ATF auditor photographing customer info in A&D bound book.

one-eyed Jack said:
Yet in 40 years I've never had a single "issue" with ATF. Jack.
Click to expand...
Spot on.. All the alphabet agencies I’ve had to deal with. The ATF might be the easiest one.

If you want to be an FFL you gotta keep your books right.. I’m just a incompetent illiterate individual. I f*** up so much paperwork all the time that eventually the ATF it’s just like “come on man the directions say initial the box not check it”

I filled filled out 30 incorrect NFA documents…
If at first you don’t succeed just try try try try try try again.

I can’t remember I’m pretty sure I got a document approved one time and then I called them and told them how they did it wrong.. lol.
 
Dadstoys said:
Granted some of that , but what does that have to do with what she was doing ?
Click to expand...
On the other hand: what about what she was doing was illegal?

ATF is allowed to copy records for an investigation or an audit. That doesn't mean that process is an illegal database.

(YES, they do illegally keep databases, but this is not evidence of that.)

The whole "ATF is creating illegal databases!" claim was by the same guy who admitted being out of compliance, with multiple 4473 errors, whose co-licensee wife thought she could just ask the agent to come back later.

This shop is not the role model for FFLs.
 
KBCraig said:
On the other hand: what about what she was doing was illegal?

ATF is allowed to copy records for an investigation or an audit. That doesn't mean that process is an illegal database.

(YES, they do illegally keep databases, but this is not evidence of that.)

The whole "ATF is creating illegal databases!" claim was by the same guy who admitted being out of compliance, with multiple 4473 errors, whose co-licensee wife thought she could just ask the agent to come back later.

This shop is not the role model for FFLs.
Click to expand...
When they make copies, it is supposed to be on a .gov approved device if digital or secured document if physical. A personal cell phone with some random app from the app store doesn't pass the sniff test.
 
Darksideblues42 said:
When they make copies, it is supposed to be on a .gov approved device if digital or secured document if physical. A personal cell phone with some random app from the app store doesn't pass the sniff test.
Click to expand...
Agreed: it's hinky.

But, people generally can't install apps on employer-issued devices. I can't even change the desktop background on my private company computer.

That doesn't mean that private devices aren't approved for use.

Even if they aren't approved for use, using them isn't necessarily illegal, which was the original claim by the FFL.

If anyone has a cite to the contrary, please educate us all.
 
Darksideblues42 said:
When they make copies, it is supposed to be on a .gov approved device if digital or secured document if physical. A personal cell phone with some random app from the app store doesn't pass the sniff test.
Click to expand...
Those documents she copied contain sensitive Personally Identifiable Information which must be protected properly along with records keeping requirements. A personal cell phone doesn't meet the requirements for either
Both subjects are annual mandatory training items so the agent would know better
 
sieveboy said:
looks more like hush puppies
Click to expand...
I can, or 'could', tell a story about a bunch of FBI 'special' agents showing up in the desert to investigate the murder of a federal agent in literal Hush Puppy type shoes, in one of the most remote desert areas in this country. They showed up the next day in full out 'tac' gear with boots and all, looked at one particular agent 20 yards from the Mexican border and asked if the armor and M4 were 'really necessary'.

edit:
RIP brother.
home.nps.gov

Who was Kris Eggle? - Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument (U.S. National Park Service)

home.nps.gov home.nps.gov
 
KBCraig said:
Agreed: it's hinky.

But, people generally can't install apps on employer-issued devices. I can't even change the desktop background on my private company computer.

That doesn't mean that private devices aren't approved for use.

Even if they aren't approved for use, using them isn't necessarily illegal, which was the original claim by the FFL.

If anyone has a cite to the contrary, please educate us all.
Click to expand...
Maybe not illegal but its a pretty big deal in federal agencies in terms of management, or in this case, mismanagement of PII. That became a huge deal a long time ago when some gov schmuck left a laptop on the DC metro that had thousands of veterans socials and stuff on it.
 
drgrant said:
Maybe not illegal but its a pretty big deal in federal agencies in terms of management, or in this case, mismanagement of PII. That became a huge deal a long time ago when some gov schmuck left a laptop on the DC metro that had thousands of veterans socials and stuff on it.
Click to expand...
Looked into it - against policy but not regulation so not much can be done except complain until it can be shown that the PII gets leaked. Then you could sue for real damages [rofl] [rofl]
 
KBCraig said:
Agreed: it's hinky.

But, people generally can't install apps on employer-issued devices. I can't even change the desktop background on my private company computer.

That doesn't mean that private devices aren't approved for use.

