Archive for the 'BATFE' Category

Congressmen Question ATF Brace Restriction Plans

BY Herschel Smith
3 months, 1 week ago

David Codrea.

“[W]e have determined that firing a pistol from the shoulder would not cause the pistol to be reclassified as an SBR,” ATF’s Firearms Technology Branch Chief replied. “Generally speaking, we do not classify weapons based on how an individual uses a weapon. FTB has previously determined that the firing of a weapon from a particular position, such as placing the receiver extension of an AR-15 type pistol on the user’s shoulder, does not change the classification of a weapon. Further, certain firearm accessories such as the SIG Stability Brace have not been classified by FTB as shoulder stocks and, therefore, using the brace improperly does not constitute a design change.”

Then in 2015, NRA-ILA reported on ATFs “Open Letter on the Redesign of ‘Stabilizing Braces’.”

“Any person who intends to use a handgun stabilizing brace as a shoulder stock on a pistol (having a rifled barrel under 16 inches in length or a smooth bore firearm with a barrel under 18 inches in length) must first file an ATF Form 1 and pay the applicable tax because the resulting firearm will be subject to all provisions of the NFA,” the reversed position stated.

Suddenly we had a problem. A huge problem, with life-destroying felony implications for anyone innocently caught up in a ridiculous bureaucratic net cast by people who either can’t make up their minds or have their minds made up for them by hidden, politically-motivated string pullers.

Fast forward to 2017 and it appeared everyone was happy again. Per a press release from SB Tactical:

“An NFA firearm has not necessarily been made when the device is not reconfigured for use as a shoulder stock – even if the attached firearm happens to be fired from the shoulder,” the reversed (yet again rule) assured everyone. “To the extent that the January 2015 Open Letter implied or has been construed to hold that incidental, sporadic, or situational ‘use’ of an arm-brace (in its original approved configuration) equipped firearm from a firing position at or near the shoulder was sufficient to constitute ‘redesign,’ such interpretations are incorrect and not consistent with ATF’s interpretation of the statute or the manner in which it has historically been enforced.’”

Go read the rest.  Now they’ve got their pink panties in a wad over “length of pull.”

My beloved dog Heidi, the best dog on earth before she passed, was all about “let’s fight, let’s fight, let’s fight, nap time, love me, love me, love me, let’s fight, let’s fight …” until the day was over.  Wake to do it all over again.  One neighbor remarked that it must be like having a girlfriend on crack.

The ATF is no girlfriend.  They’re like that obnoxious, troubling, unfriendly neighbor on crack.  This way one day, the other way the next day.  Isn’t there a medical diagnosis for this kind of behavior?  Shouldn’t these people be medicated by a professional?

ATF Secretly Crafting Rules That Restrict Pistol Braces

BY Herschel Smith
3 months, 1 week ago

Rep. Matt Gaetz.

The @ATFHQ is crafting secret rules restricting the possession of certain pistol braces by American citizens, which would turn millions of law-abiding gun owners into felons overnight. I sent a letter today demanding they stop.

Here is selected quotes from the letter.

ATF initially welcomed the advent of pistol arm braces. In 2012, ATF correctly determined that the attachment of arm braces to large pistol platforms does not constitute the manufacture of a short barreled rifle. This determination, consistent with law, clarified that attachment of a pistol-affixed arm brace did not constitute the making of a Short Barreled Rifle (SBR) subject to registration requirements under the National Firearms Act (“NFA”), 26 U.S.C. §§ 5801–5872, and made these important safety tools more readily available to those who need them. Central to ATF’s determination was its finding that arm braces are not synonymous with shoulder stocks and thus not designed or intended to be fired from the shoulder. Since ATF’s initial determination, over two million arm braces have been sold to gun owners. Additionally, hundreds of firearm manufacturers have sold over one million firearms pre-configured with arm braces.

Despite initially welcoming the introduction of pistol arm braces, it has come to our attention that ATF is now attempting to restrict some of the most popular arm brace configurations by creating non-public standards that are not based in statute or regulation. For example, in determining whether an item is an arm brace or stock, ATF has, through private letters, created an inexhaustive list of what it considers “objective design features.” With no basis in law, one of the “indicators” chosen to make these determinations is “length of pull,” which is the distance from the rear of the stabilizing brace to the trigger. Unbeknownst to the general public, ATF has ordained in private determination letters that it considers “any firearm with a ‘length of pull’ over 13-1/2 inches to be designed to be fired from the shoulder,” thereby making it a short-barreled rifle. However, ATF has also privately proclaimed that even firearms under this length of pull can be classified as a short-barreled rifle, if ATF identifies other (and often unspecified) applicable “indicators.” It is not clear what authority ATF has to establish these hidden standards.

