Is ATF playing politics with firearm classifications?

April 13, 11:07 AMGun Rights ExaminerDavid Codrea

Previous Next

6 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Gun Rights Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

On Saturday, we examined ATF's NFA Branch--specifically why their then-chief said in a roll call training session:

Let me say that when we testify in court, we testify that the data base is 100 percent accurate. That's what we testify to, and we will always testify to that. As you probably well know, that may not be 100 percent true.

Now their Firearms Technology Branch comes under scrutiny.  What do they do? Let's let them tell you. Per their own procedures:

They examine and classify firearms and ammunition. They provide examination and testing of evidence.

In other words, what they do can impact the lives and freedoms of American gun designers and owners. That kind of highlights the importance of truthful testimony that we've already talked about, wouldn't you say?

So it ought to be a pretty cut and dried approach, right? Either something passes muster or it fails? Since we're talking mechanical systems, this should be something with little room for subjectivity, right?

Well, not exactly:
That's a pretty broad coalition of administrators, legal minds and bureaucrats there. And it appears they have the final say about classification over...uh...science.

It is science, right? By now, standardized procedures are in place based on objective criteria?

No?
Ah, still winging it after all these years. But this does raise the question of how it's possible to have "deviations from established and recognized procedures" that don't exist.

Come we now to the heart of the matter:
It's official policy to assign political considerations a role in the examination and classification of firearms, which can then impact the examination and testing of evidence? Gee, no wonder David Olofson and Len Savage have had such a time of it.

But come on, some might say--I'm citing a document that's 20 years old.

Stipulated. And then in Dec. 1997 it was audited by the Treasury Department. Those are auditor notations in the margins. My source believes the audit was never completed because ATF transitioned to the Justice Department as part of the 2002 Homeland Security Act. I am informed the file I have posted was obtained as part of an FOIA request made after that. Which brings us pretty close to current times.

The point being, if gun owners or designers are to be held to standards that have liabilities attached for noncompliance, why are these standards not known, both to them, and apparently, internally to ATF? Why can science apparently be trumped by bureaucratic panels? And why should political considerations play any role in these decisions whatsoever?

It's time for total transparency on all agency policies and procedures. And it's past time for our representatives to start asking some pretty tough questions.

But they won't unless we demand it.

------------

Busy days in Oregon

OFF tells us what we can expect over the next few weeks, plus how Senators Wyden and Merkley "voted to prevent you from legally transporting a firearm on a train, something you can do on an airplane."

------------

The Neville Chamberlain School of Gun Rights Advocacy

St. Louis GRE Kurt Hofmann tells us how Alabama Congressman Spencer Bachus just threw semiauto owners under the bus.

First order of business: Contact NRA and GOA and ask if they intend to downgrade his rating.

------------

Here comes da judge

And he apparently thinks that even the most law-abiding of citizens has no right to protect himself when a threat exists. His rationale: New Jersey police can protect you.

Unbelievable arrogance and ignorance. Read the North Jersey Crime Examiner's account.

------------

Media continuing to parrot 90% lie

We've seen it's a deception.

Others have validated that assessment.

So why are so many "Authorized Journalist" organizations still reporting it without challenge?