Make a mistake and you may lose your license.

From https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/hundreds-of-gun-dealers-lose-licenses-under-biden-administration-crackdown-da9d6dfb

Quote:

---

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has revoked the licenses of 122 gun dealers in the fiscal year that began in October, up from 90 for all last fiscal year and 27 in 2021.

Previously, ATF issued warnings to many firearms dealers for legal violations, in part because they are a valuable source of tips on suspicious gun buyers. The Trump and Obama administrations never revoked more than 81 dealers' licenses annually since at least 2013, the earliest year for which data are available.

Gun dealers have filed lawsuits and threatened to stop informing federal agents about suspicious buyers, claiming that the crackdown is a way to punish the firearms industry by an administration hostile to them.

---

Yeah, there are some violations, but the goal should be to bring the dealers into compliance with the law, not shut them down.

eric76 said:

---

Make a mistake and you may lose your license.

From https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/hundreds-of-gun-dealers-lose-licenses-under-biden-administration-crackdown-da9d6dfb

Quote:

---

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has revoked the licenses of 122 gun dealers in the fiscal year that began in October, up from 90 for all last fiscal year and 27 in 2021.

Previously, ATF issued warnings to many firearms dealers for legal violations, in part because they are a valuable source of tips on suspicious gun buyers. The Trump and Obama administrations never revoked more than 81 dealers' licenses annually since at least 2013, the earliest year for which data are available.

Gun dealers have filed lawsuits and threatened to stop informing federal agents about suspicious buyers, claiming that the crackdown is a way to punish the firearms industry by an administration hostile to them.

---

Yeah, there are some violations, but the goal should be to bring the dealers into compliance with the law, not shut them down.

---

Any way for this to be challenged in the courts?

Their goal is to prohibit subjects' access to guns.

Our goal:



https://gaetz.house.gov/media/press-releases/congressman-matt-gaetz-introduces-abolish-atf-act

jt2hunt said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Make a mistake and you may lose your license.

From https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/hundreds-of-gun-dealers-lose-licenses-under-biden-administration-crackdown-da9d6dfb

Quote:

---

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has revoked the licenses of 122 gun dealers in the fiscal year that began in October, up from 90 for all last fiscal year and 27 in 2021.

Previously, ATF issued warnings to many firearms dealers for legal violations, in part because they are a valuable source of tips on suspicious gun buyers. The Trump and Obama administrations never revoked more than 81 dealers' licenses annually since at least 2013, the earliest year for which data are available.

Gun dealers have filed lawsuits and threatened to stop informing federal agents about suspicious buyers, claiming that the crackdown is a way to punish the firearms industry by an administration hostile to them.

---

Yeah, there are some violations, but the goal should be to bring the dealers into compliance with the law, not shut them down.

---

Any way for this to be challenged in the courts?

---

In 1945, the Supreme Court ruled that courts should defer to agencies interpretations of the law as long as they aren't egregious about it. Edit: I looked up the case. It was Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., 325 U.S. 410 (1945). From the decision:

Quote:

---

In interpreting an administrative regulation, a court must necessarily look to the administrative construction of the regulation if the meaning of the words used is in doubt. The intention of Congress or the principles of the Constitution in some situations may be relevant in the first instance in choosing between various constructions. But the ultimate criterion is the administrative interpretation, which becomes of controlling weight unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation.

---

And then there is the Chevron deference. See https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/chevron_deference

Quote:

---

One of the most important principles in administrative law, the "Chevron deference" was coined after a landmark case, Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 468 U.S. 837 (1984). The Chevron deference is referring to the doctrine of judicial deference given to administrative actions. In Chevron, the Supreme Court set forth a legal test as to when the court should defer to the agency's answer or interpretation, holding that such judicial deference is appropriate where the agency's answer was not unreasonable, so long as Congress had not spoken directly to the precise issue at question.

The scope of the Chevron deference doctrine is that when a legislative delegation to an administrative agency on a particular issue or question is not explicit but rather implicit, a court may not substitute its own interpretation of the statute for a reasonable interpretation made by the administrative agency. Rather, as Justice Stevens wrote in Chevron, when the statute is silent or ambiguous with respect to the specific issue, the question for the court is whether the agency's action was based on a permissible construction of the statute.

---

So probably not much. The best approach is probably to get Congress involved to limit the ATF.

