Support NeoGAF

[Angry Grimace]

As far as I can tell, people here seem happy they lost their licenses because they don't like guns. Except, the problem here is that they aren't doing anything illegal by simply selling a gun to someone. I guess due process doesn't matter when the underlying subject matter is something we don't like.

 

[DietRob]

I'm not pro or anti gun per say but this doesn't sit well with me. I hope they have a good reason and provide it soon. This will only add fuel to the already raging fire if they don't.

 

[joelseph]

If the government shuts down your business, you have the right to know why. I don't understand why we're arguing over this. What if it was a pot dispensary?

Masterfully played sir.

 

[Edag Plata]

They won't say it's because the gun was legally sold to someone who knew someone who was going to kill someone. They'll say their tax return form missed the dot on the i or something and they need to shut them down pending further investigation or some crap like that.

 

[MorisUkunRasik]

I'm not pro or anti gun per say but this doesn't sit well with me. I hope they have a good reason and provide it soon. This will only add fuel to the raging fire if they don't.

I imagine most reasonable people agree. I hope the ATF is smart enough to have thought of that and do indeed have a convincing reason for doing this.

 

[Various Artists]

Devil's advocate.


Correct. What would the implications be if a system like that existed?

Well I suppose every hardware store would eventually be closed at some point. A lot of people are killed with items from there. (Hammers, ropes etc)

Every car dealership would be closed. There is vehicular Homicide everyday.

Hey lets close every fast food restaurant or anywhere that sells junk food as well. That is slowly killing people as well right?

Your thoughts on this have no merit. If the company did something wrong and it is a coincidence fine. They should be closed but at least disclose it. At this point it seems like a witch hunt.

 

[The Lamonster]

That's not being a devil's advocate. It's propping up a ridiculous and idiotic position under false pretenses. It's not productive to any conversation that isn't just a circlejerk.

Fair enough. My 'productive' comment about this article is that I'm betting there is an actual reason for the loss of license, but it should have been stated outright by the ATF. Doing it this way only fuels the fire of the pro-gun camp and further intensifies their fears of the government taking their guns away.

 

[Ferrio]

As someone who pretty much anti-gun, this was a dick move. They did nothing wrong, and operated within the law as far as we know. Don't punish a business because our laws suck ass. If they did have a legitimate reason for revoking it, they better fess up quick or it's going to do a lot to hurt the gun control movement.

 

[Kinyou]

They won't say it's because the gun was legally sold to someone who knew someone who was going to kill someone. They'll say their tax return form missed the dot on the i or something and they need to shut them down pending further investigation or some crap like that.

Well now you have already made up your mind and declared that any reason that might come up now is bullshit.

Not sure if that's the right way to go at these things.

 

[Cyan]

#optics

 

[WanderingWind]

Fair enough. My 'productive' comment about this article is that I'm betting there is an actual reason for the loss of license, but it should have been stated outright by the ATF. Doing it this way only fuels the fire of the pro-gun camp and further intensifies their fears of the government taking their guns away.

Yeah. At this point no matter what they say, we'll be hearing about this for the next decade from every wackadoo with an agenda. Stupid move on their part to not be super, super transparent if they did find wrongdoings in the course of the investigation that had to happen after Sandy Hook.

 

[Hawkian]

If the government shuts down your business, you have the right to know why. I don't understand why we're arguing over this. What if it was a pot dispensary?

They actually didn't shut down the business... and the owners are appealing the license revocation.

If there was no legitimate reason for them to lose the license such an appeal should bear fruit. I suspect there was indeed legitimate reason for them to lose it and when confronted with facts in a hearing they will lose the appeal.

There is little likelihood this incident actually has anything to do with the Sandy Hook shooting either way. It's just news because it is the store that happened to sell the weapons used in the massacre and faced additional scrutiny directly after the incident.

 

[BattleMonkey]

They won't say it's because the gun was legally sold to someone who knew someone who was going to kill someone. They'll say their tax return form missed the dot on the i or something and they need to shut them down pending further investigation or some crap like that.

Probably, and its all to make it seem like the ATF is doing something for once by shutting down that evil gun shop in a town where the action will be seen as Justice served.

They actually didn't shut down the business... and the owners are appealing the license revocation.

If there was no legitimate reason for them to lose the license such an appeal should bear fruit. I suspect there was indeed legitimate reason for them to lose it and when confronted with facts in a hearing they will lose the appeal.

There is little likelihood this incident actually has anything to do with the Sandy Hook shooting either way. It's just news because it is the store that happened to sell the weapons used in the massacre and faced additional scrutiny directly after the incident.

A gun store without a firearms license is basically shut down. It's like a bar without a liquor license.

 

[Al-ibn Kermit]

I suppose the ATF might have a legal reason to revoke the license and the store owners might really have no idea. Confusing why the ATF didn't say why the license was taken away (any gun shop in America could have sold those guns to the mother).

