Does anyone else see the problem? MILITARY in charge of a CIVILIAN agency? Do you support this? Did you KNOW about this? Great time for a parade, no?

Question

President Donald Trump hasn't made clear what his plans are for the ATF, which has long been a target for congressional Republicans. The agency is charged with enforcing the nation’s laws with respect to firearms, explosives and arson. It's also charged with licensing federal firearms dealers, tracing guns used in crimes and analyzing intelligence in shooting investigations

OneViewpoint · Accepted Answer

I hadn't heard about this. WTF does the military want to fuck around with domestic ATF crap? It violates the mission of DOD and ATF.

This is exactly the sort of expansion of military authority that fascists and authoritarian leaders use every time to secure control of the population. So much for that second amendment boys and girls. Better take yer guns and ammo back to Walmart for a refund.

On the other hand, I'd love to see a mech infantry battalion show up to the next Jan 6th, Charlottesville, or Proud Toddlers armed rally.

Lliam · Accepted Answer

Just because Driscoll will continue to serve as the Army secretary while overseeing the ATF doesn't mean that the ATF is being taken over by the military.

As long as Driscoll is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, I'm happy. At least he should know the difference between a true assault weapon and a semiautomatic "military-style assault weapon".

I despise Democrats and gun control supporters who know nothing about guns and make idiotic comments about so-called "assault weapons".

Anonymous · Accepted Answer

I don't see a problem. He's an employee of the federal government, a general in the federal army. Maybe the head of the FBI shouldn't be in charge of a second federal paramilitary organisation. I think the FBI shouldn't be in charge of Alcohol Tobacco and firearms. The federal government has 137,000 paramilitary agents, a small army. Perhaps they should be divided up in the intrest of democracy.

NathanDavis · Answer

how about civilians hired as military a. k. a... mercenaries, another American favorite... lol

WindAtMyBack · Answer

I see nothing at all wrong with it. Better someone who knows about guns in charge of a government agency which regulates guns, than some idiot who doesn't know a damn thing about it.

Avicenna · Answer

LOL, you do know that the Secretary of the Army is a civilian, right? And that the chain of command in ATF is as well?

Furthermore, were you squawking when the CIA had active duty military officers in charge?

Anonymous · Answer

Army General Lloyd Austin is currently heading up the Department of Defence a federal agency. He replaced Marine General Mathis.

Though not common for a military General to head up a Federal agency, there is precedent.

exitseven · Answer

I am more concerned that he will be both the Sec of the Army and the Director of the ATF. Both of these positions is a full time job.

chrissykerdock · Answer

these are made up allegations

Dongie · Answer

No, it is a good fit. Paranoid

seeyounexttuesday · Answer

what? Are you retarded? Asking honestly.

Anonymous · Answer

Crazy Question

Does anyone else see the problem? MILITARY in charge of a CIVILIAN agency? Do you support this? Did you KNOW about this? Great time for a parade, no?

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

Does anyone else see the problem? MILITARY in charge of a CIVILIAN agency? Do you support this? Did you KNOW about this? Great time for a parade, no?

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

We're glad to see you liked this post.