Todd 02 said:

---

Their goal is to prohibit subjects' access to guns.

Our goal:



https://gaetz.house.gov/media/press-releases/congressman-matt-gaetz-introduces-abolish-atf-act

---

If you are in CD23 vote for Brandon Herrera, if not send money and buy a let's go Brandon T-shirt

It is the quickest way to a registry, when an ffl is closed down they have to turn over all their records. Allows the BATFE to save those records and boom instant registry.

At least people like Eric are keeping us safe from mean tweets while the Biden admin attacks our 2A rights!!

Horse with No Name said:

---

At least people like Eric are keeping us safe from mean tweets while the Biden admin attacks our 2A rights!!

---

What kind of idiocy is this?

Trump and Biden are peas in a pod -- both enemies of Democracy and neither in favor of our Right to Bear Arms. Don't forget that Trump said "Take the guns first, go through due process second."

To my knowledge, I've never voted for a gun grabber. I take it that you have.

We had this discussion last week. It is not exactly as described but is awesome for the message.

• There is zero doubt that the current ATF bosses are tightening the screws and it is clearly on orders from Biden.
• This happens periodically and is not nearly as bad as it was in 2002-2004
• They are NOT, contrary to what yall want to believe, just revoking licenses at random for clerical errors.
• Most of these dealers have major violations. The article will make them sound like they did nothing but the one from the partisan rah rah article last week was a guy that released a gun without an active approval. Liek it or not thats a big problem.
• The most recent one I heard of had an employee selling guns to illegals and instead of reporting it tried to cover it up and got caught.

I am not a defender of the ATF, though I worked with them for 16 years and am very aware of their processes. Believe me when I say I would be first in line to abolish the ATF. And I am the one calling out the idiots who want bill of sales on private gun sales.

But this article is one of a thousand examples of partisanship based very loosely on the truth, and that general problem has us on a bad path.

agsalaska said:

---

We had this discussion last week. It is not exactly as described but is awesome for the message.

• There is zero doubt that the current ATF bosses are tightening the screws and it is clearly on orders from Biden.
• This happens periodically and is not nearly as bad as it was in 2002-2004
• They are NOT, contrary to what yall want to believe, just revoking licenses at random for clerical errors.
• Most of these dealers have major violations. The article will make them sound like they did nothing but the one from the partisan rah rah article last week was a guy that released a gun without an active approval. Liek it or not thats a big problem.
• The most recent one I heard of had an employee selling guns to illegals and instead of reporting it tried to cover it up and got caught.

I am not a defender of the ATF, though I worked with them for 16 years and am very aware of their processes. Believe me when I say I would be first in line to abolish the ATF. And I am the one calling out the idiots who want bill of sales on private gun sales.

But this article is one of a thousand examples of partisanship based very loosely on the truth, and that general problem has us on a bad path.

---

One of the examples in the article involved a firearms dealer who sold a firearm to an out of state resident who had a valid concealed carry license for his home state.

Quote:

---

Leslie Gifford, an 82-year-old retiree who sold firearms out of his garage in Burlington, Kan., for the past three decades, tried to fight back when the ATF pulled his license last year for several violations including selling a gun to a man from Nebraska. Such sales are required to go through a dealer in the purchaser's home state.

At a hearing, Gifford said he thought the sale was allowed because the man had a concealed-carry license from Nebraska, and he apologized, according to ATF documents. He attributed other violations to being too busy.

The ATF wasn't moved by his pleas, ruling that "there is no legal justification for a licensee's claim that circumstances, such as being busy or overwhelmed, excuses the failure."

Gifford said he believes the government was determined to revoke his license, rather than reach a reasonable compromise.

"Mr. Biden wants to get rid of all of us little dealers," said Gifford. "Gets me wound up, boy. It's a political game, sure as hell."

---

What is the reason for banning dealers from selling firearms to people from other states possessing valid concealed carry licenses for their state? I wonder what his other violations were about.

I have read that there are so many laws that it is nearly impossible to avoid violating some.

eric76 said:

---

jt2hunt said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Make a mistake and you may lose your license.

From https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/hundreds-of-gun-dealers-lose-licenses-under-biden-administration-crackdown-da9d6dfb

Quote:

---

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has revoked the licenses of 122 gun dealers in the fiscal year that began in October, up from 90 for all last fiscal year and 27 in 2021.

