They Should Have Done Like French Farmers

I was reading a press release on Monday from RW Arms of Fort Worth, Texas. They were a retailer of bump stocks. As I understand it, they had purchased the entire remaining inventory from Slide Fire last year. The press release said they were were surrendering their remaining 60,000 bump stock to BATFE for destruction.

Fort Worth based retailer, RW Arms, will turn in their entire inventory of bump stocks to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) on Tuesday, March 26th, to be destroyed, in compliance with the Bump Stock Ban. RW Arms will transfer 60,000 bump stocks to American Shredder in Fort Worth, Texas, to be shredded and recycled under the supervision of ATF agents.

 Subsequent stories in Texas newspapers shows them being crushed at the recycling plant.

Now I'm sure they turned them over like this because they want to stay in the good graces of the BATFE and the rest of the Deep State. However, I might have taken a page from the French farmers protesting what they considered injustices.

I would have loaded them up into this.

Driven them to this building which is the headquarters of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.

Donned my yellow vest. And then done this like French farmers have done in Paris.




Bearing in mind that French farmers have dumped more "odiferous" offerings, I think this would have been a more gentle protest of the perversion of the rule of law by the administrative state at the behest of politician than those French farmers might have conducted. I guess we will have to wait and see if the courts can grow a spine and actually stand up for the rule of law.

She’s Right You Know

This is something that I thought that I’d ever write but Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is correct. To be more precise, she is correct on one thing. That is that any ban on bump stocks is the business of Congress and not a regulatory agency.

In an op-ed published Wednesday in the Washington Post, she wrote:

Automatic weapons produced before 1986 are highly regulated, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives tracks them. Despite this, the agency has consistently stated that bump stocks could not be regulated under the current law. That was because they do not fit the legal definition of an automatic weapon under the National Firearms Act.

Automatic weapons are defined by their ability to fire a continuous number of rounds by holding down the trigger. Bump stocks and other accessories have made this definition largely obsolete, creating a loophole that circumvents Congress’s intent to bar civilians from achieving automatic rates of fire. That’s because the recoil of the stock “bumps” the finger against the trigger, allowing the weapon to achieve automatic fire. Because of this technicality, bump stocks have not run afoul of the law.

ATF initially concluded that it could not ban these devices through regulation in 2008. And after the 2012 shooting at a movie theater in Aurora, Colo., ATF further explained in a 2013 letter to Congress that it could not take unilateral action because “stocks of this type are not subject to the provisions of federal firearms statutes.” In addition, internal ATF documents made public through Freedom of Information Act requests by Giffords Law Center and Democracy Forward show that the agency had reiterated its lack of authority to ban bump stocks unilaterally and that it had approved similar devices as recently as April 2017 — under the Trump administration.

In March 2018, the Justice Department did an about-face, claiming that bump stocks do, in fact, fall under the legal definition of a machine gun and therefore can be banned through regulations. The administration’s position hinges on a dubious analysis claiming that bumping the trigger is not the same as pulling it.

Feinstein goes on to say that banning bump stocks by executive fiat opens it to legal challenge and that the Final Rule provides a roadmap for the "gun lobby" to do just that. This is not to say that Feinstein is pro-bump stock. Far from it. She wants them banned along with "trigger cranks" but says it should be done by Congress. Part of her rationale is that if it is done by Congress a future President can't change his or her mind about bump stocks and ditch the ban. The other part of her rationale is the feeling that President Trump and the BATFE with the ban are intruding upon a Congressional prerogative.

The bump stock ban is already being challenged in District Court in Guedes et al v. BATFE et al. Gun Owners of America have also been promising a lawsuit which as of this afternoon still hasn't been filed.

Bumpstock Ban, Part II

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives in response to the announcement by Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker that the final rule banning bump fire stocks has more detail as well as "instructions" for owners of these firearms accessories. You have to wonder if the release of this final rule was delayed until after Attorney General Jeff Sessions was fired and a more compliant acting AG was in place.

First, the final 157 page rule can be found here. It will officially become final when it is published in the Federal Register. The rule goes into effect 90 days from when it is published in the Federal Register.

Second, the BATFE has published instructions on how to destroy your bump fire stock. They also have links to diagrams for a number of named bump fire stocks which are below.

• Slide Fire Solutions Bump Stock
• Bump Fire Systems AR and AK Bump Fire Stocks
• Michael Wolff Bump Stock (IQ #304609)
• Phoenix Technologies Bump Stock (IQ #76598)
• Vincent Troncoso Bump Fire Device (IQ #302683)
• Michael Smith Bump Stock (IQ #76715)
• Paul Ruble 10/22 Bump Fire Stock (IQ #303826)
• Slide Fire Solutions AR Pistol Bump Fire Device (IQ #304071)
• JT Grip Solutions Bump Fire Grips (IQ #303318)
• Saigatechusa/Ramlake, LLC AK Bump Stock Device (IQ #76600)
• FosTech Outdoors Bumpski AK Bump Stock (IQ #77918)
• Michael Foeller AK Bump Stock (IQ #72350)
• James Erskine Hailstorm Bump Stock (IQ #78025)
• David Compton Bump Fire Stock (IQ #74544)
• Mike DeWitt Chuckbuster Bump Fire Grip (IQ #303195)

Third, the other opinion is turn in your bump fire stock at your local BATFE office. They "advise" to call ahead. Also, while they don't mention it, make sure you have your dog in a safe, undisclosed location.

Fourth, and this is not mentioned by BATFE, you can support the lawsuits that have or will be filed seeking to have this overturned. I will cover some of them in the next post.