We understand that ATF is currently considering restricting one arm brace model owned by over 700,000 Americans, despite it being functionally no different from the more than ten arm brace designs already approved by ATF. Were ATF allowed to proceed with issuing this determination letter or others, close to one million law abiding Americans could be made felons overnight.

What is left unsaid is exactly what brace design is being reconsidered for this classification.  Stay tuned.  It would be just like the ATF folks to state, restate, bait and switch, and then restate again in order to entrap innocent people.

It’s their bread and butter.

BATFE Tags: ,

Acknowledging the Earlier ‘Shockwave’ Developer: Len Savage

BY Herschel Smith
5 months, 1 week ago

David Codrea.

“Should you choose to classify such a firearm as a ‘Destructive Device’ under CFR 479.11 the firearms mentioned in the ATF article also have a barrel diameter of greater than one half inch (12 gauge being approximately .69 inches),” Savage continued, revealing how TF had closed the door on that alternative as well. “The Destructive Device definition does exempt shotguns, however since the firearms described in the article are neither rifles nor shotguns … I would remind you, I would NOT be changing bore diameter of the firearm that is neither a rifle nor a shotgun mentioned in the article. Making such a classification would appear most arbitrary and capricious given the facts at hand.”

[ … ]

“Marty Ewer used to own Shockwave Industries.” Savage explains. “I gave Marty my letter as he was making a birds head grip so that a factory 14″ barrel could be purchased and installed legally. He later sold the trade name shockwave to Mossberg and retired.”

“For what it’s worth, I also approached Mossberg and was rebuffed,” Savage adds. “I posted the letters on several gun boards and gave it to anyone who wanted to make them.”

Historic Arms, LLC developed the first firearm taking advantage of “the rules” and received the first ATF approval. All I ask is that we don’t forget Len Savage’s contribution and his name.

After discussing this with Len several years ago, I wrote Mossberg and asked to speak to their attorney.  To my surprise, he called me within minutes.

His discussions with me were interesting and he defended the use of the term “firearm.”  I’ve never told him so, but congratulations to Len on this victory.

Len is one of the very good guys, and I’m proud to know him.  I wish he could have gotten some scratch out of this.

ATF: Enabling A National Gun Registry?

BY Herschel Smith
7 months, 1 week ago


The ATF has issued new rules that will alter the format for Form 4473’s and make it easier to create a national gun registry.

Here’s what we know. ATF agents have used annual inspections to electronically record the contents of Form 4473’s being kept by federal gun dealers. See here and here.

We also know that a software company exhibiting its wares at the Shot Show in Las Vegas has crafted a system where ATF can take the contents of all the dealer’s Bound Book entries (which contain all of the buyer’s personal information and gun information which is on a Form 4473) by simply capturing them on a thumb drive.

And we know that the ATF is now trying to put the names of gun owners on the same page of the 4473 as the identifying information of the gun. See here.

But if they’re successful with changing the 4473 in this way, it will be much easier for ATF to create a national gun registry by photographing paper documents.

So it appears that we have an answer to the almost inexplicable question of why ATF is crawling over glass now to reincarnate the format for the 4473 which was junked decades ago.

Thanks to GOA for a good analysis of this.  It’s more than about allowing non-binary as a sex option, which in this case is obviously a misdirect.  It was magician’s trick to focus the eye somewhere else.

The only real solution for any of this is to abolish the ATF.  On top of that, abolishing DOJ, CIA, FBI and DHS would also be a good solution to many ills.

BATFE Tags: ,

ATF Recognizes “Non-Binary” As Sex Option

BY Herschel Smith
7 months, 3 weeks ago

Changes come to form 4473.

“Non-binary” is added in the sex field options, too. The section inquiring if the transferee is under indictment for a felony would also now ask, “…or are you a current member of the military who has been charged with violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and whose charges have been referred to a General Court Martial?”

In addition, the question regarding whether the person has ever been convicted of a misdemeanor of domestic violence would, if approved, include,“…or are you or have you ever been a member of the military and been convicted of a crime that included, as an element, the use of force against a person as identified in the instructions?” A variety of boxes and questions have been moved for clarity and continuity, apparently, and the “county” of residence field now includes “Parish/Borough.”