Previously, ATF issued warnings to many firearms dealers for legal violations, in part because they are a valuable source of tips on suspicious gun buyers. The Trump and Obama administrations never revoked more than 81 dealers' licenses annually since at least 2013, the earliest year for which data are available.

Gun dealers have filed lawsuits and threatened to stop informing federal agents about suspicious buyers, claiming that the crackdown is a way to punish the firearms industry by an administration hostile to them.

---

Yeah, there are some violations, but the goal should be to bring the dealers into compliance with the law, not shut them down.

---

Any way for this to be challenged in the courts?

---

In 1945, the Supreme Court ruled that courts should defer to agencies interpretations of the law as long as they aren't egregious about it. Edit: I looked up the case. It was Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., 325 U.S. 410 (1945). From the decision:

Quote:

---

In interpreting an administrative regulation, a court must necessarily look to the administrative construction of the regulation if the meaning of the words used is in doubt. The intention of Congress or the principles of the Constitution in some situations may be relevant in the first instance in choosing between various constructions. But the ultimate criterion is the administrative interpretation, which becomes of controlling weight unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation.

---

And then there is the Chevron deference. See https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/chevron_deference

Quote:

---

One of the most important principles in administrative law, the "Chevron deference" was coined after a landmark case, Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 468 U.S. 837 (1984). The Chevron deference is referring to the doctrine of judicial deference given to administrative actions. In Chevron, the Supreme Court set forth a legal test as to when the court should defer to the agency's answer or interpretation, holding that such judicial deference is appropriate where the agency's answer was not unreasonable, so long as Congress had not spoken directly to the precise issue at question.

The scope of the Chevron deference doctrine is that when a legislative delegation to an administrative agency on a particular issue or question is not explicit but rather implicit, a court may not substitute its own interpretation of the statute for a reasonable interpretation made by the administrative agency. Rather, as Justice Stevens wrote in Chevron, when the statute is silent or ambiguous with respect to the specific issue, the question for the court is whether the agency's action was based on a permissible construction of the statute.

---

So probably not much. The best approach is probably to get Congress involved to limit the ATF.

---

Yes but the court have been handing the ATF their collective lunch on BS interpretations lately.

eric76 said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

We had this discussion last week. It is not exactly as described but is awesome for the message.

• There is zero doubt that the current ATF bosses are tightening the screws and it is clearly on orders from Biden.
• This happens periodically and is not nearly as bad as it was in 2002-2004
• They are NOT, contrary to what yall want to believe, just revoking licenses at random for clerical errors.
• Most of these dealers have major violations. The article will make them sound like they did nothing but the one from the partisan rah rah article last week was a guy that released a gun without an active approval. Liek it or not thats a big problem.
• The most recent one I heard of had an employee selling guns to illegals and instead of reporting it tried to cover it up and got caught.

I am not a defender of the ATF, though I worked with them for 16 years and am very aware of their processes. Believe me when I say I would be first in line to abolish the ATF. And I am the one calling out the idiots who want bill of sales on private gun sales.

But this article is one of a thousand examples of partisanship based very loosely on the truth, and that general problem has us on a bad path.

---

One of the examples in the article involved a firearms dealer who sold a firearm to an out of state resident who had a valid concealed carry license for his home state.

Quote:

---

Leslie Gifford, an 82-year-old retiree who sold firearms out of his garage in Burlington, Kan., for the past three decades, tried to fight back when the ATF pulled his license last year for several violations including selling a gun to a man from Nebraska. Such sales are required to go through a dealer in the purchaser's home state.

At a hearing, Gifford said he thought the sale was allowed because the man had a concealed-carry license from Nebraska, and he apologized, according to ATF documents. He attributed other violations to being too busy.

The ATF wasn't moved by his pleas, ruling that "there is no legal justification for a licensee's claim that circumstances, such as being busy or overwhelmed, excuses the failure."

Gifford said he believes the government was determined to revoke his license, rather than reach a reasonable compromise.

"Mr. Biden wants to get rid of all of us little dealers," said Gifford. "Gets me wound up, boy. It's a political game, sure as hell."

---

What is the reason for banning dealers from selling firearms to people from other states possessing valid concealed carry licenses for their state? I wonder what his other violations were about.