Wednesday Is The Last Day To Comment On ATF's Proposed Retroactive Ban On Bump Stocks

Tomorrow, Wednesday, June 28th at 11:59pm EDT, is the close of the comment period on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives proposed ban on bump fire stocks. According to the legal sophistry of the DOJ lawyers, the BATFE erred when it said bump fire stocks did not violate the National Firearms Act. Thus, if the rule is adopted, bump fire stocks will be treated as machine guns and since they were produced after the Hughes Amendment was enacted they will be destroyed without compensation.

Bump fire stocks are a novelty to me. However, more important is how this ruling could be used to expand restrictions on all semi-automatic firearms, trigger upgrades, and the list goes on. To paraphrase Pastor Martin Niemoller's quote about the Nazis, "first they came for the bump fire stocks and I did not speak out because I didn't own a bump fire stock..."

The corporate gun ban lobby has been active in the last few days trying to solicit their members to submit comments. I'm sure they'll get a lot that will ignore the law and play on emotion. While I'll have another post up in the morning about the Firearms Policy Coalition's 900+ page submission, for the time being here is a reminder from Grass Roots North Carolina.

STOP THE ‘BUMP-STOCK’ GUN BAN

The Dangerous Precedent of the ‘Bump-Stock’  ban. The law that a ‘machine gun’ is defined by one trigger pull firing multiple rounds was written by congress and signed off on by the executive branch.  But with ‘Writing It Out’ the executive branch all by its lonesome is going to magically redefine multiple trigger pulls as one so that they can call a bump-stock equipped semi-auto firearm a ‘machine gun’.   In the words of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives: Specifically, these devices convert an otherwise semiautomatic firearm into a machinegun by functioning as a self-acting or self-regulating mechanism that harnesses the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm in a manner that allows the trigger to reset and continue firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter. The trigger still has to be pulled for every shot, but with the word play magic, those additional trigger pulls are going to be ‘written out’ so with supposedly one trigger pull, you have a ‘Machine gun’! It’s a semi-automatic miracle!       If the required trigger pull for every shot has been ‘written out’ devices such as Bump-stocks, belt loops, rubber bands or fingers will have to be banned since these can also turn that which is ‘semi-automatic’ into something that is ‘automatic’.  But they can’t very well ban pants, rubber bands or fingers, so they will have to ban semi-automatic firearms instead.     But wait!  There’s more!     With this magical word play any gun that can fire again with just a trigger pull could also be banned as a 'machine gun', meaning revolvers or shotguns could also be eliminated. See how easy it is to ban just about everything by just changing the meaning of a few words? Nancy Pelosi [Bless her heart] openly admitted that she hoped the ‘Bump-Stock’ ban would lead to a slippery slope towards other restrictions on our freedom.   “They’re going to say, ‘You give them bump stock, it’s going to be a slippery slope.’ I certainly hope so,” Pelosi confirmed. The Left wants to cynically exploit the recent shootings for political gain, This is only round one of a coming battle to defend your Constitutional rights.

IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED!

The end of the comment period is tomorrow: June 27, 2018  so you only have a short time to express your opinion on this important and far reaching issue. SUBMIT A COMMENT AGAINST THE THE SEMI-AUTO/BUMP-STOCK BAN  Click on the link provided, and use the copy/paste message provided below under ‘Deliver This Message.’https://www.regulations.gov/comment?D=ATF-2018-0002-0001 Help GRNC reload for the coming battle: The Left cannot stand it when you exercise your rights and they will stop at nothing to deprive you of them.   We desperately need money and volunteers for the upcoming battle. Please help by donating at: https://www.grnc.org/join-grnc/contribute

DELIVER THIS MESSAGE

This is in opposition to the 'bump device' ban, or any such rule.     The Executive branch of the Federal government cannot simply change the meaning of words to ‘write out’ things that are unpopular at the moment. It also cannot turn semi-automatic firearms into ‘machine guns’ with the stroke of a pen.  These firearms require multiple trigger pulls to fire.  No amount of word magic can change that fact. Attempting to do so will set a dangerous precedent with potential to put all guns on the chopping block.  That will most certainly INFRINGE on the 2nd amendment.  The Federal government has no authority to  change the meaning of words that impact the law in this matter.   Respectfully,

Comment Period Opens On Proposed Bump Stock Ban

Adam Kraut gives a good thumbnail overview of how to respond to the BATFE proposed rulemaking in the video below. He suggests taking a shotgun approach as the more objections you can raise, the more the BATFE has to work to respond to them. Moreover, if it isn't brought up now, it can't be brought up in court later.



Here is the document released by the lawyers of the Department of Justice with their legal rationale (or bullshit, to be more honest about it) saying why they can now define bump fire stocks as machine guns. It is important to note that if this rule is enacted then all existing bump fire stocks become contraband unregistered machine guns and must be destroyed or turned into BATFE. Why? That little amendment to FOPA 1986 called the Hughes Amendment comes into play as bump fire stocks were developed, manufactured, and sold after 1986.

Here is the correct link to the comments page.

I say correct link because www.regulations.gov has two links to the proposed regulations. One is the correct link and the other says comments are closed. Remember, never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence or stupidity.

So scan through the DOJ document to find areas on which to make comments. There is nothing to say you can't make multiple comments on different things. The comment period closes on June 27, 2018 at 11:59pm. So do it now while it is still fresh in your mind.

Sorry Donald But This Is Bovine Excrement

President Donald Trump released a Presidential Memorandum today directing Attorney General Jeff Sessions to complete the review of bump fire stocks and to promulgate a rule banning them. The problem with this Presidential Memorandum is that bump fire stocks as exemplified by the SlideFire Stock do not meet the definition of machine guns under the National Firearms Act and applicable BATFE rulings. That was why Rich Vasquez when he was charged with analyzing the SlideFire Stock found that it was not a machine gun nor did it convert a semi-automatic firearm into one. I made this very point in my own comment under the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

If President Trump wishes to change the definition of a machine gun under the National Firearms Act or if he wishes to pass a bill banning bump fire stocks, then he should ask Congress to pass such a bill. Directing the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to make such a change to the existing rules governing bump fire stocks ignores the rule of law despite what he might say in this Presidential Memorandum.

