ATF: Byzantine, Arbitrary and Ridiculous Rules to Live By
BY Herschel Smith1 year, 10 months ago
Proverbs 30:21-23 come to mind.
Proverbs 30:21-23 come to mind.
This is relevant to the Pistol Brace rule.
The simple truth is that short rifles and short shotguns were never a problem, and continue to not be a problem today. The 1934 National Firearms Act originally wanted to restrict handgun ownership, and the clauses relating to SBRs and SBSs were simply to close the loophole of a person cutting down a rifle or shotgun to get around a handgun prohibition. That handgun (effective) prohibition was removed before the legislation was passed, but the SBR/SBS parts were left in. And thus for 89 years we have has the ridiculous legal situation in which a handgun is fine, a long gun is fine, but something in between is prohibitively regulated.
The pistol brace ban started with Bumpstocks and then binary triggers. If this isn’t stopped now, all manner of features and accessories will be banned until you’re left with nothing but a flintlock. But if you read the ruling carefully, they’ll be banning all rifle stocks soon, starting with the standard six-position AR stock.
I’m sure you can find the link for it so I won’t provide it here. As I’ve said before, I don’t own any pistol-braced weapons. Nonetheless, I’m sure readers need to know this information. Most readers already know, but if you don’t, you are the one who needs to hear these things.
A small Iowa town of 800 residents likely has no need for a police force armed with 90 machine guns to keep the peace.
That, at least, is the view of federal prosecutors, who on Wednesday announced the indictment of Adair Chief of Police Bradley Wendt on charges of making false statements to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to obtain numerous machine guns over a four-year period on behalf of the Adair Police Department, which during Wendt’s tenure has never had more than three officers.
Instead, according to prosecutors, weapons were resold for profit through Wendt’s private gun store or another store owned by a friend who also is facing charges.
According to court filings and a press release from the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Wendt used his position as police chief to obtain 10 machine guns for the official use of the police department, but later resold at least six of those weapons for “significant profit.”
In addition, Wendt obtained 13 guns for his Dennison- and Anita-based gun store, BW Outfitters, under the pretense they were to be used as demonstration models for potential future purchases by the department. Another 10 weapons were obtained in the same manner for Williams Contracting, a business Williams owned that is federally licensed as a firearms dealer.
Prosecutors say Wendt sought to purchase or demonstrate approximately 90 machine guns between July 2018 and August 2022. Some of the weapons were used for public machine gun shoots, where Wendt and Williams charged customers money to be able to fire the weapons.
The indictment describes the firearms as fully automatic weapons not legally available to the public, including an M60 machine gun, a belt-fed weapon widely used by the U.S. military since the Vietnam war that was purportedly obtained for official use by the Adair Police Department.
Wendt also sought repeatedly to obtain for the department a rotary M134 minigun capable of firing 50 rounds per second, usually mounted on military helicopters. The ATF denied the requested transfer.
“The Adair Police Department does not own a helicopter,” the indictment notes.
Wendt is charged with 18 counts of making a false statement to the ATF and one for unlawfully possessing a machine gun. Williams is charged with three counts of false statements and with aiding and abetting. Prosecutors are also seeking forfeiture of at least 35 machine guns involved in the case.
“Brad Wendt is charged with exploiting his position as chief of police to unlawfully obtain and sell guns for his own personal profit,” Eugene Kowel, a senior FBI agent based in Omaha, said in a statement. “The FBI is committed to working with our law enforcement partners to investigate and hold accountable those who violate their oath of office to enrich themselves.”
Well, that last part is a pregnant bit of prose, yes?
So no doubt he wanted to enrich himself. He’s corrupt like so many other LEOs. But if the FBI is so committed to hold those accountable who violate their oath of office, how about those ATF agents who violate the 2A?
For whatever reason, Matthew 7:3-5 comes to mind.
There is a solution to all of this, of course. Undo the infringement of the NFA, GCA and Hughes Amendment. Then no one will be able to enrich themselves this way by selling machine guns.
Here are three good reviews of the new form, admittedly a bit wordy in places, but make sure not to miss the nuance. They all seem to add different things to the full analysis.
I guess the moral of the story is to be very careful in the future what you say, what you sign, and how your purchase your firearms. Not that you aren’t already so, but increased diligence is required in the future.
