Sunday, July 31, 2016

BATFE Whining

It seems that the head of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) is whining because he doesn't have a searchable national database of gun owners.
"There's a lot of things that don't make sense in this town, you know?" Brandon tells Schlesinger. "And, so, yeah, would it be efficient and effective? Absolutely. Would the taxpayers benefit with public safety? Absolutely. Are we allowed to do it? No."
That's right, Mr. Brandon, you're not allowed to have a searchable database.  In fact, you have to destroy all personal information in gun checks (Brady checks) after 24 hours.  That's the law.

Many folks don't remember GCA '68, or that later law that established Brady Checks, which came into existence after rigorous debate, a legislative battle, passage of both houses of Congress, and signed by President Bill Clinton.  It was a hard-fought battle on both sides of the aisle, but through compromise and  political wrangling both sides managed to come together.  The law became effective on February 28, 1994.  You can go to the link above for a full history.

The reason that the BATFE can't have a national registration scheme is because it is forbidden under the legislation that allowed them to start conducting background checks at all.  I remember it well, because for the NRA and freedom-loving Americans, it was a bitter pill.  We were afraid then (and with good reason) that keeping the background check information would eventually lead to a registration scheme.  We're still fighting that battle today.

I remember freedom.  In 1965, I walked into a gun shop (actually a gun club on an Air Force base), put my money on the counter, selected a firearm and walked out with nary a question asked.  I was twelve (12) years old.  Everything I did that day was perfectly legal, and absolutely illegal today.  That's the danger of creeping incrementalism.  That's the danger of big government.  They want to keep taking, one little step at a time, until freedom ceases to exist.  Like the proverbial frog in the pot, we don't realize we're being boiled until we're dead.

No, Mr. Brandon, we drew a line in the law in 1993.  You can't register our guns.  It's galling enough that you check us when we buy a gun, unlike that 12-year-old in 1965.  You can go this far, but no farther.

Let Freedom Ring.

**Update**.  Anonymous asks in comments about the gun I bought at age 12.  I bought my first gun at the old McBride Rod and Gun Club, England AFB, LA.  I was a "skeet boy" there on weekends, making the princely sum of 50 cents per hour, plus I got to shoot up the broken boxes of ammo at the end of the day.  In early 1966, I bought a Winchester Model 1200 shotgun from that club and I paid $87.50 for it.  That gun represented 175 hours of labor.  In today's dollars, figure roughtly a month's pay at minimum wage.


Anonymous said...

What firearm did you buy? (at the AF gun club when you were 12) Do you remember the price?

Joe Mama said...

The infringements never stop.

According to the actual text of the order:

Reloading of ammo is considered exempt "h) Manual loading or reloading of ammunition of .50 caliber or smaller."

But then in the next section it states "d) The systemized production of ammunition, including the automated loading or
reloading of ammunition;" requires registration and the payment of an annual $2250 fee.

A strict reading of this order means that somebody who cranks out a single round off ammo on a "progressive" press must pay $2250 or be in violation.

A very strict reading of this order means that you would owe $2250 if you so much as presort your brass and keep them in separate, labeled bins or have a cardboard box positioned to catch your resized brass as you pump it through a single-stage press.

Joe Mama said...

Ooops. Text of "interpretation" found here

North Texan said...

What I read was "those in the buisness". I'm not in the firearms buisness at all. Now, they could redefine what in the buisness means tomorrow. But since I'm not an FFL and anything I do to a firearm is done to my property and for my use only, at this time I don't think the rules apply to citizens who tinker on their own guns as a hoby. That being said, the entire ruling ( and all the restrictive garbage that has come of of the fed since NFA 1938) is unreasonable and needs to be struck down. The gov is regulating tools because you cannot regulate evil. Free up the citizenry and with a more defensive citizenship the evil will die down.

Just Someguy said...

The text reads as follows:

"122.1 Registration requirements.

... For the purpose of this subchapter, engaging in such a business requires only one occasion of manufacturing or exporting or temporarily importing a defense article or furnishing a
defense service. A manufacturer who does not engage in exporting must nevertheless register"

I maybe a fearful ninny, but I think that definition applies to all of us now. I'm looking forward to qualified attorneys telling me why I'm wrong.

Anonymous said...

There's already a database of law abiding citizens in this country, we pay your salary, and our personal property is none of your effing business Mr. Brandon.

Bibliotheca Servare said...

So that's what real liberty is sure sounds nice. My favorite part of the background check nonsense is that although the ATF can't make a "searchable database" from the info, they *can* force the *sellers* to keep records of each and every sale, and they can peruse them at their leisure whenever they get the urge. "Favorite" being a relative term, of course. *scowl*