So what if you were referred to a general court martial and were acquitted?  I’ve never agreed with the notion anyway that problems with a dishonorable discharge should affect recognition of God-given rights.  But that’s the difference, yes?  I see this right as God-given, the state sees itself as the source.

But thank goodness that “Non-binary” is now officially recognized as a sex option.  I won’t have to lose sleep over that any longer.


More Creative ATF Rulemaking

BY Herschel Smith
9 months, 2 weeks ago

Via David Codrea, courtesy of Len Savage, the ATF is involved in more creative rulemaking.

No mechanism currently exists for ATF to authorize a request from an FFL to transfer a GCA/SBS, such as the Reformation, to a non-licensee. Therefore, until ATF is able to promulgate a procedure for processing and appr.oving such requests, an FFL may not lawfully transfer a Reformation configured as a GCA/SBS to a non-licensee.

I don’t personally care since I don’t want one.  But I do care because if someone else wants one, they should be able to have one.  Fudds are not honorable men.

Because.  Liberty.  I don’t have a bump stock either, but if I wanted one I should be able to have one.  Because.  Liberty.

Because.  Shall not be infringed.  All gun control is wickedness.

ATF Firearms Industry Operations Manual Obtained Via GOA FOIA Request

BY Herschel Smith
10 months ago

John Crump writing at Ammoland.

Gun Owners of America has obtained the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives [ATF] Industry Operations Manual used by Industry Operations Inspectors (IOI). The gun-rights group received a copy of the document after submitting multiple Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request the federal law enforcement agency.

This copy is the first time since the 1990s that the manual has been made public. The ATF was not quick to supply the information to GOA, but continued pressure by the gun-rights organization forced the ATF’s hand. The document does have a few redactions, but it does give enough information to help out FFLs by understanding what the ATF is looking for in their inspections of FFL and gun shop retailers.

And thus it may be helpful to some of my readers.

I truly wish they wouldn’t put documents on Scribd.  There is a direct PDF link for those of you (like me) who don’t wish to “log in” with any ID.

ATF Informants

BY Herschel Smith
11 months, 1 week ago

Len Savage sends this.  It means that the ATF has so many paid informants that they have to have federal forms for them.  This bit of twisted sickness is also interesting.  The ATF had an informant passing on Savage’s litigation strategy to the FedGov.  It seems that very few can be trusted.  Keep that in mind.

But beware, if you’re a traitor.  Remember the case of Mike Detty.

Although Detty never solicited a dime, he was promised hefty rewards, which, of course, were never paid. This particular case took many a turn. The final twist being when Detty’s good intentions, his actions at his own peril just because it was the right thing to do, were rewarded with betrayal by the very agency on whose behalf he had risked so much.

[ … ]

Loyalty, it turned out, was not a two-way street between the Department of Justice and a public-spirited citizen who had volunteered, and worked for years at personal risk, to do the right thing.

“I learned that the ATF’s public information officer in Phoenix gave my name and contact information to a New York Times reporter who was inspired to write an article after Attorney General Eric Holder’s speech of Feb. 2, 2009, in which he detailed that Mexicans were being killed with American guns and that he and President Obama would like to see the Assault Weapons Ban reinstated,” Detty said. “If it wasn’t bad enough that Department of Justice employees were exposing me as an informant, now an ATF agent was doing the same thing.”

To keep the facts straight, from early on Detty had kept a private journal. Government minions learned of it. They apparently feared it could be a source of embarrassment or worse—in passing it detailed several official misadventures.

From that point on, Detty was cast into a limbo somewhere between persona non grata and outright threat. His personal e-files were hacked and redacted by persons unknown, but of course there were backups. Detty does not make this observation. But it begs: If a former intelligence asset now has the potential to be a liability or embarrassment, how better to solve the problem than to let the cartels he was working against know who he is and let nature take its course?

[ … ]

“With American guns being used in ruthless savagery across the border, a push could be made for a new assault weapons ban here in the United States. There is no other explanation why guns would be continually allowed to cross the border after the purchasers, their cartels and ports of entry had already been identified.”

They aren’t playing by the Marquess of Queensberry Rules.

New Case Law Derails Sentencing Of Nevada County Man In Federal Weapons Case

BY Herschel Smith
11 months, 1 week ago

The ripples of this case are just beginning.

A South County man indicted by a federal grand jury in 2015 on weapons and marijuana charges was set to be sentenced today after taking a plea agreement. But Craig Mason’s sentencing has been postponed until mid-November, because a different case currently being litigated could invalidate the weapons charge.