I have read that there are so many laws that it is nearly impossible to avoid violating some.

---

To your first, because it is against the law and is a big no no. That's nothing new.

To your bold part, that is absolute bull***** It is not hard to satisfy the ATF. They are a lot easier than the EPA, CFPB, and OSHA. Lots easier. Not even close. Go to Seattle and have asbestos and mold found in the same building you house 20 employees in(and an FFL license) and get back to me on what government agency is difficult to deal with.

The bolded part was meant to be overall and not specifically about the ATF.

That said, it's hard to know when it might be true for any one agency.

And for the first part, laws that have no reason sounds about right.

Fair enough. Yuu are certainly going to violate some crimes. That seems to be by design doesnt it.

Debating eric is like slapping a tar baby. He's always right.

Love the guy. He doesnt come to town much.

That's a damned lie.

I have never voted for a gun grabber, but you sure did.

Quote:

---

Reap what you sow you freaking loser

---

I have no idea who you are but this is completely out of line on this board. Take that **** somewhere else.

The ATF is just doing their job, do yours gun dealers, don't make mistakes. Be better.

-TikkaShooter

surprise surprise agalaska defending the ridiculous practices of the atf once again.

eric76 said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

We had this discussion last week. It is not exactly as described but is awesome for the message.

• There is zero doubt that the current ATF bosses are tightening the screws and it is clearly on orders from Biden.
• This happens periodically and is not nearly as bad as it was in 2002-2004
• They are NOT, contrary to what yall want to believe, just revoking licenses at random for clerical errors.
• Most of these dealers have major violations. The article will make them sound like they did nothing but the one from the partisan rah rah article last week was a guy that released a gun without an active approval. Liek it or not thats a big problem.
• The most recent one I heard of had an employee selling guns to illegals and instead of reporting it tried to cover it up and got caught.

I am not a defender of the ATF, though I worked with them for 16 years and am very aware of their processes. Believe me when I say I would be first in line to abolish the ATF. And I am the one calling out the idiots who want bill of sales on private gun sales.

But this article is one of a thousand examples of partisanship based very loosely on the truth, and that general problem has us on a bad path.

---

One of the examples in the article involved a firearms dealer who sold a firearm to an out of state resident who had a valid concealed carry license for his home state.

Quote:

---

Leslie Gifford, an 82-year-old retiree who sold firearms out of his garage in Burlington, Kan., for the past three decades, tried to fight back when the ATF pulled his license last year for several violations including selling a gun to a man from Nebraska. Such sales are required to go through a dealer in the purchaser's home state.

At a hearing, Gifford said he thought the sale was allowed because the man had a concealed-carry license from Nebraska, and he apologized, according to ATF documents. He attributed other violations to being too busy.

The ATF wasn't moved by his pleas, ruling that "there is no legal justification for a licensee's claim that circumstances, such as being busy or overwhelmed, excuses the failure."

Gifford said he believes the government was determined to revoke his license, rather than reach a reasonable compromise.

"Mr. Biden wants to get rid of all of us little dealers," said Gifford. "Gets me wound up, boy. It's a political game, sure as hell."

---

What is the reason for banning dealers from selling firearms to people from other states possessing valid concealed carry licenses for their state? I wonder what his other violations were about.

I have read that there are so many laws that it is nearly impossible to avoid violating some.

---

What were the other violations that he was "too busy" to bother with?

Furlock Bones said:

---

surprise surprise agalaska defending the ridiculous practices of the atf once again.

---

You mean you read that post as 'defending the ridiculous practices?'

rab79 said:

---

Todd 02 said:

---

Their goal is to prohibit subjects' access to guns.

Our goal:



https://gaetz.house.gov/media/press-releases/congressman-matt-gaetz-introduces-abolish-atf-act

---

If you are in CD23 vote for Brandon Herrera, if not send money and buy a let's go Brandon T-shirt

---

I donated the second that I knew he was running.

agsalaska said:

---

I am not a defender of the ATF, though I worked with them for 16 years

---

Yes, you are, in every thread where they are mentioned.

Literally anytime someone mentions the atf, agalaska pops in.

B-1 83 said:

---

eric76 said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

We had this discussion last week. It is not exactly as described but is awesome for the message.