Even if they aren't approved for use, using them isn't necessarily illegal, which was the original claim by the FFL.

If anyone has a cite to the contrary, please educate us all.
Click to expand...
Darkside is right.
What she was doing was an end run around FOIA.
If it is not on an official device then it doesn't officially exist in the system therefore not subject to FOIA.
What records? We never copied any records.
We could go on for days about the stupidity and malice within the ATF but some of them have learned from past mistakes.
Leave no trail or trace.
How comfortable would you be right now if you knew your name was in that book and wondering where that information was going to end up ?
 
Dadstoys said:
Darkside is right.
What she was doing was an end run around FOIA.
If it is not on an official device then it doesn't officially exist in the system therefore not subject to FOIA.
What records? We never copied any records.
We could go on for days about the stupidity and malice within the ATF but some of them have learned from past mistakes.
Leave no trail or trace.
How comfortable would you be right now if you knew your name was in that book and wondering where that information was going to end up ?
Click to expand...
Anything used in the course of official duties is discoverable. Especially here where it's openly acknowledged, and on video.
 
Dadstoys said:
Darkside is right.
What she was doing was an end run around FOIA.
If it is not on an official device then it doesn't officially exist in the system therefore not subject to FOIA.
What records? We never copied any records.
We could go on for days about the stupidity and malice within the ATF but some of them have learned from past mistakes.
Leave no trail or trace.
How comfortable would you be right now if you knew your name was in that book and wondering where that information was going to end up ?
Click to expand...
If that is a personal cell phone and not an encrypted .gov phone, um, yeah, that could blow up in a bad way.
 
KBCraig said:
Anything used in the course of official duties is discoverable. Especially here where it's openly acknowledged, and on video.
Click to expand...
We can agree to disagree.
If there is a scummier federal agency in this country I've yet to see it.
A friend who was formerly military L.E. went to a multi agency training seminar and he was telling me that the ATF agents were like the f*cked up uncle the rest of the family avoids at family gatherings .
They thought they were making an impression with war stories about setting people up and railroading folks like it was supposed to make them the cool kids at the party.
The other agencies folks were just disgusted .
 
OK all you "experts" out there who are not FFLs and have not had many years dealing with ATF, I say don't piss them off. Next thing you know, there will be a surprise audit and they will find that T that you didn't cross or that i that you didn't dot or that 3 that was an 8 in the serial #. Life is too short for that shit. Jack.
 
one-eyed Jack said:
OK all you "experts" out there who are not FFLs and have not had many years dealing with ATF, I say don't piss them off. Next thing you know, there will be a surprise audit and they will find that T that you didn't cross or that i that you didn't dot or that 3 that was an 8 in the serial #. Life is too short for that shit. Jack.
Click to expand...

As the originator of this thread, I've got to agree with not wanting to piss off the AFT. This FFL seemed to have invited the AFT in for a much deeper and detailed inspection with his actions and responses to previous audits. I do think he was right in recording and disseminating the action of the auditor. Highly questionable conduct should be just that, questioned. Yes, auditors have snapped photos of page(s) before, but this was the first I had heard of an 'ap' used to copy a whole bound book. We'll see if there is any follow-up. Matt
 
Dadstoys said:
We can agree to disagree.
If there is a scummier federal agency in this country I've yet to see it.
A friend who was formerly military L.E. went to a multi agency training seminar and he was telling me that the ATF agents were like the f*cked up uncle the rest of the family avoids at family gatherings .
They thought they were making an impression with war stories about setting people up and railroading folks like it was supposed to make them the cool kids at the party.
The other agencies folks were just disgusted .
Click to expand...
We don't disagree about any of that. I'm a retired fed, and ATF was universally scorned.

Even more than IRS CID, who sold t-shirts at FLETC saying, "I'm your worst nightmare: an accountant with a badge and a gun!"

(Seriously, I saw it. And one of their trainees was busted for prostitution in the dorms. I never found out if they charged her for unreported income.)
 

Fourth Amendment​

Fourth Amendment Explained

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

---------------------------------

note it doesn't say they can just go on a fishing expedition and record everything in the book to be used later if they decide it's applicable to something.
 

Similar threads

Atf leadership
Replies
3
Views
169
paul73
paul73
New ATF director named?
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
safetyfirst2125
safetyfirst2125
ATF Form 1 Disapproval “Expired License”
Replies
16
Views
793
Jnhockey25
J
Atf
Replies
27
Views
724
paul73
paul73
Atf head
Replies
13
Views
603
In God We Trust
In God We Trust
Back
Top Bottom