Mason pleaded guilty in March to unlawfully manufacturing and dealing in firearms and was facing as much as five years in prison and a $250,000 fine, according to court documents. At the center of the charge was an allegation that Mason manufactured and sold the parts necessary to assemble a firearm to a person he believed to be a felon.

But in a memo sent last week to U.S. District Court Judge Kimberly J. Mueller, Mason’s attorney cited developments in a case involving similar allegations — United States v. Roh. Like Mason, Roh was indicted for manufacturing and dealing firearms — hundreds of AR-15-type lower receivers, completed pistols, and completed rifles, according to court records.

At issue is whether “lower receivers” can be considered firearms. Federal prosecutors have, as in Mason’s case, considered the answer to be “yes.” Mason operated a workshop on his Rosewood Road property just outside Lake of the Pines, where he allegedly converted AR-15-style blanks into lower receivers. A “blank” is a metal casting that can be converted to allow the firing a of a projectile. Once converted, it is considered a firearm by statute, even if there is no barrel, handle, or trigger, and it is subject to regulation.

In Joseph Roh’s case, a judge ruled “the evidence at trial was uncontroverted that a finished AR-15 receiver does not contain a bolt or breech block and is not threaded to receive the barrel. … The plain conclusion is that the finished receiver is not a firearm.” The ruling continued, “Roh did not violate the law by manufacturing receivers. The Court further finds that with respect to manufacturing receivers, the statute and regulation are unconstitutionally vague.”

Following the tentative order, the prosecution and defense agreed to a deal in which Roh would plead guilty to the charge against him, but would be allowed to withdraw that plea if he stayed out of trouble for a year. Prosecutors would then dismiss the case. If Roh abides by the deal, he will have no criminal conviction and serve no time behind bars. Roh’s sentencing has been set for July of next year.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives had been investigating the unlawful sale and manufacturing of firearms by Sacramento dealer LCG AR Parts and Custom Accessories. A confidential informant reportedly purchased blanks from LCG in 2013, asked to have them illegally converted and was directed to Mason. According to court records, Mason manufactured two AR-15-style lower receivers for the confidential informant, despite being told the man had been to prison and was prohibited from possessing a firearm.

During execution of a federal search warrant on Mason’s property in October 2013, law enforcement officers reportedly found multiple AR blanks and lower receivers, as well as several AR-15 rifles and a pistol built with a lower receiver that originally had been blanks, and three jigs used to machine blanks into lower receivers.

I wonder how far this will go?  Will this case be dropped as well, or at least, recast into something else?  Is the ATF’s spider web of judgments, regulations and letters of interpretation beginning to unravel, or will they just judge-shop until they find a ruling they like?


ATF Drops Lower Receiver Case For Fear Of Doing Damage To Other ATF Regulations

BY Herschel Smith
11 months, 3 weeks ago

This is a fascinating case, telling us more about the ATF and their world view than anything to do with lower receivers.  Read every word of the report.

For more than a year, Joseph Roh illegally manufactured AR-15-style rifles in a warehouse south of Los Angeles.

His customers, more than two dozen of whom were legally prohibited from possessing a firearm, could push a button, pull a lever, and walk away a short time later with a fully assembled, untraceable semi-automatic weapon for about $1,000, according to court records.

Roh continued his black-market operation despite being warned in person by agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that he was breaking the law.

But five years after raiding his business and indicting him, federal authorities quietly cut a deal with Roh earlier this year and agreed to drop the charges.


The judge in the case had issued a tentative order that, in the eyes of prosecutors, threatened to upend the decades-old Gun Control Act and “seriously undermine the ATF’s ability to trace and regulate firearms nationwide.”

In the eyes of prosecutors, the case “threatened to upend the decades-old Gun Control Act and seriously undermine the ATF’s ability to regulate firearms nationwide.”  This is important.

No one can change the law except those who made the law, i.e., the House and Senate.  It may be that the GCA is reprehensible, and it is, and it may be that it is unconstitutional, and it is, but only the House and Senate can change it.  The fear that losing a case, whatever that case may be, could upend the GCA is ridiculous.  Ponder that for a moment and let’s continue.

A case once touted by prosecutors as a crackdown on an illicit firearms factory was suddenly seen as having the potential to pave the way to unfettered access to one of the most demonized guns in America.

Federal authorities preferred to let Roh go free rather than have the ruling become final and potentially create case law that could have a crippling effect on the enforcement of gun laws, several sources familiar with the matter told CNN. Each requested anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the case and its possible implications.

Under US District Court Judge James V. Selna’s interpretation of the law, convicted felons and other people prohibited from possessing firearms would be allowed to legally acquire all the parts necessary to assemble an AR-15-style rifle and other weapons, according to federal prosecutors.