As if that's the discussion the other side wants to have.

Well nobody's forcing you to participate in an adult discussion you're not mature enough for.

 

[Edag Plata]

Well now you have already made up your mind and declared that any reason that might come up now is bullshit.

Not sure if that's the right way to go at these things.

Well, that's how these things usually work. They won't say why they closed it and when people start demanding answer they give this convoluted red tape bureaucracy reason. I'd be happy to be proven wrong, but I'm too old and skeptical to assume otherwise for now. It's like the Mohammed Youtube video guy after Benghazi.

 

[KHarvey16]

Probably, and its all to make it seem like the ATF is doing something for once by shutting down that evil gun shop in a town where the action will be seen as Justice served.



A gun store without a firearms license is basically shut down. It's like a bar without a liquor license.

It was revoked in December. If the idea was to make themselves look good, this wouldn't be the first time you heard they did it. It's a terrible theory.

 

[Cipherr]

They won't say it's because the gun was legally sold to someone who knew someone who was going to kill someone. They'll say their tax return form missed the dot on the i or something and they need to shut them down pending further investigation or some crap like that.

Well, the license was revoked, not the store shutdown. They just cannot sell weapons without the license. But anyway, like someone said, you should calm down.

Truth is we don't know what their reasoning was, or if they gave the shop owners a reason or not. If they have no real reason for revoking the license then this is some bullshit. But I'm going to wait and see, and not try and pre-paint the reasoning as absurd before we even know what it is.

 

[Deified Data]

They actually didn't shut down the business... and the owners are appealing the license revocation.

If there was no legitimate reason for them to lose the license such an appeal should bear fruit. I suspect there was indeed legitimate reason for them to lose it and when confronted with facts in a hearing they will lose the appeal.

There is little likelihood this incident actually has anything to do with the Sandy Hook shooting either way. It's just news because it is the store that happened to sell the weapons used in the massacre and faced additional scrutiny directly after the incident.

There's little doubt in my mind that 90% of firearms dealers have some sort of noteworthy fuck-up in their books if we bothered to check. All I ask is that they be informed as to why their license was suspended. It just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

 

[Hawkian]

A gun store without a firearms license is basically shut down. It's like a bar without a liquor license.

Knowing little about the intricacies of owning a gun stone beyond the fact that you can still sell ammo without a firearms license, I was just going by what it says in the article about their status:

She said the store remains open selling ammunition and other items while LaGuercia appeals the revocation.

There's little doubt in my mind that 90% of firearms dealers have some sort of noteworthy fuck-up in their books if we bothered to check. All I ask is that they be informed as to why their license was suspended. It just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

But we have zero indication as to whether or not they were informed other than the people affected claiming they weren't (and one of the two of them refusing to comment). Even if it really was simply revoked and the ATF refused to give an explanation it will have to come out in an appeal. Do you think that the ATF should be required to publicly disclose the reason?

 

[syllogism]

If they truly don't have any idea why the license was revoked (?), the process is flawed, but I'm always skeptical when a person claims that they haven't been told anything. Do they really not know or do they just not understand? The license was revoked 5 months ago, you would think they would have made some noises earlier if they believe they haven't done anything wrong and haven't been accused of anything.

ATF details their revocation process on their website and they say

If revocation is pursued, procedures are followed as specified under Title 27 Code of Federal Regulations Part 478. The licensee is provided with a Notice of Revocation
that includes findings describing the reasons for pursuing revocation. The licensee has 15 days from receipt of the notice to request a hearing. The licensee may be represented by an attorney at the hearing and may bring employees and documentation to address the violations cited in the notice. ATF is generally represented at hearings by ATF Counsel and the IOIs who conducted the inspection(s) resulting in the revocation recommendation.

During a hearing, the licensee has the opportunity to challenge the violations and establish that the violations were not willful. Based on the evidence presented at the hearing by the licensee and ATF, the hearing officer submits a report of findings to the DIO. Based upon the hearing testimony, exhibits presented during the hearing, and the hearing officer’s findings, the DIO decides whether to continue with the revocation. If the DIO’s decision is to revoke following a hearing, or in cases where a hearing is not requested, then a Final Notice of Revocation is sent to the licensee with a summary of the findings and the legal conclusions that warrant revocation.

 

[Beer Monkey]

Has mom been sued by victim families yet? Kept a house full of guns knowing her son was a nutcase.

 

[KHarvey16]

Has mom been sued by victim families yet? Kept a house full of guns knowing her son was a nutcase.

Mom was his first victim.

 

[GungHo]

Knowing little about the intricacies of owning a gun stone beyond the fact that you can still sell ammo without a firearms license, I was just going by what it says in the article about their status:

They can still sell ammunition and paraphenalia. It's just the guns they can't sell, and they cannot legally transfer anything. Not sure how they can reduce their stocks if wholesalers won't take the guns back, though.