You can read the full Presidential Memorandum below:

After the deadly mass murder in Las Vegas, Nevada, on October 1, 2017, I asked my Administration to fully review how the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives regulates bump fire stocks and similar devices.

Although the Obama Administration repeatedly concluded that particular bump stock type devices were lawful to purchase and possess, I sought further clarification of the law restricting fully automatic machineguns.

Accordingly, following established legal protocols, the Department of Justice started the process of promulgating a Federal regulation interpreting the definition of “machinegun” under Federal law to clarify whether certain bump stock type devices should be illegal. The Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published in the Federal Register on December 26, 2017. Public comment concluded on January 25, 2018, with the Department of Justice receiving over 100,000 comments.

Today, I am directing the Department of Justice to dedicate all available resources to complete the review of the comments received, and, as expeditiously as possible, to propose for notice and comment a rule banning all devices that turn legal weapons into machineguns.

Although I desire swift and decisive action, I remain committed to the rule of law and to the procedures the law prescribes. Doing this the right way will ensure that the resulting regulation is workable and effective and leaves no loopholes for criminals to exploit. I would ask that you keep me regularly apprised of your progress.

You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

DONALD J. TRUMP

If Donald Trump has any desire to have a second term, pissing off the gun rights community which provided his margin of victory in battleground states is a damn poor way to go about it.

Much Ado About Nothing

The Brady Campaign, CNN, and the cult of personality known as Giffords are all in a tizzy that an BATFE official actually reached out to a lobbyist for comments. You may remember the white paper written by BATFE Associate Deputy Director Ron Turk that suggested items for discussion with regard to firearms regulations. The white paper was released after the inauguration of President Trump. It is to be noted that Ron Turk has always maintained that the items discussed in the paper were not official policy but rather items for discussion that he proposed.

According to CNN, after writing his initial draft of the white paper, Turk sent it to firearms lobbyist Mark Barnes for comments.

"If I am missing the mark on a major issue or disregarding a major discussion point any feedback you have would be appreciated," Turk wrote to the lobbyist, Mark Barnes, on January 9, 2017. "My hope is that the agency can demonstrate flexibility where appropriate and identify areas for further discussion, recognizing that solving everyone's concerns on each side would be difficult."

Some of the suggestions from Barnes were included in the final draft of the white paper. Things like allowing dealers to use the NICS system to run background check on their own employees and a re-examination of a 20-year old sporting use study in light of the sporting uses of AKs and ARs. However, things that Barnes also suggested like loosening restrictions on the imports of SKS carbines and Makarov pistols from Russia were not included.

I think what has the gun control lobby and their enablers in the media so upset is that they weren't approached for suggestions.

From Avery Gardiner of the Brady Campaign:

"I was surprised to see that the draft document had been emailed out to a gun industry lawyer and the final product took his suggestions as edits -- without any disclosure of that until we went to court to get these documents," said Avery W. Gardiner, co-president of the Brady Center. ...

"There was a secret white paper that was partially written by the gun lobby. That's exactly the kind of thing the Freedom of Information Act is supposed to address -- transparency of government," Gardiner said.

And from David Chipman, the former BATFE Special Agent who now works for Giffords, who is dismayed by the revelation:

"An independent ATF is critical to this nation's security. The white paper suggests that the gun industry's quest for power and influence has trumped public safety," Chipman said.

An interesting side note on Chipman, he is a 1984 graduate of Phillips Exeter Academy - the ultra-expensive, ultra-upper class, prep school. I'm having a little bit of cognitive dissonance over a preppy actually getting his hands dirty working for a lackluster agency like BATFE. Isn't that a little beneath a graduate of Phillips Exeter?

Back to the story in question, think back to the Obama Administration and all the photo ops and meeting held with the gun control industry. They were quite numerous. I think the problem here is that they are miffed to be on the outside looking in as opposed to the good old days when they had a seat at the table.

The CNN story does have link to all the drafts of the white papers if you are interested. They have also included a video on the page that seems like an outright editorial call for universal background checks. As Glenn Reynolds has often said they are Democratic operatives with a byline. I'd modify it to include gun control advocates with a byline.

Firearms Policy Coalition Promises Cost Will Be High For BATFE If They Ban Bump Stocks

Last night at midnight EST, the comment period on the BATFE's Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking closed. My comment was submitted last Saturday so that I wouldn't forget it in all the hub-bub of the SHOT Show.

The Firearms Policy Coalition submitted their comment yesterday (on time). Their release below makes some very good points especially on the costs of implementing such a rule. It is important to bear in mind that if BATFE were to create a ruling banning bump fire or slide fire stocks, they would be making it up out of whole cloth. In other words, they would be assuming extra-constitutional powers that have no basis in either legislation or the rule of law.

Furthermore, there is the cost issue. There will be millions spent on enforcing an illegal law as well as untold millions on litigation. The Firearms Policy Coalition is upfront in saying that they will go to Federal court if the BATFE does create a regulation banning or regulating bump fire stocks. That said, I hope that cooler heads will prevail and any further moves towards a new regulation die in infancy.

From the FPC:

WASHINGTON, D.C. (January 25, 2018) — Today, civil rights advocacy organization Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) submitted formal comments to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) regarding a regulatory proposal that would apply the definition of ‘machinegun’ to so-called “bump fire stocks” and countless other devices. In a letter sent by FPC President Brandon Combs, the group called the proposal “troubling” and said that it “raises serious constitutional concerns, including the violation of the separation of powers.”