In particular, I don’t like the question asking where you are within the city limits where you reside. I also see this as fomenting the upcoming war between the DOJ/ATF and local, county and state law enforcement over the 2A, with the former pressing increased infringements, and the later exercising nullification. I’ve told you to watch out for this as the movement expands and increases over the country. And expand it will, you can be sure.
So after watching this video in its entirety, I can only conclude the following: (a) the ATF is crooked and corrupt (but we already knew that), (b) the ATF isn’t spending its time at the Southern border trying to end the trafficking of people, drugs and arms across the border into America, for that would be dangerous for them (but we already knew that), (c) the ATF is full if inept people (but we already knew that), (d) the ATF falsely arrested this individual, (e) the ATF took some very nice firearms (e.g., a Knight’s Armament rifle, other weapons, some suppressors, etc.), (f) the ATF doesn’t want to give them back, (g) the man did nothing wrong, (h) the ATF is so juvenile that they threatened the individual when he called to get his weapons back.
Now for the things I suspect: that nice Knight’s Armament rifle has become somebody’s Christmas present and the man will never see his weapon again – it will magically become “lost.” That’s the cause of the delay.
This is your tax dollars at work. Gaze upon the corruption, perfidy, and the repugnant and repulsive picture of a government agency that has become unhinged from morality.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday turned away another challenge to a federal ban imposed under former President Donald Trump on devices called “bump stocks” that enable a semi-automatic weapon to fire like a machine gun.
The justices declined to review an appeal by a group of firearms dealers and individuals in Minnesota, Texas and Kentucky after a lower court rejected their argument that the government had violated the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment “takings clause” by effectively taking their private property without just compensation.
Trump’s administration moved to reclassify bump stocks as machine guns, which are forbidden under U.S. law, in a rare firearms control measure prompted by a 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas. The Supreme Court in 2019 declined to block the ban from going into effect. The justices last month rejected appeals by a Utah gun lobbyist and firearms rights groups of lower court rulings upholding the ban as a reasonable interpretation of a federal law prohibiting machine gun possession.
Having banned the bump stock, now the BATF is coming for arm braces. Next, it’ll be the six-position AR stock. If this isn’t stopped, gunstocks of every kind will be outlawed by fiat. Perhaps you say that’s ridiculous? But if we’re playing chess and not checkers, it sounds like a “reasonable” pathway to outlawing rifles altogether.
To quote WoG, “And thanks again, Donald.”
I sort of naturally assume that when local law enforcement confiscates firearms, even if nothing illegal has occurred, the firearms will either never be returned, or if they are, will be rusted, and that most of the time at least some of the firearms end up as gifts to extended family members. This is the whole point of civil asset forfeiture, it’s just that when the ATF or local LEOs confiscate firearms it might be on a smaller scale. Idiot Jeff Sessions approved of and defended civil asset forfeiture, as you will recall. Trump left him in office for nearly two years before appointing Barr, the defender of Lon Horiuchi.
And if that’s true of local law enforcement, it’s true in the superlative of the ATF. If they take possession of firearms, you should expect never to see them again, even if you’ve done nothing wrong.
And yet, God declared theft to be a sin, and hasn’t changed His mind.
As you all are aware by now, Texas passed a “Texas Made Suppressor Law” last session. It is a highly specific law that says that a suppressor that is made ENTIRELY of Texas made parts and stays in Texas is legal. Representative Tom Oliverson (R-District 130) led the fight for passage on this bill and it was well crafted.
It requires anyone who wants to build these to first seek a Declaratory Judgement from the courts–thus giving Attorney General Ken Paxton legal standing to defend the law.
Good news for us! The feds tried to kill the case and Judge Pittman said their arguments were not good enough to pull the plug on the case and denied their motion.
We will have our day in court! Post-Bruen, I have high hopes that this will prevail. Further, I spoke with Representative Oliverson this morning and he said ““HB957 passed its first legal challenge yesterday. I am glad to see the lawsuit move forward and I look forward to Judge Pittman’s evaluation of the arguments. I believe the case against federal regulation of these Texas-made, Texan-owned firearm safety devices is solid!”
It’s going to be a long haul but the trial date has been included in the four-week docket beginning November 12, 2023 and I have high hopes for it!
