Category: ATF

On Topic

OffTopic/
David, What’s with the Ohio AG not joining the other States in the lawsuit challenging the new rule against private sales? [More]

I won’t respond there, because a big thing with me is keeping things on topic (see “Comment H0use Rules” in sidebar). That’s why comment threads hijacked away from the conversation I’m inviting, or worse, devolving into childish squabbling, really grind my gears.

But it’s a good question, and Dave Yost hasn’t shied away from those before.

Where is Ohio?

Let’s ask him.

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Plaintiffs bring this action seeking a stay of agency action, temporary restraining order, and/or a preliminary injunction to preserve the status quo, followed by a declaratory judgment and permanent injunctive relief restraining Defendants from enforcing a Final Rule issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives of the U.S. Department of Justice on April 19, 2024, entitled “Definition of ‘Engaged in the Business’ as a Dealer in Firearms” (“Final Rule”), 89 Fed. Reg. 28968. [More]

This is good work:

COUNT 5 Second Amendment: Right to Keep and Bear Arms 193. All foregoing allegations are repeated and realleged as if fully set forth herein. 194. The Second Amendment provides that “[a] well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” 195. The text of the Second Amendment provides no qualifications or limitations constraining who may exercise the right or for what purpose the right may be exercised. Accordingly, the Second Amendment presumptively protects all Americans and all lawful purposes. 196. ATF failed “to justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.” N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1, 17 (2022). Nor can ATF justify its regulation because there is no early American tradition of requiring licensure of gun sellers

Plenty of pundits will be giving you their read on this. Why not read it for yourself?

[Via Len Savage]

Justice Department FOIA Response on Permanent Entry to NICS Ignores Key Requests

What all those pages in the FOIA response did not do is provide what was being asked for. [More]

I wonder why they won’t share where they get the authority to strong-arm permanent gun disabilities without due process and that are not statutorily authorized from…

There’s an App for That

More guns are now trafficked to criminals through online sources such as Facebook, TikTok and Tinder than are trafficked at gun shows or flea markets, according to new Justice Department data that argues the marketplace for illegally obtained weapons is quickly evolving. [More]

You really can’t stop the signal.

[Via Jess]

All Clear?

That is why the week before that we promulgated a new rule to implement the bipartisan safer communities act and to at long last make it crystal clear that if you’re engaged in the business of dealing firearms for profit, there is no Gun Show Loophole and there never was. [Watch @ 11:24]

Did the poles just shift or something…?

[Via Jess/HT Langley Outdoors Academy]

We’re the Only Ones Optional Enough

TFOs employed by a law enforcement agency that mandates the use of BWCs on federal task forces MAY wear and activate their recording equipment [emphasis added]… [More]

Which presupposes “may not” …

New Biden Rule Makes ‘Buybacks’ Potential Seller Traps

An email I sent out this morning to my “small cadre” of advisors:

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-04-19/pdf/2024-07838.pdf

“The definition of ‘to predominantly earn a profit’ now focuses only on whether the intent underlying the sale or disposition of firearms is predominantly one of obtaining pecuniary gain… ’ to define the terms ‘purchase’ and ‘sale’ as they apply to dealers to include any method of payment or medium of exchange for a firearm…”

Did they just tank anonymous “buybacks” with “no questions asked”? I know some gun owners publicize selling cheap junk for a profit… I don’t see a carve out for buybacks in the text (albeit I only did a word search and have not pored through the whole mess).

It turns out Armed Attorneys addressed that in a video Len Savage sent me the link to, along with this observation:

Fun fact: The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act was touted to close the “gun show loophole” to prevent buying a firearm without a background check,

However; There is NOTHING in the rule (based on the law passed) that effects or applies to a BUYER.

NOTHING!

Meaning it would only affect the seller of a firearm to a buyback program.

Don’t take my word on it, here are two attorneys discussing it.

The relevant section starts at 8:12:

So it looks like they outsmarted themselves, and now need to ignore their own rule.

So, every time the antis hold a buyback, why not loudly complain and warn people they’re being invited to violate “commonsense gun safety laws”?

The Final Word?

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives 27 CFR Part 478 [Docket No. ATF 2022R–17; AG Order No. 5920–2024] RIN 1140–AA58 Definition of ‘‘Engaged in the Business’’ as a Dealer in Firearms AGENCY: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Department of Justice. ACTION: Final rule. [More]

I wouldn’t call it “final.”

This isn’t over by a long shot.

We’re the Only Ones Calumniating Enough

At that hearing, a law officer “falsely told the judge that ATF had been watching Mr. Wilson for 13 months and then listed dates the ATF falsely claimed he sold drugs. The agent also falsely told the judge that the Government had Mr. Wilson on tape committing these crimes,” the lawsuit said. [More]

We know Wilson’s name. How come we don’t know the name of the incompetent badged thug, and what’s going to happen with him?

Why only civil charges for kidnapping/hostage-taking? And why wouldn’t a citizen have the right to use all necessary force to protect himself and stop them?

[Via Jess]

Verified by MonsterInsights