“The DOJ and BATFE clearly lack the statutory authority to re-define the targeted devices as ‘machineguns.’” But the gun rights group said that, if the government does re-classify so-called “bump stocks” and other devices to be “machineguns” under federal law, they would file a federal lawsuit that “would provide an excellent vehicle for the Supreme Court to re-visit and eliminate the made-up judicial construct of agency deference”—something many Supreme Court justices have signaled as an issue they may revisit soon.

FPC also said that the proposed ban would come at a high price. “These costs would necessarily include likely millions of dollars in BATFE implementation and enforcement costs, in addition to potentially millions of dollars in fending off the inevitable litigation arising from the serious constitutional and statutory violations engendered by this regulatory process,” FPC argued. “Moreover, American taxpayers would also likely be stuck with the bill for the plaintiffs’ attorneys fees and costs should the government fail in attempting to defend this illegal and unconstitutional action.”

After the October 1, 2017, mass shooting in Las Vegas, FPC released a statement ( http://bit.ly/fpc-las-vegas ) saying that, even “in troubled and troubling times like these, we are honor-bound to stand united in defense of fundamental, individual liberties, in all cases, and in spite of the incalculable grief we feel for the victims of Las Vegas as fellow human beings.”

In a subsequent statement ( http://bit.ly/fpc-2017-10-6 ) FPC repudiated proposed bans on semi-automatic firearms and accessories, including “bump fire” stocks. “All unconstitutional laws are unjust, illegitimate, and offensive to the rule of law—even if they are enacted in response to a very real tragedy. FPC opposes all restrictions on the acquisition, possession, carry, and use of common, semi-automatic firearms, ammunition, and accessories by law-abiding people.”

Later in October, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra issued a news release declaring “bump stock” devices to be “multiburst trigger activators” and “illegal in California.” But FPC responded days later ( http://bit.ly/fpc-becerra-illegal-bump-stocks ) and said that it was Becerra’s statements that were “disingenuous at best and probably illegal.” Said FPC President Brandon Combs at the time, “Not only is Attorney General Becerra’s so-called ‘news release’ inaccurate and misleading, it is almost certainly an illegal underground regulation.”

Reminder From GRNC - ATF Comment Period Closes Next Week

Grass Roots North Carolina sent out an alert reminding people that the comment period for the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking closes on January 25th. They also have a suggested comment. I have sent my comment in and will post it as a separately.

Just a reminder, all comments must reference Docket Number  2017R-22.

PROPOSED RULE TO STIFLE THE 2ND AMENDMENT

It seems our friends at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE, often referred to as the ATF) would like to impose “maximum firing rates” on American gun owners. Apparently, there is even talk that they may classify your semi-automatic rifle as a “machine gun.” Reason and legalities tell us that a machine gun fires continuously and automatically with a single function of the trigger.  But the BATFE is no longer sure that definition suits them. This is because, since the definition was established, super high-tech items have been developed, such as rubber bands, belt loops, shoestrings and Jerry Miculek.  The truth is, even with these “high-tech” devices, nothing has really changed. So-called “bump firing” still requires one trigger action for each round fired. Yet, the BATFE is looking to “clarify” the NFA and whether certain devices, commonly known as bump fire stocks, fall within the definition of machine gun. Absurd. With the flick of a bureaucrat’s wrist, your lowly non-NFA firearm (read: semi-automatic) may suddenly be elevated to the status of machine gun. It will be classified not by trigger action, but by arbitrary firing rate, which is something that can be altered by any number of things, including something as nebulous as the skill of its owner. The list of items that can affect rate of fire also includes innocuous, legal and unrelated things such as: optical sights, trigger jobs, muzzle compensators, and who knows what else? Picture Andrew Cuomo screaming: “No one needs a gun that can shoot more than once every 5 minutes to kill a deer!” Surely, we can trust the government to not take advantage of a new-found power over the peoples’ guns, right? Comment Against This Infringement The BATFE’s comment period regarding this proposed rule is still open, and it is critical that you submit a comment against this proposed infringement on your gun rights. BUT HURRY! THE COMMENTS PERIOD IS ONLY OPEN FOR FIVE MORE DAYS! If this is not stopped, who knows when all guns will be classified as “machine guns?” To comment, find a link below, and a copy/paste message you can use to comment.

IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED!
SUBMIT A COMMENT AGAINST THIS SO-CALLED “BUMP FIRE” RULE. Click on the link provided, and use the copy/paste message provided below under ‘Deliver This Message.’ CLICK HERE (or go to: tinyurl.com/yavpvb4n). Comments MUST be submitted by Thursday, January 25th.
DELIVER THIS MESSAGE
I'm writing to day to speak against the formation of a so-called “Bump Fire” rule. Clearly, the proposed rule is designed to open a debate about semi-automatic firing rates, something that is not open to debate in a free country. This is dangerous territory where ambiguous language, established by unelected government employees, is sure to infringe on the Second Amendment rights of The People. The proposed rule references “devices used with a semiautomatic firearm to increase the firearm's cyclic firing rate.” Clearly, that sort of open-ended language could be used to ban any device that increases the firearm's cyclic firing rate regardless of trigger action, e.g. trigger jobs, muzzle compensators, optical sights, shoestrings, rubber bands, and who knows what else? Given that bump stocks do not alter trigger function, firearms remain semi-automatic, the BATFE has no legitimate authority to impose this infringement on the American people. Indeed, there is no statutory definition of “machinegun” in the National Firearms Act of 1934 nor the Gun Control Act of 1968 that would allow the BATFE to make this stretch. Any “Bump Fire” rule would be unconstitutional, and any “rule” imposed by federal bureaucrats is really just a law established without the approval of the peoples’ representatives. Surely, those at the BATFE have no interest in circumventing the Constitution of the United States, nor would they want to disrespect the country’s law-abiding people in such a manner. For these reasons, I must insist that the BATFE immediately discard any thoughts of imposing a “Bump Fire” rule.