[ … ]

The guns are sometimes assembled from separately acquired parts. Under federal law, the one regulated individual part of a firearm is what’s known as the frame or receiver — a piece that, among other things, provides a housing for the hammer and firing mechanism of a gun.

Though incapable of firing a round, the part is considered a gun in its own right and is subject to the same restrictions as a fully intact firearm. Manufacturers must stamp it with a serial number and licensed dealers are required to conduct background checks on prospective buyers. The restrictions are intended, in part, to keep felons and other people prohibited from possessing firearms from acquiring them piece by piece.

AR-15s, however, do not have a single receiver that meets that definition. They have both an upper and lower receiver — two parts as opposed to the single part described in the law.

At issue in Roh’s case was whether the law could fairly be interpreted to apply to just the lower receiver of the AR-15, as the ATF has been doing for decades.

To rule otherwise “would sweep aside more than 50 years of the ATF’s regulation of AR-15s and other semiautomatic firearms,” prosecutors wrote prior to the judge’s order.

Federal law enforcement officials — and members of Congress — have been on notice about a potential problem with the language in federal gun law as applied to AR-15s since at least 2016.

In July of that year, prosecutors in Northern California abandoned a case against a convicted felon named Alejandro Jimenez after a judge found that the AR-15 lower receiver he was accused of purchasing in an ATF undercover sting did not meet the definition of a receiver under the law.

The ruling and subsequent dismissal drew little notice but prompted a letter to Congress from then-US Attorney General Loretta Lynch. She advised lawmakers that the judge’s decision was not suitable for appeal and that if ATF officials believed the definition should be changed, they should pursue regulatory or administrative action.

Further into the report, we get to the details of the case.

“We here at ROHG Industries have been doing build parties for quite some time,” he wrote in the sparsely worded, one-paragraph letter.

“The customer installs the part into our machine and pushes the start button,” Roh explained.

“Is this legal?” he asked.

In November, the chief of ATF’s Firearms Technology Branch responded to Roh by letter. He told him that if the “build parties” he was referring to resulted in the production of anything the ATF classified as a firearm, he would need to obtain a license for manufacturing.

Roh did not heed that advice. When an undercover ATF agent visited his factory on two occasions in December, he “observed parts and machinery used to manufacture AR-15-type firearms,” court documents state.

Two days before Christmas, the ATF gave Roh a warning in the form of a “cease and desist” letter. It informed him that he was engaged in the unlicensed manufacture of firearms and was at risk of criminal prosecution.

This time, Roh appeared to take heed.

When undercover agents visited his factory in early January, he was not there. But employees told agents they were no longer machining gun parts.

“The ATF had shut them down,” the employees said, according to a report recounting the conversation.

They promised to call the purported customers back when they got the “green light” to resume operations.

Less than a week later they got the call. Their visit to the factory the following day was captured in secretly recorded video obtained by CNN.

Roh, dressed in a T-shirt and New York Yankees baseball cap, appeared congenial and knowledgeable about firearms. He made no secret of his business model.

“Are you here to … make yourself a rifle right now?” he asked the agents during the encounter in January 2014.

“I’m not going to get into trouble or anything like that?” one of the agents asked.

“No,” Roh reassured him. “We’re legal, man.”

Roh told the undercover agents he’d enacted a new policy after being shut down by the ATF: Anyone who wanted machining services performed had to pay a $25 fee to join his “gun club.” That way, he was no longer catering to the general public, he explained.

He told one of the agents he was already considered a member because he’d bought a gun before. Roh told him he would have to vouch for the newcomer so that he could join the gun club as well.

After collecting $25 from the new customer and agreeing to a price of $1,000 each for a pair of rifles he wanted to buy, Roh directed an employee to begin the machining process.

Moments later, he stood next to the agent in front of a large piece of equipment that is computer-coded to precisely machine parts for AR-15-style firearms.

“Go ahead and press the green button,” Roh told the undercover agent.

“The green button?” the agent asked.

“Yeah,” Roh replied. “That basically means that you did it — believe it or not.”

A member of Roh’s staff then oversaw the process of machining and drilling that converted an unfinished lower receiver — an innocuous chunk of metal before the process began — into a finished receiver the ATF considered a firearm under the law.

Roh then added barrels, stocks, bolts, triggers and other parts to make them fully-functioning weapons.

Now to the legal machinations.

