Archive for the 'BATFE' Category

Control.  It’s what controllers do.

Change. It’s what menstruating people do. Maybe it’s their time of the month.

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?

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.

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.

GOA.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?