ATF Or AEF? Trump Budget Proposes A Realignment Of Agency

"Senior administration officials" have told the New York Times that the Trump Administration plans to strip out the tobacco and alcohol enforcement roles from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. These functions would be returned to the Treasury Department as BATFE has ignored cigarette smuggling and bootlegging in favor "fighting violent crime".

Under the Trump administration’s plan, the Treasury Department would inherit the authority to investigate tobacco and alcohol smuggling. The A.T.F. would need a new name. One possibility: the Bureau of Arson, Explosives and Firearms, or A.E.F.

The move would resolve a bureaucratic split that has existed for years. Treasury collects the taxes on cigarettes and liquor, but A.T.F. investigates efforts to evade those taxes.

The change is included in a draft of President Trump’s coming budget proposal, according to two senior administration officials. The plan envisions hiring roughly two dozen Treasury agents, plus auditors and support staff, the officials said. Congress would have to pass a law to reorganize the agencies.

The officials who discussed the proposal did so on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it in draft form. Though budget plans can change, the officials said the A.T.F. language has remained in place through multiple revisions.

Spokespersons for BATFE and the Treasury Department did not respond to requests for comments.

A quick check of CleanUpATF.org shows no comments on the proposed change.

I'm sure this proposal will be the source of some speculation at this coming week's SHOT Show. If I pick up anything juicy or earth-shattering, I'll share it here as an update.


H/T Stephen Wenger's DUF list

Reclassification Of Bump Stocks By BATFE - Comments Due By January 25th

As many already know, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives anticipates opening a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking with regard to bump fire stocks to clarify whether or not they meet the definition of a machine gun under the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Gun Control Act of 1968. Before they release any proposed rule, they are seeking comments from manufacturers, retailers, and consumers. These must be received by midnight EST on January 25, 2018.

The Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking with the questions to be answered is here. All comments must include this identification number - 2017R-22. Comments can be submitted online, by fax, or by US Mail. So far, 2,309 comments have been received. Here is the link to submit them online. It also allows you to upload a document.

These are the questions that they have for consumers:

Consumers

21. In your experience, where have you seen these devices for sale and which of these has been the most common outlet from which consumers have purchased these devices (e.g., brick and mortar retail stores; online vendors; gun shows or similar events; or private sales between individuals)?

22. Based on your experience or observations, what is (or has been) the price range for these devices?

23. For what purposes are the bump stock devices used or advertised?

 Gun law attorney Adam Kraut had these suggestions for responding to the ANPRM. Adam has more on the notice here.

Comments vary in form, length, and specificity. However, there are some things that a person submitting a comment will want to consider. Specificity is key. Providing a basis for the support or opposition to a proposed rule is crucial. Citing to studies or other evidence-based information is useful to show the agency why or why not a proposed rule is useful. In the instance of an ANPRM, responding to the specific questions posed by the agency is a particularly good strategy (not to say a commenter could not and should not go broader in their response). Regulations.gov has some more tips.

As important as comment “dos” are, there is one comment “don’t” that should be avoided: the Form Letter. As comment periods are not a measure of “popularity”, flooding the agency with form letters do not serve a useful purpose in the rulemaking process. A comment that is well reasoned is a much better avenue to pursue and not very difficult.

David Codrea has his take on the notice of rulemaking here.

The danger in this anticipated rulemaking is the same as it is with the proposed bills banning bump stocks before Congress:  where does it stop? With the Slidefire Bump Stock or will it go further to mean any modification that could increase the rate of fire of a semi-automatic firearm? Because of this, it is important that we comment.

While it might feel good to tell the BATFE to just f*#k off, go away, and mind the letter of the law, that will get us nowhere. It will be expressly ignored as it includes profanity. I think Adam's approach to address some part of the questions asked is a good one. These cannot be ignored as readily. I think the key thing is to kill the attempt to issue a rule before it gets off the ground. That is better than having to respond to an actual proposed rule which is more likely to be adopted.

Why Bump Fire Stocks Were Approved

Rick Vasquez was the Assistant Branch Chief of the Technology Branch of BATFE. He has now retired and owns a firearms firm in Virginia. Before he retired from the BATFE, analysts under his management did the research and technical evaluation of the bump fire stocks submitted for approval. Rick reviewed their results and approved their evaluation. Moreover, he makes no apologies for it as it follows the law as written by Congress.

In the video below, Rick is interviewed for a Vice News/HBO report. While Vice TV often has a leftist slant, they played it straight on this one and let Rick explain things. He also shows the reporter how you can bump fire without a device or special stock.

Judicial Watch Goes To Court Against The BATFE

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives just can't seem to keep themselves out of the news this week. The watchdog group Judicial Watch sued BATFE because they still have not responded to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for documents relating to the attempt to ban 5.56x45 "green-tip" ammunition. The FOIA request was made made in March 2015.

From Judicial Watch on their suit:

Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the agency failed to respond to a March 9, 2015, FOIA request seeking information on the ammo ban effort:

• All records of communications, including emails, to or from employees or officials of the ATF related to the decision to revise the ATF 2014 Regulation Guide to no longer exempt 5.56 mm. SS109 and M855 (i.e., “green tip” AR-15) ammunition from the definition of “armor-piercing” ammunition.

The precise statutory definition of “armor-piercing ammunition” can be found in 18 U.S.C §921(a)(17).

“This is yet another example of how Obama’s wanton use of the ‘pen and the phone’ attempted to undermine the constitutional rights of all Americans, as opposed to upholding the rule of law,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The Obama ATF simply ignored our request on their ammo ban. Let’s hope the Trump administration finally brings transparency to this out-of-control agency.”