When the case finally came to trial last year, much of the four-day proceeding consisted of Nicolaysen, Roh’s defense attorney, grilling ATF officials on arcane gun laws and regulations and the agency’s internal decision-making process.

After both sides presented their evidence, the defense filed a motion for acquittal, arguing that the government’s case against Roh was “legally flawed” because the charges were based on a violation of an internal ATF “classification” as opposed to federal law.

Nicolaysen argued that the definition of a receiver under the relevant federal code differed in various ways from the AR-15 component Roh was accused of manufacturing.

Under the US Code of Federal Regulations, a firearm frame or receiver is defined as: “That part of a firearm which provides housing for the hammer, bolt or breechblock, and firing mechanism, and which is usually threaded at its forward portion to receive the barrel.”

The lower receiver in Roh’s case does not have a bolt or breechblock and is not threaded to receive the barrel, Nicolaysen noted.

He called the decision to classify it as a firearm nonetheless, the result of “secret, in-house decision-making.”

Nicolaysen accused the ATF of abusing its authority by pursuing Roh based on his alleged violation of a policy “that masquerades as law.”

He asked the judge to consider recommending that then-US Attorney General Jeff Sessions conduct a review to determine whether there were any similar cases pending around the country or past convictions “sustained on the basis of ATF policy, rather than law.”

Prosecutors acknowledged there were technical differences between the regulation and the lower receiver in Roh’s case, but said the ATF’s interpretation of the regulation was consistent with the intent of federal gun laws. The agency’s reading of the law “should also receive deference from this court,” prosecutors Shawn J. Nelson and Benjamin D. Lichtman argued.

Adopting the defense position, the prosecutors wrote, would be “manifestly incompatible” with the intent of the federal Gun Control Act and would “severely frustrate” enforcement of the law.

The prosecutors’ filing said a ruling in favor of the defense could impact the receivers for up to 90% of the firearms in America.

“The necessary result of this would be that the unregulated parts could be manufactured, sold, and combined with other commercially available parts to create completed, un-serialized firearms which would not be subject to background checks, and which would be untraceable,” the prosecutors wrote. “Defendant’s interpretation would mean that nearly every semi-automatic firearm could be purchased piece by piece with no regulation or background check before a prohibited person would have a firearm.”

Though the trial lasted less than a week, Selna deliberated for more than year. In April, he issued a tentative order in which he determined that the ATF had improperly classified the AR-15 lower receivers in Roh’s case as firearms.

He rejected the prosecution’s argument that the ATF’s interpretation of the regulation describing a receiver could reasonably be applied to the device at issue in Roh’s case.

“There is a disconnect,” the judge wrote.

Selna added that the combination of the federal law and regulation governing the manufacturing of receivers is “unconstitutionally vague” as applied in the case against Roh.

“No reasonable person would understand that a part constitutes a receiver where it lacks the components specified in the regulation,” Selna wrote.

Therefore, the judge determined, “Roh did not violate the law by manufacturing receivers.”

The judge’s tentative order also found that the ATF’s in-house classification process failed to comply with federal rule-making procedures. Changes to substantive federal regulations typically include a notice-and-comment period and eventual publication in the Federal Register.

“Consistent with the intent of federal law.”  What the ATF doesn’t want the general public to know is that they’re making up the rules as they go.  Letters to the ATF and ATF responses don’t constitute law, and they don’t even constitute regulation, strictly defined.

First of all, I’ve discussed that before.  There is a difference between law and regulation.  Laws are made by Congress.  Regulation, that behemoth which has so empowered the federal executive and the bureaucratic state, at least has the requirement that it gets published in the federal register, has a comment period, goes through a cost-benefit analysis as required by law, and then the final version gets published in the federal register.  ATF regulations get none of this, and judgments and rules promulgated by the ATF bypass all of these requirements.

Second, it’s apparent that the whole intent of the ATF rules is to limit the firearms in circulation, attempt as best as possible to govern who has them, and know with as much certainty as possible where they are at any particular time.  The rules aren’t arbitrary – they have the purpose the controllers intended.  They make the policy as it suits them at the moment, and then change it on a whim if they deem it more advantageous to their designs.  For a silly example of this, witness their hand-wringing and rule du jour over whether you can legally shoulder a stabilizing brace.

Third, they are so afraid that this decision would have disrupted those designs that they were willing to drop the case outright.  After hearing the truth from this judge, that is, that the ATF was illegally bypassing the regulation process and imposing seemingly arbitrary policies in lieu of real regulations and laws, they literally don’t care.  They are completely unmoved by the revelations of their illegality.

