Gunleaders Blog


by on Nov.23, 2011, under Uncategorized

The best part is – it’s We the People who did it.

Scroll down to page 58 for the beginning of the fun.

That’s a lot of PWNing.  Where to begin?  Here are the prohibitions on spending any of the tax payers hard earned money on:

in connec- tion with consolidating or centralizing, within the Department of Justice, the records, or any portion thereof, of acquisition and dis- position of firearms maintained by Federal firearms licensees

On the surface that is a pretty broad sweeping prohibition on records centralizing, but does this fully cover the collection of such records?

to implement an amendment or amendments to 27 CFR 478.118 or to change the definition of ‘‘Cu- rios or relics’’ in 27 CFR 478.11 or remove any item from ATF Pub- lication 5300.11 as it existed on January 1, 1994

Keeps the C&R definition from shrinking.

to in- vestigate or act upon applications for relief from Federal firearms disabilities under 18 U.S.C. 925(c): Provided further, That such funds shall be available to investigate and act upon applications filed by corporations for relief from Federal firearms disabilities

This is one of the more perplexing modifications.  I am given to understand that the first part of this is routine, but what exactly are they “enabling” BATFE to do by providing disability relief to corporations?  Corporations run by felons, or some other problem?  And why corporations?

to transfer the functions, missions, or activities of the Bu- reau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to other agencies or Departments

pretty shrewd.  This closes the door on ATF from handing off any ongoing activities mentioned herein to another agency with more money / flexibility to spend.

to disclose part or all of the con- tents of the Firearms Trace System database maintained by the Na- tional Trace Center of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives or any information required to be kept by licensees pur- suant to section 923(g) of title 18, United States Code, or required to be reported pursuant to paragraphs (3) and (7) of such section  (foreign governments are still excluded from this).

923(g) is FFL record keeping, Para 3 is multiple handgun sale reporting, and para 7 is the ubiquitous “AG request for information” contained in FFL records.

no person or entity described in (1), (2) or (3) shall knowingly and publicly disclose such data; and all such data shall be immune from legal process, shall not be subject to subpoena or other discovery, shall be inadmissible in evidence, and shall not be used, relied on, or disclosed in any manner, nor shall testimony or other evidence be permitted based on the data, in a civil action in any State (including the District of Columbia) or Federal court or in an administrative proceeding other than a proceeding com- menced by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to enforce the provisions of chapter 44 of such title, or a review of such an action or proceeding

Prohibits disclosing the data mentioned above, even in court proceedings apparently.

to promulgate or implement any rule requir- ing a physical inventory of any business licensed under section 923 of title 18, United States Code

Prohibits a physical FFL inventory.

to elec- tronically retrieve information gathered pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 923(g)(4) by name or any personal identification code

Prohibits data mining of name or id code of FFL out of business records.

to deny any application for a license under section 923 of title 18, United States Code, or renewal of such a li-cense due to a lack of business activity, provided that the applicant is otherwise eligible to receive such a license, and is eligible to re- port business income or to claim an income tax deduction for busi- ness expenses under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986

This seems to say that BATFE can no longer deny issuance or renewal for a general lack of commerce or activity after getting an FFL.  This was part of the Clinton FFL purge.  It probably does not fully restore the ability to easily procure an FFL but it looks like a small step forward.

Fast forward to around page 89:

SEC. 541. None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to pay the salaries or expenses of personnel to deny, or fail to act on, an application for the importation of any model of shotgun if—

(1) all other requirements of law with respect to the pro- posed importation are met; and

(2) no application for the importation of such model of shot- gun, in the same configuration, had been denied by the Attorney General prior to January 1, 2011, on the basis that the shotgun was not particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sport- ing purposes.


These are a lot of wins but probably the most significant win is prohibiting the Executive branch from spending money via another agency from doing exactly what BATFE planned to do.  Even so, there is still too much US Code & too many federal regulations governing firearms and keeping BATFE around.  While looking at 27CFR 487.118, I also found 27CFR 471.119

(a) No ammunition feeding device shall be imported or brought into the United States unless the Director has authorized the importation of such de- vice.

(b) For purposes of this section, an ‘‘ammunition feeding device’’ is a mag- azine, belt, drum, feed strip, or similar device for a firearm that has a capacityof, or that can be readily restored or converted to accept, more than 10 rounds of ammunition. …

Really?  We’re still putting up with this…WHY?


Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!


All entries, chronologically...