Reading through the complaint, it appears that BATFE just blew off this FOIA request and didn't even assign it a control number. The complaint asks the District Court to order BATFE to search their records for the requested documents, to order them to hand over all non-exempt documents, and to enjoin them from continuing to withhold any of the requested documents. Judicial Watch is also asking for attorneys' fees.

Judicial Watch is known for its success in these types of lawsuits. It will make for interesting reading what they uncover.

The Difference Between Stupid And Really Stupid

Stupid is blowing off a "request" to appear before the House Oversight and Government Affairs Committee. The committee was investigating the death of a Federal law enforcement officer, ICE's Jaime Zapata, by Mexican cartel members using firearms BATFE allowed to be "walked" to Mexico.

This is what BATFE's Associate Deputy Director Ronald B. "Ron" Turk did on Thursday, March 9th. In response, the committee chairman, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), issued a subpoena for Mr. Turk.

Now that was stupid. Really stupid is what happens next.

Turk did finally appear on April 4th at another House Oversight hearing at which his earlier absence was noted. After getting into it with Rep. Chaffetz about why he didn't appear when "invited", Turk made this accusation as he really starts to go off: "You want to get your 15 seconds of YouTube minute time to challenge my honor." You can see this starting at 4:56 in the attached YouTube video.




It takes Rep. Chaffetz another minute or so of questioning before he really lights into Turk for blowing off the committee and for his YouTube comment. That starts at 7:12 and runs until about 8:04. At this point Turk realizes that he has screwed up and starts to grovel for the remainder of the time.

Bear in mind that Turk is not only the number two person at BATFE but he is also a Brigadier General in the Maryland Air Nation Guard where he serves as Chief of Staff. He didn't get to those two positions by being a good street agent or a good airman. He got there by being a good politician and a good politician should know when to shut up. That he had that lapse of judgement was a bit surprising given the political astuteness of his leaked white paper. It was really stupid on his part and cements the impression that BATFE is out of control.



H/T CleanUpAtf.org

Couldn't You Just Imagine John Ross As Head Of BATFE?

I saw reference to this on Facebook earlier this evening and now have found the original letter. John Ross, author of Unintended Consequences, has volunteered to be Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives for a salary of $1 per year. If you are unfamiliar with the book, it is a 1996 novel of the gun culture (one of the earliest uses of that term) and the jack-booted thuggery of the BATF.

If you don't want to pay over $100 for a used hardcover version of the book, I suggest going to the publisher who reportedly still has paperback versions of the book available. While I don't want to suggest gypping an author out of his well-deserved royalties, you can find PDFs of the book on the Internet if you look hard enough.

Ross' letter and an introductory letter by T. J. Mullin are posted on the Subguns.com NFA forum. I have taken the liberty of reproducing it below.

John Ross volunteers for ATF Director position

Posted By: stfram
Date: 1/2/17 05:38

Copied from conservativetreehouse.com:

January 2, 2017 at 12:26 am

Another Dollar-A-Year Man for the Trump Administration by Timothy J. Mullin and John Ross

Treepers: I’ve been urged to volunteer to be a part of the Trump Administration, and need a good place to publish these letters, that supporters can link to. I’d like that place to be CTH.

First, an introductory letter from Timothy J. Mullin, then my own to President-elect Trump.
JR

===================================================

To all Trump Administration supporters:

I suspect that most of you reading this are like me, and figure that anyone who wants to get a government job is likely one of two types: First, there are the lazy and stupid, who can’t compete in the private sector, but still want to get a high-paying job with good benefits. That’s okay, I suppose, as such people are not dangerous, just a drag on everyone else. Worse are those who want to get the job to exert power over other people, but who know that with their own skills and abilities alone, they could not do it. However, if they have the weight and power of the government at their command, they will be able to rule over others. Then, of course, there are those who are both things, the lazy & stupid who also want to control the lives of other people.

Alternatively, there are a few citizens who are willing to make sacrifices of both money and, more critically, time, to take a government position because they think it is the right thing to do. They know that they can bring insight and ability to a position that will make the country a better place–a better place not for themselves, but for others who will come after them. People like this get little value for themselves from their efforts, for they have already managed to structure their lives so that the reforms that they will encourage have little impact on them, but will benefit others.

Among this group of people who volunteer to sacrifice their own best interests, much the same as a soldier will do for the country’s best interests, is my friend, John Ross.

John has agreed to offer himself up to serve in the new Trump Administration as the Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. This Agency is one riddled with scandal and is certainly one of the least admirable of our existing federal agencies, considered by most as the “F Troop” of federal law enforcement.

Why, then, would anyone who has everything going for him, as John does, be willing to take on such a position? It is because he is the man for the job, and realizes that his country desperately needs his abilities and insights at this so-very-critical time.

For those who may have come in late to the subject of the BATFE and its interaction with the citizens and civil rights of our country, John Ross is the author of UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, the definitive book chronicling the gun culture of our country, and the attacks on it by our own government. This book has risen to as high as No. 7 on the Amazon hardcover sales chart, and is now in its eighth printing. It has sold an astounding number of copies, but more critically, it has achieved world-wide fame and been lauded by many readers (too many to count) as the best book they have ever read, excepting the Bible. Not only is John Ross an accomplished author of great renown familiar with the BATFE and its many issues, he has been an active participant in the field for over 40 years, holding BATFE-issued federal licenses at a variety of levels, so he has had plenty of interaction with that Agency.

Of course, merely being the single most influential chronicler of the gun culture and holding licenses issued by the BATFE would hardly be sufficient to administer an Agency like the BATFE if he did not also have the intellect and managerial skills needed for such duties. His many articles in a variety of publications, like The American Thinker, as well as graduation from Amherst College, with BA degrees in both English and Economics, all give strong evidence of his intellectual capabilities. A successful quarter-century career managing others in the securities field, forty years and counting in Aspen real estate, and being an entrepreneur who developed and promoted a specialty handgun (the massive Smith & Wesson Ross Model 500 revolver), clear up any questions about the latter point.