Fourth, the ATF is run by controllers.  We’ve also discussed this before.  As I’ve pointed out before, “The desire to control others is the first sign, incorrigible pathology and premier sin of the wicked.”  These folks are sociopaths.  They have no conscience, and their pathological drive is to control others.

26th MEU (10)
Abu Muqawama (12)
ACOG (2)
ACOGs (1)
Afghan National Army (36)
Afghan National Police (17)
Afghanistan (679)
Afghanistan SOFA (4)
Agriculture in COIN (3)
AGW (1)
Air Force (35)
Air Power (9)
al Qaeda (83)
Ali al-Sistani (1)
America (20)
Ammunition (120)
Animals (78)
Ansar al Sunna (15)
Anthropology (3)
Antonin Scalia (1)
AR-15s (248)
Arghandab River Valley (1)
Arlington Cemetery (2)
Army (77)
Assassinations (2)
Assault Weapon Ban (27)
Australian Army (6)
Azerbaijan (4)
Backpacking (2)
Badr Organization (8)
Baitullah Mehsud (21)
Basra (17)
BATFE (90)
Battle of Bari Alai (2)
Battle of Wanat (18)
Battle Space Weight (3)
Bin Laden (7)
Blogroll (3)
Blogs (22)
Body Armor (20)
Books (3)
Border War (11)
Brady Campaign (1)
Britain (38)
British Army (35)
Camping (4)
Canada (2)
Castle Doctrine (1)
Caucasus (6)
Center For a New American Security (8)
Charity (3)
China (13)
Christmas (11)
CIA (28)
Civilian National Security Force (3)
Col. Gian Gentile (9)
Combat Outposts (3)
Combat Video (2)
Concerned Citizens (6)
Constabulary Actions (3)
Coolness Factor (2)
COP Keating (4)
Corruption in COIN (4)
Council on Foreign Relations (1)
Counterinsurgency (216)
DADT (2)
David Rohde (1)
Defense Contractors (2)
Department of Defense (159)
Department of Homeland Security (26)
Disaster Preparedness (4)
Distributed Operations (5)
Dogs (12)
Donald Trump (26)
Drone Campaign (3)
EFV (3)
Egypt (12)
El Salvador (1)
Embassy Security (1)
Enemy Spotters (1)
Expeditionary Warfare (17)
F-22 (2)
F-35 (1)
Fallujah (17)
Far East (3)
Fathers and Sons (2)
Favorite (1)
Fazlullah (3)
FBI (32)
Featured (183)
Federal Firearms Laws (18)
Financing the Taliban (2)
Firearms (1,215)
Football (1)
Force Projection (35)
Force Protection (4)
Force Transformation (1)
Foreign Policy (27)
Fukushima Reactor Accident (6)
Ganjgal (1)
Garmsir (1)
general (15)
General Amos (1)
General James Mattis (1)
General McChrystal (43)
General McKiernan (6)
General Rodriguez (3)
General Suleimani (9)
Georgia (19)
Google (1)
Gulbuddin Hekmatyar (1)
Gun Control (1,265)
Guns (1,717)
Guns In National Parks (3)
Haditha Roundup (10)
Haiti (2)
Haqqani Network (9)
Hate Mail (8)
Hekmatyar (1)
Heroism (4)
Hezbollah (12)
High Capacity Magazines (16)
High Value Targets (9)
Homecoming (1)
Homeland Security (1)
Horses (1)
Humor (29)
ICOS (1)
IEDs (7)
Immigration (91)
India (10)
Infantry (4)
Information Warfare (2)
Infrastructure (2)
Intelligence (23)
Intelligence Bulletin (6)
Iran (170)
Iraq (379)
Iraq SOFA (23)
Islamic Facism (64)
Islamists (95)
Israel (18)
Jaish al Mahdi (21)
Jalalabad (1)
Japan (2)
Jihadists (80)
John Nagl (5)
Joint Intelligence Centers (1)
JRTN (1)
Kabul (1)
Kajaki Dam (1)
Kamdesh (9)
Kandahar (12)
Karachi (7)
Kashmir (2)
Khost Province (1)
Khyber (11)
Knife Blogging (4)
Korea (4)
Korengal Valley (3)
Kunar Province (20)
Kurdistan (3)
Language in COIN (5)
Language in Statecraft (1)
Language Interpreters (2)
Lashkar-e-Taiba (2)
Law Enforcement (3)