Here’s the problem. Unless this bill includes the directive for local LEOs to arrest agents of the FedGov who attempt to arrest folks who have suppressors without registering them as NFA items, the law is meaningless.
It’s a setup and trap, even if unintentional.
Do the right thing with the bill. Connect it to protection from the FedGov by the state and then it’s good to go. Even if the FedGov cannot be watched 24 hours per day, after arrest of innocent victims of this new law the state can decide to enter FedGov facilities to regain control of the victims and arrest said agents.
It’s all about who is willing to flex their muscle enough. And by the way, this sort of thing is exactly why the FedGov fears the new Missouri law prohibiting the ATF from interfering with the 2A in that state. It has teeth because it’s backed by state and local law enforcement under threat of firing and never again being able to work as a LEO in Missouri.
Cascade County [Montana] Sheriff Jesse Slaughter on Saturday broke up an investigation carried out in apparent coordination between federal and Canadian authorities at a Great Falls gun show, saying those agencies had not contacted his office beforehand.
Here’s the Sherriff’s Report.
Although state law does not require federal investigators to obtain approval from local law enforcement to conduct operations, the agents left the fairgrounds “reluctantly” and without issue. Slaughter has positioned himself as a “constitutional sheriff,” which theorizes sheriffs are the ultimate authority in their county — above local, state and federal officials — raising questions in this incident about possible friction between layers of law enforcement.
Theorizes? No, a Constitutional Sheriff is the highest law enforcement officer in the county. And that includes any invited or uninvited law enforcement from outside the county and local police departments.
According to a Sept. 24 report compiled by the Cascade County Sheriff’s Office, Slaughter and a deputy responded to a complaint that a man at the Montana Expo Park was acting suspiciously by taking photographs of vehicles. According to the fairgrounds director, the man was driving around the property in a black SUV with Canadian license plates, but never entered the show.
According to the report, Slaughter questioned Howe on why his office wasn’t contacted about the investigation; Howe said he had made contact with city police. The fairgrounds however are under the county’s jurisdiction. Howe added the person they were investigating was an American who did not have a federal firearms license to sell guns, according to the report. Slaughter noted this was a different reason than that provided by the Canadian police officer.
After a discussion under the fairgrounds’ grandstands, Slaughter “informed them they had to leave, to which they did.”
[…]
Slaughter said he had several concerns after learning of the investigation underway at the fairgrounds, primarily a public safety concern that if the federal or Canadian authorities were to use force in any way, they might be mistaken as a citizen assaulting another citizen. Citizens, local law enforcement or the agents involved could have been injured “if something went awry,” he said.
The sheriff also said he has constitutional questions about the legality of the investigation.
“I don’t know what their investigation was, it’s important that you print that,” Slaughter said, noting again the two investigations he was told about; looking for Canadians smuggling guns to the north, and investigating an American who was not licensed to sell firearms.
Slaughter said that had the federal and Canadian agencies contacted his office prior to Saturday’s incident, he would have been able to call off questions of who the agents were, or what they were doing, allowing the investigations to proceed.
Asked Thursday if drawing attention to the federal agents put those law enforcement officers in jeopardy, Slaughter said their police work outed themselves.
That’s funny.
“We don’t know they’re undercover,” Slaughter said. “We don’t know who they are, but we have them acting suspiciously.”
Slaughter said he expects next legislative session, which begins in January, to see passage of a bill that would require federal agencies to make contact with local law enforcement before launching an investigation on the ground. Such a law would further validate his stance as a “constitutional sheriff.”
Such proposals, known previously under the banner of “Sheriffs First,” have failed to pass muster in the state Legislature before. In 2011, a Republican state Senator from Thompson Falls introduced a bill that would have subjected federal agents to kidnapping or trespassing charges if they failed to obtain permission from the local sheriff to effectuate an investigation. Supporters said the legislation would prevent the bloodshed seen in episodes like the 1993 federal raid in Waco, Texas.
But state law enforcement officers and prosecutors called the measure unconstitutional, adding it would disrupt important federal operations and interagency cooperation of state, local and federal officials.
These proposed laws are an increment but remain weak because almost all local law enforcement submits to federal authority. We’d like to see a lot more of this but for the right reason: ‘get out of my county, you have no authority here,’ would be a good way to handle these situations. If state legislatures had any Tenth Amendment guts that also would help.