Cleaning up an Agency like the BATFE, which is riddled with mismanagement, has been exposed numerous time for engaging in criminal behavior, and has a history of civil rights violations such that the honest citizenry of our country distrusts them at a level unreached by any other government agency, calls for a man like John Ross to take control and, to quote the new President, “Drain the Swamp.”

At my urging, John has written a letter to President-elect Donald Trump, following Mr. Trump’s example by offering himself as a “Dollar A Year” man. Such opportunities to get talent and skills like his are almost unheard of at the Federal level when accompanied by the correct attitude and philosophy. With his permission, I am attaching a copy of his letter offering his services.

I would encourage all who read this, and would like to see a rogue agency be brought back into the mold of an organization that can be trusted by those who applaud what our country was founded to achieve, to join me. Please contact the President-elect and ask him to take advantage of this superb opportunity for our nation.

Timothy J. Mullin is a 1973 graduate of the University of Chicago Law School and has a private law practice in St. Louis, MO. He has written over a dozen books on firearms-related topics, with emphasis on their history, cultural significance, and tactical use. He has also published scores of firearms-related magazine articles, many on the legal realities of protecting oneself from an overreaching Federal Government.

==================================================

From John Ross:

Dear President-Elect Trump:

It is Christmas Day as I write this, and I have been watching the things you have been doing as President-Elect with ever increasing admiration. I would like to be a “Dollar a Year Man” in your administration—that is to say, to follow your example and eschew a government salary.

The position I’d like to fill is Director of BATFE. This would dovetail well with your policy of appointing established critics of various troubled agencies (EPA, HUD, etc.) as the people to best lead them, reform them, or, in some cases, oversee their dissolution.

The experience and attitude I would bring to BATFE would focus on four areas, all consistent with your philosophy of “Make America Great Again”: Restore an environment in which the weapons invented by America’s individual small arms designers were the best in the world, with the attendant benefit to the U.S. Military;

Nurture an environment of innovation in all disciplines regulated by BATFE;

Preserve and advance the current and historic knowledge and techniques that are slowly being lost here in America;

Increase legal commerce (and the attendant tax revenue) in ways consistent with your strong pro-business platform.

Many of these goals can be attained with policy shifts within the BATFE which I would initiate, and would not require Congress to pass new legislation.

My Credentials:

While I have never managed a group of people as large as a Federal Agency, I spent over 25 years running offices and training departments in the Securities industry. I was successful enough at these endeavors that, like you, I can afford to work for free to help put our country back on the right track so that it will be stronger and more free for our descendants.

Of equal importance is my 40-year background in firearms and explosives. These fields are unlike most segments of American commerce in that they generate tremendous passion among their participants. More than one American firearms company, looking to improve its market position, has hired a Chief Executive who was a great success at running a company that made washing machines or some other common manufactured product, only to discover that consumers don’t think the same way when buying guns as they do when shopping for appliances. The same is true for explosives, particularly in the growing fireworks industry.

Business in this industry is bigger every year, and we are currently seeing over $1 Billion in domestic annual revenues. The BATFE should be directed by someone who understands these market realities with every fiber of his being.

The fact that I have zero experience in the manufacture, importation, sale, or distribution of alcohol or tobacco products is not, as it might first seem, a negative in regards to heading this federal agency. According to the General Accounting Office, BATFE spends 76% of its annual budget on firearms-related operations, and 22% on explosives and the attendant arson investigations.

Despite having “Alcohol” and “Tobacco” in its name, only 2% of BATFE’s budget is spent on alcohol and tobacco issues. The lion’s share of that tiny budget percentage is dedicated to thwarting illicit smuggling operations involving the movement of cigarettes from Virginia, where the state excise tax is 30 cents per pack, to New York and Chicago, where state and local tax rates are $5.85 and $6.16 per pack, respectively. See this article for documentation:

https://www.nap.edu/read/19016/chapter/8#142

These statistics clearly show that it is imperative that a BATFE Director be intimately familiar with the areas where BATFE spends 98% of its budget, namely Firearms and Explosives. Even more importantly, the new Director must be sensitive to the legal and cultural issues that exist in the interplay between the Agency he directs and the citizens with whom it interacts.

I am that person. I will bring experience to the job, and restore credibility to this tarnished Agency.

Sincerely yours,

John Ross

"Suspected Of Impersonating A Police Officer"

The Anchorage Police Department received complaints about an obnoxious driver last weekend. They were very concerned as the vehicle involved had flashing red and blue lights and thought they might be dealing with someone impersonating a police officer. They asked the public for help in identifying the driver.

The driver in question, a white male in his 30s with short hair, came up behind multiple cars, flipped on his flashing lights and then would speed past them when they yielded. Oh, and he would laugh at them while flipping them the middle finger.

One of the motorists who had been pulled over took a picture of the license plate of the vehicle in question. This is where it really gets interesting. The APD went to run the plate against the DMV database and came up empty. Thinking it might be an undercover car of the Alaska State Police, they contacted them and also came up empty.

After a few days of detective work by APD, the car and unidentified driver were traced to a federal law enforcement agency - the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. In a later release, APD said they were informed that this employee of BATFE was "on official business at the time of the incident".

ATF's Seattle office, which also oversees operations in Alaska, declined to answer questions Tuesday about the bureau's policies regarding unmarked vehicles or whether any disciplinary action had been taken. The office released a brief statement from special agent in charge Doug Dawson.

"ATF is aware of the allegations made in the complaint and is investigating the incident," Dawson said. "Further, as a matter of policy, ATF does not comment on personnel matters."