Lawfare (7)
Leadership (6)
Lebanon (6)
Leon Panetta (2)
Let Them Fight (2)
Libya (14)
Lines of Effort (3)
Littoral Combat (8)
Logistics (50)
Long Guns (1)
Lt. Col. Allen West (2)
Marine Corps (263)
Marines in Bakwa (1)
Marines in Helmand (67)
Marjah (4)
Media (54)
Medical (49)
Memorial Day (5)
Mexican Cartels (35)
Mexico (50)
Michael Yon (5)
Micromanaging the Military (7)
Middle East (1)
Military Blogging (26)
Military Contractors (4)
Military Equipment (24)
Militia (5)
Mitt Romney (3)
Monetary Policy (1)
Moqtada al Sadr (2)
Mosul (4)
Mountains (25)
MRAPs (1)
Mullah Baradar (1)
Mullah Fazlullah (1)
Mullah Omar (3)
Musa Qala (4)
Music (21)
Muslim Brotherhood (6)
Nation Building (2)
National Internet IDs (1)
National Rifle Association (71)
NATO (15)
Navy (22)
Navy Corpsman (1)
NCOs (3)
News (1)
NGOs (2)
Nicholas Schmidle (2)
Now Zad (19)
NSA (3)
NSA James L. Jones (6)
Nuclear (57)
Nuristan (8)
Obama Administration (221)
Offshore Balancing (1)
Operation Alljah (7)
Operation Khanjar (14)
Ossetia (7)
Pakistan (165)
Paktya Province (1)
Palestine (5)
Patriotism (7)
Patrolling (1)
Pech River Valley (11)
Personal (64)
Petraeus (14)
Pictures (1)
Piracy (13)
Pistol (2)
Pizzagate (21)
Police (495)
Police in COIN (3)
Policy (15)
Politics (778)
Poppy (2)
PPEs (1)
Prisons in Counterinsurgency (12)
Project Gunrunner (20)
PRTs (1)
Qatar (1)
Quadrennial Defense Review (2)
Quds Force (13)
Quetta Shura (1)
RAND (3)
Recommended Reading (14)
Refueling Tanker (1)
Religion (196)
Religion and Insurgency (19)
Reuters (1)
Rick Perry (4)
Rifles (1)
Roads (4)
Rolling Stone (1)
Ron Paul (1)
ROTC (1)
Rules of Engagement (75)
Rumsfeld (1)
Russia (30)
Sabbatical (1)
Sangin (1)
Saqlawiyah (1)
Satellite Patrols (2)
Saudi Arabia (4)
Scenes from Iraq (1)
Second Amendment (362)
Second Amendment Quick Hits (2)
Secretary Gates (9)
Sharia Law (3)
Shura Ittehad-ul-Mujahiden (1)
SIIC (2)
Sirajuddin Haqqani (1)
Small Wars (72)
Snipers (9)
Sniveling Lackeys (2)
Soft Power (4)
Somalia (8)
Sons of Afghanistan (1)
Sons of Iraq (2)
Special Forces (28)
Squad Rushes (1)
State Department (21)
Statistics (1)
Sunni Insurgency (10)
Support to Infantry Ratio (1)
Supreme Court (20)
Survival (38)
SWAT Raids (55)
Syria (38)
Tactical Drills (2)
Tactical Gear (5)
Taliban (167)
Taliban Massing of Forces (4)
Tarmiyah (1)
TBI (1)
Technology (17)
Tehrik-i-Taliban (78)
Terrain in Combat (1)
Terrorism (95)
Thanksgiving (9)
The Anbar Narrative (23)
The Art of War (5)
The Fallen (1)
The Long War (20)
The Surge (3)
The Wounded (13)
Thomas Barnett (1)
Transnational Insurgencies (5)
Tribes (5)
TSA (22)
TSA Ineptitude (13)
TTPs (3)
U.S. Border Patrol (5)
U.S. Border Security (14)
U.S. Sovereignty (17)
UAVs (2)
UBL (4)
Ukraine (3)
Uncategorized (56)
Universal Background Check (3)
Unrestricted Warfare (4)
USS Iwo Jima (2)
USS San Antonio (1)
Uzbekistan (1)
V-22 Osprey (4)
Veterans (3)
Vietnam (1)
War & Warfare (241)
War & Warfare (40)
War Movies (4)
War Reporting (21)
Wardak Province (1)
Warriors (6)
Waziristan (1)
Weapons and Tactics (70)
West Point (1)
Winter Operations (1)
Women in Combat (21)
WTF? (1)
Yemen (1)

September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006

about · archives · contact · register

Copyright © 2006-2020 Captain's Journal. All rights reserved.