used to harm another human. Now, I can’t say the same for several of the surplus firearms i have collected over the years because they were former military firearms and I have no way of knowing their exact histories. Was the Imperial Germany marked Mauser M1898 actually used in the trenches? Or was the Nazi marked Mauser used in Poland or France? Did my Garand see service in Europe, North Africa or the Pacific? Did my SMLE serve in India or France?
Anything used as a weapon to assault/attack another person is an assault weapon. All the way back to the rock Cain bashed Able with or the handy stick some caveman beat another caveman with over a chunk of horse meat.
Gun control has little to do with guns but everything to do with control.
I thought it was up to Congress to make the definition of what is and what ain’t?
Congress doesn’t have the tme to do it. They have important meetings to attend with important people who know what stocks are hot.
The reason he CANNOT define what an “assault weapon” is, is because there is NO SUCH THING.
I just tried to post essentially the same thing and erased it by hitting the wrong button. To be more precise, the federal government HAS NOT HAD a definition of an “assault weapon” since the assault weapons ban expired in 2004. The ATF cannot through regulation (or executive order) create a definition and ban such rifles without Congressional authorization, and until that happens, there is no definition that Dettelbach could describe to the Senate panel.
From a state law perspective, there IS such a thing as an “assault weapon”; it is anything the state Legislature says it is that is passed into law. For those states that have such bans, I am fairly certain no two are alike except in general terms. On top of that, those definition change over time as intelligent gunsmiths design work-arounds to the statutory definitions.
Gee, I’m having a hard time defining exactly what a Republican is, but I know that they’re not automatically on our side.
unicorn whisperer, To define a Republican is rather simple. A Republican is a person who supports the Constitution AS WRITTEN. Those who claim to be Republicans but do NOT support the Constitution AS WRITTEN are what is known as RINOs.
Nebraska just put another nail in the coffin of gun-control, passes Constitutional carry, headed to the Governor’s desk for final sign off… 27 down..
What is so hard about defining an assault weapon?
Assault weapon: A made up meaningless term by left leaning supporters of gun control to describe a group of weapons often sharing cosmetic and ballistic characteristics with that of assault rifles. The primary and critical exclusion between the two being the fire control systems which is the primary distinguishing feature.
I hope he at least knows a lot about alcohol and tobacco. That’s a pretty low bar though.
“parameters”? The Stasi, KGB, SA don’t need any stinking “parameters”. Get in the boxcar Prole.
Articles such as this are fun, but a more serious threat to POTG is the building wave of actions designed to put a framework under ridding the Supreme Court of Justice Thomas. The ethics attack is not trivial, nor silly.
At the moment, the Chief Justice is being asked to testify before a congressional panel regarding ethics policy of the SC. The invitation apparently is accompanied by a pledge to restrict questioning specifically to a code of ethics for SC justices (yeah, right). It will devolve into a pseudo- “lynching of an uppity black”.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-04-20/chief-justice-asked-to-testify-to-senate-on-supreme-court-ethics?leadSource=uverify%20wall
The Dims are looking to impeach Thomas. The non-Dim majority in the House can quickly shift in 2024. The Senate will retain a Dim edge, allied with McConnell and “never Trumpers”.
Everything else the anti-gun mafia does pales in significance.
Never get 66 votes in the Senate (needs 15 Republicans) IF you can convince enough Republicans in the House to bring charges against him in the first place… Spending someone elses money is one thing, blowing the Conservative balance in the SCOTUS is a completely different animal…
“Never get 66 votes in the Senate (needs 15 Republicans) IF you can convince enough Republicans in the House to bring charges against him in the first place…”
Thinking the world today will not be the world tomorrow. The Dims are counting on taking the house in 2024, and adding more Republicrat or Dimwitocrats to the Senate. And, of course, Justice Thomas will be branded as too dangerous/radical, justifying packing the court, if impeachment and conviction do not happen.
The attack on Thomas is intended to fire up the base, for increasing Dim power.
Gun control politics are a “bright, shiny object to distract attention; be wary.
Meh, we’ll see… I know you like to “argue” stuff til someone gives up so okay, you win, I’ve got nothing else to say about this…
i don’t give a s**t what adjective you atf-a**holes attach to a weapon of any type – anything re 2A is NOYMFB
Comments are closed.