I'm guessing the BATFE agent in question was confused by his agency's directives on trafficking. He must have thought it had something to do with traffic enforcement as opposed to trafficking in guns, dynamite, moonshine, or cigarettes.


H/T Sipsey Street

People Ask The Most Embarrassing Questions

Unlike scripted townhalls scheduled for CNN, when it comes to government agencies and social media embarrassing questions do get asked.

A case in point. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives maintains a Facebook page. They posted a number of links late last night to the new rules being promulgated as the result of President Obama's Executive Actions. There was one about the elimination of the CLEO signoff and another about Rule 41-P and responsible persons needing background checks. My favorite, however, was their guidance about when a Federal firearms license was needed. Someone named Bre Ve asked a question that you know they would rather ignore.

Reading the comments, it appears that a Becky Solis objected to the question. The commenters had good Google-fu and found out that she was none other than an area supervisor in the Denver Field Division. Her comment objecting to Ms. Ve's question has, of course, been deleted.

Good on Bre Ve for asking the question of the day and for the commenters in exposing Ms. Solis.

Ummm - Not Exactly Correct, Ms. US Attorney For Connecticut

While reading the Book of the Face I was stunned to learn that Stag Arms had just lost their Federal Firearms License for a variety of violations including having 62 machine guns (actually just the receivers) that were registered to another entity or not registered at all. More on this in another post.

What I found very interesting was this paragraph from the joint press release from US Attorney for Connecticut Deidre M. Daly and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.

A receiver is the key regulated part that is considered a machine gun. All other parts necessary to transform a receiver to a fully functional semi-automatic or automatic machine gun can be purchased over the Internet.

On the face of it, this is true. The receiver is the key regulated product of machine guns as well as any other firearm manufactured in the United States. It is the part that is serialized. It is also true that you can get all the normal trigger parts including the auto sear over the Internet to go into a registered machine gun receiver.

However, thanks to ATF Ruling 81-4, drop-in auto sears which allow some semi-automatic AR15s to become fully automatic if they have the other M16 parts are considered machine guns and are regulated under the National Firearms Act.

Regardless of the date of manufacture of a drop in auto sear (i.e., before or after November 1, 1981) the possession or transfer of an unregistered drop in auto sear (a machinegun as defined) is prohibited by the National Firearms Act (NFA), 26 U.S.C. § 5861, and the Gun Control Act, 18 U.S.C. § 922(o).

This may be a niggly, little quibble but it was the BATFE's own ruling that decreed the drop in auto sear a NFA item. Since they wrote the regulation they should be held to a higher standard when it comes to the verbiage used in a press release. (Alinsky's Rule No. 4) A drop in auto sear is not just something that you can buy off the Internet to make a receiver into a fully automatic firearm.

Malfeasance Rewarded

Imagine if you will that you worked for a large company and were issued both a company car and company-provided credit card. Then imagine what would happen if you decided to use that company car to drive to a casino, to use that company-provided credit card to get a cash advance to buy chips, and you did it all on company time.

You would likely be fired and perhaps even prosecuted for stealing from your employer. Or, at least, that is how it should work in the real world.

However, if you were a BATFE Special Agent and you did this, then you just might get promoted to Special Agent in Charge of a Field Division and move into the Senior Executive Service. According to the summary report from the DOJ's Office of Inspector General posted to CleanUpATF.org, that is exactly what happened.

Investigative Summary:
Findings Concerning On-Duty Gambling and Related Misconduct by an ATF Special Agent in Charge While in a Prior Position

The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) initiated this investigation based on information from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) alleging that a current Special Agent in Charge (SAC) gambled on duty and engaged in related misconduct while in a position with ATF prior to being promoted. The OIG investigation determined that the SAC gambled on duty, misused his government travel card to facilitate his gambling, and misused his assigned government vehicle by using it to travel to casinos. By gambling while on duty, the SAC violated federal regulations that prohibit federal employees from gambling while on duty. In addition, the SAC violated ATF policy by, among other things, misusing his government travel card to obtain cash advances to gamble, and using his assigned government vehicle to travel to casinos to gamble, which is not an “official purpose” for which use of the government vehicle is authorized. Prosecution was declined. The OIG provided a report of investigation to ATF for appropriate action.

So the question remains, which one of the 25 Special Agents in Charge (SAC) on this list is the culprit? Was it Eric Harden in LA, Delano Reid in NYC, Carl Walker in Atlanta, or someone else?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Absurd Ruling In Terry Murder Trial

US District Court Judge David Bury ruled on Friday that no mention of Operation Fast and Furious aka Project Gunwalker could be made in the trial of two men accused of the murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

The U.S. asked the judge this summer to keep the details of Fast and Furious out of the murder trial, stating it was irrelevant.

Bury agreed. "I agree with one exception. I can't find any relevance expect if the government should open the door," he said.

If the government brings up the origins of the guns found, Bury ruled that defendants can then bring up Fast and Furious.

Bury ordered the defendants "not to refer to ... or elicit any testimony regarding Operation Fast and Furious. Understood?"

Excuse me?

The defendants, Ivan Soto Barraza and Jesus Leonel Sanchez Meza, used AK-47s to kill Agent Terry that the BATFE had allowed (encouraged) to be walked to Mexico as part of Operation Fast and Furious. Given that the Department of Justice and BATFE were complicit in providing the firearms used to kill Agent Terry, ICE Special Agent Jaime Zapata, and 300 or more Mexicans, I'm not surprised that the US Attorney's Office doesn't want it mentioned. However, I am surprised that a judge would deny the defense of the opportunity to use it in defending their clients.

It is obvious that burying the details of Operation Fast and Furious is important to the prosecutors. In addition to the judge's order above, they have a whole series of questions for potential jurors asking about their knowledge of Project Gunwalker.  One does have to wonder if this was a local decision to suppress mention of Operation Fast and Furious or did the order come down from DC.