 

[Hawkian]

ATF details their revocation process on their website and they say

Thanks for that, I was just looking for it.

The licensee is provided with a Notice of Revocation that includes findings describing the reasons for pursuing revocation.

Welp. Someone is lying; it would be satisfying to find out what the reason was, but more likely than not we'll merely find out who.

 

[massoluk]

Has mom been sued by victim families yet? Kept a house full of guns knowing her son was a nutcase.

Shooters mother was nutcase prepper

 

[Deified Data]

But we have zero indication as to whether or not they were informed other than the people affected claiming they weren't (and one of the two of them refusing to comment). Even if it really was simply revoked and the ATF refused to give an explanation it will have to come out in an appeal. Do you think that the ATF should be required to publicly disclose the reason?

If they're telling a half-truth and playing the sympathy card, I'm with you. I just don't think they should have to navigate an appeals process to understand what it is they're appealing.

 

[commedieu]

Thanks for that, I was just looking for it.

Welp. Someone is lying; it would be satisfying to find out what the reason was, but more likely than not we'll merely find out who.

Even on their own site, they say they give reasons. Not that anyone really needed a GOV agency to confirm it needs reasons to act or revoke, but there it is.

These people shouldn't be fighting a revocation that they aren't even informed about. And there are public records for licenses. I think its disgusting. And i'm as anti-gun as you can come, and its sad to see people coming up for excuses about the possibilities of what these people did, versus why the ATF hasn't declared their reason to revoke a license, when they say they declare reasons to revoke licenses.

 

[syllogism]

Sources have said during that review investigators uncovered other evidence that led to the revocation of the firearms license.

The gun shop is familiar to law enforcement authorities. Omar Thornton, the gunman in the Hartford Distributors Inc. mass shooting that left eight people dead, also purchased guns there, records show.

Also in December a South Windsor man who had received a suspended prison sentence and two years probation in May on charges of stealing a dozen rifles and shotguns from Riverview Gun Sales tried to steal a sniper rifle from the same store but was caught.

http://articles.courant.com/2013-04...p-revoke-20130404_1_gun-shop-atf-gun-purchase

Even on their own site, they say they give reasons. Not that anyone really needed a GOV agency to confirm it needs reasons to act or revoke, but there it is.

These people shouldn't be fighting a revocation that they aren't even informed about. And there are public records for licenses. I think its disgusting. And i'm as anti-gun as you can come.

Why are you assuming that they don't know?

 

[speculawyer]

...

Kinda feel really uncomfortable with the ATF acting, then answering questions later. To citizens.

Shop owners don't know.

ATF better have a damn good reason or the NRA is gonna have a field day.

Yeah, they better have reasons. I'm pretty sure they do. I'm a little skeptical on this report ... maybe the shop owner doesn't want to tell his wife what the problem is.

Just taking a license away with no reason would be a due process violation.

 

[GoldenEye 007]

It was revoked in December. If the idea was to make themselves look good, this wouldn't be the first time you heard they did it. It's a terrible theory.

So they pulled the license in December? Does it really make the ATF look any better they still apparently not provided a reason over 3 months later now. I don't think that fact really helps anything.

 

[KHarvey16]

So they pulled the license in December? Does it really make the ATF look any better they still apparently not provided a reason over 3 months later now. I don't think that fact really helps anything.

Is it a fact they provided no reason?

 

[Hawkian]

If they're telling a half-truth and playing the sympathy card, I'm with you. I just don't think they should have to navigate an appeals process to understand what it is they're appealing.

Totally agreed, and luckily the procedure on the books indicates that the ATF is required to provide the reason in writing, affording the security of due process.

If they didn't, their appeal will both get their license back and strike a blow to the autonomy of the already wholly-crippled ATF.

 

[commedieu]

Is it a fact they provided no reason?

Is it a fact they revoked the license?

 

[GoldenEye 007]

Is it a fact they provided no reason?

I don't know. That's why I said apparently. Has anyone been able to furnish a reason for the revocation in the past 3 months? This is normally simple public records stuff too.

 

[Kevtones]

Good, now let's close all auto dealerships that legally sold cars to future drunk drivers that were convicted of vehicular manslaughter.

 

[commedieu]

http://articles.courant.com/2013-04...p-revoke-20130404_1_gun-shop-atf-gun-purchase



Why are you assuming that they don't know?

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives revoked the license of Riverview Gun Sales in East Windsor in December 2012. The agency didn't say why.

Now I see how devolution feels in all of those victim blaming threads.

 

[MorisUkunRasik]

This is basically a 'he said, she said' where one side hasn't said anything yet and whoever is lying, if anyone is lying should be obvious.

 

[syllogism]

[/B]

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives revoked the license of Riverview Gun Sales in East Windsor in December 2012. The agency didn't say why.

So cbsnews does not know why, but it's very unlikely that the licensees have requested a hearing and haven't been served a notice of any kind.

 

[Hawkian]

[/B]

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives revoked the license of Riverview Gun Sales in East Windsor in December 2012. The agency didn't say why.

Are you kidding me right now? The agency didn't say why to CBS News. I can't understand any rationale for why they should be required to do that. The Wife of the shop owner claims the ATF didn't give them a reason either, then referred further questions to her husband, who refused to comment.

Honestly we have barely any information here. And this isn't really even news; it's a story because it in all likelihood merely happens to be the shop that sold guns to the Lanzas.

Now I see how devolution feels in all of those victim blaming threads.

Holy crap.

 

[Vestal]

[/B]

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives revoked the license of Riverview Gun Sales in East Windsor in December 2012. The agency didn't say why.

Now I see how devolution feels in all of those victim blaming threads.

who did the article ask? Maybe the ATF cannot disclose an ongoing investigation and the owners are bullshitting.

we don't know without a direct quote from the atf.

part if me thinks its bullshit because given the atf document copied here any lawyer would be all over this like stink on shit. The NRA would be crying foul and what not.

 

[commedieu]

So cbsnews does not know why, but it's very unlikely that the licensees have requested a hearing and haven't been served a notice of any kind.

His wife, Shelley Clemens, said Friday that she and her husband still don't know why the ATF revoked his firearms license.

Well. Im discussing the OP. Op says no one knows right now, and this is public record, (since december) If the OP article is horrible, and a lie. Then great, reason will surface, since it hasn't.

 

[Hawkian]

who did the article ask? Maybe the ATF cannot disclose an ongoing investigation and the owners are bullshitting.

His wife, Shelley Clemens, said Friday that she and her husband still don't know why the ATF revoked his firearms license. She said the store remains open selling ammunition and other items while LaGuercia appeals the revocation.

"They just came in the store after Sandy Hook, raided the store and took away the license," she said, referring further questions to her husband. LaGuercia, of Agawam, Mass., didn't return phone messages Friday.

we don't know without a direct quote from the atf.

It's unlikely we'll get one, unless I'm missing some aspect of the scenario.

part if me thinks its bullshit because given the atf document copied here any lawyer would be all over this like stink on shit. The NRA would be crying foul and what not.

Well, it will probably be months before we get wind of the legal outcome. They are at least seeking an appeal, or attempting to do so...

Well.

What is it, precisely, that you think you just did?

 

[GoldenEye 007]

who did the article ask? Maybe the ATF cannot disclose an ongoing investigation and the owners are bullshitting.

we don't know without a direct quote from the atf.

part if me thinks its bullshit because given the atf document copied here any lawyer would be all over this like stink on shit. The NRA would be crying foul and what not.

Well it's been 3 months. And the store owners would need to know the specific infractions in order to appeal the ruling effectively. Without that, what are they appealing?

 

[AkuMifune]

Good, now let's close all auto dealerships that legally sold cars to future drunk drivers that were convicted of vehicular manslaughter.

That's a fairly reasonable analogy, though we don't need guns to get around in our day to day lives.

Though none of us need cars either, we're just lazy. Same reasons we need guns I guess. Too fat for gymkata.

 

[Messypandas]

Good. Now the rest

 

[GoldenEye 007]

Good. Now the rest

Nope. Now move on.

 

[commedieu]

The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has permanently revoked the federal firearms license of East Windsor, Conn., gun store owner David LaGuercia, whose shop reportedly sold guns used in the Newtown school massacre and a second Connecticut mass shooting.

ATF spokeswoman Deb Seifert told The Journal News on Thursday that she could not be more specific on the reasons LaGuercia’s license was revoked. It was revoked Dec. 20 and the 60-day time frame to appeal has expired.

“It’s been revoked,” Seifert said. “It’s final at this point.”

..

 

[Messypandas]

Nope. Now move on.

lol. Stay free

 

[speculawyer]

Are you kidding me right now? The agency didn't say why to CBS News. I can't understand any rationale for why they should be required to do that. The Wife of the shop owner claims the ATF didn't give them a reason either, then referred further questions to her husband, who refused to comment.

Fishy.

My guess:
-ATF told store owner why
-ATF won't disclose the info to others because of privacy concerns (if the allegations turn out to false and the owner wins on appeal, it is good that they were not made public)
-The owner didn't tell his wife the full story.

 

[KHarvey16]

Is it a fact they revoked the license?

I would say the fact they are not selling firearms at the firearms store weighs heavily in the direction that it was.

I don't know. That's why I said apparently. Has anyone been able to furnish a reason for the revocation in the past 3 months? This is normally simple public records stuff too.

I don't know if I would expect the reason is public record in the instance of revocation.