• There is zero doubt that the current ATF bosses are tightening the screws and it is clearly on orders from Biden.
• This happens periodically and is not nearly as bad as it was in 2002-2004
• They are NOT, contrary to what yall want to believe, just revoking licenses at random for clerical errors.
• Most of these dealers have major violations. The article will make them sound like they did nothing but the one from the partisan rah rah article last week was a guy that released a gun without an active approval. Liek it or not thats a big problem.
• The most recent one I heard of had an employee selling guns to illegals and instead of reporting it tried to cover it up and got caught.

I am not a defender of the ATF, though I worked with them for 16 years and am very aware of their processes. Believe me when I say I would be first in line to abolish the ATF. And I am the one calling out the idiots who want bill of sales on private gun sales.

But this article is one of a thousand examples of partisanship based very loosely on the truth, and that general problem has us on a bad path.

---

One of the examples in the article involved a firearms dealer who sold a firearm to an out of state resident who had a valid concealed carry license for his home state.

Quote:

---

Leslie Gifford, an 82-year-old retiree who sold firearms out of his garage in Burlington, Kan., for the past three decades, tried to fight back when the ATF pulled his license last year for several violations including selling a gun to a man from Nebraska. Such sales are required to go through a dealer in the purchaser's home state.

At a hearing, Gifford said he thought the sale was allowed because the man had a concealed-carry license from Nebraska, and he apologized, according to ATF documents. He attributed other violations to being too busy.

The ATF wasn't moved by his pleas, ruling that "there is no legal justification for a licensee's claim that circumstances, such as being busy or overwhelmed, excuses the failure."

Gifford said he believes the government was determined to revoke his license, rather than reach a reasonable compromise.

"Mr. Biden wants to get rid of all of us little dealers," said Gifford. "Gets me wound up, boy. It's a political game, sure as hell."

---

What is the reason for banning dealers from selling firearms to people from other states possessing valid concealed carry licenses for their state? I wonder what his other violations were about.

I have read that there are so many laws that it is nearly impossible to avoid violating some.

---

What were the other violations that he was "too busy" to bother with?

---

I was curious about this. A web search found his "Final Notice of Denial of Appeal" at https://www.atf.gov/docs/undefined/leslieegifford91fci-30547508pdf/download

From the denial, these are the violations listed:
1) he did not timely record the acquisition of firearms:

Quote:

---

Specifically, hearing testimony and evidence revealed that Licensee had llll firearms in inventory that were not included in his Acquisition and Disposition bound book ("A&D book"). [Gov. Ex. 5; Hearing Transcript (..HT") pgs. 37-38]. During the inspection, Licensee admitted the violation and indicated that he "guess[ed] he overlooked them."

---

2) he did not timely record the disposition of firearms:

Quote:

---

The hearing testimony and evidence demonstrated tha mri rearms were transferred, but the required disposition infonnation was left blank in the A&D book. [Gov. Ex. 5; HT pg. 40]. Additionally,- fireanns that were listed as acquired could not be found in inventory and could not be reconciled through review of ATF Forms 4473. [HT pg. 41]. This required the completion of a theft and loss report. [Gov. Ex. 6; HT pg. 41-44]. During the inspection, Licensee admitted the violation and indicated that he "guess(ed) he overlooked them."

---

3) he didn't always perform a background check:

Quote:

---

On one occasion, Licensee willfully transferred a firearm to an unlicensed person without first contacting the National Instant Criminal Background Check System ("NICS") 2 and obtaining a unique identification number before allowing the transfer, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(t) and 27 C.F.R. 478.102(a)

---

This appears to have been the violation regarding the CCL holder from Nebraska.
4) he failed to complete a transaction record regarding an over the counter transfer of a firearm to someone without a CCL license:

Quote:

---

Specifically, was completed despite Item 30 of the A TF Form 44 73 being incomplete. The Government offered Exhibit 8 which was the form reflectin this transaction. Exhibit 8 shows that [Gov. Ex. 8; HT pgs . 53-54). Because the transfer did not take place on the same day as the initial certification, recertification by the purchaser was required in Item 30.

---

5) he transfered some firearms without verifying the identity of the transferee:

Quote:

---

the Government resented Exhibit 9 which contained Fonns 4473, pertaining to purchases b Exhibit 9 showed that Item 26.a was blank in all.. fonns. [Gov. Ex. 9). Additionally, in all - instances, conceal and cany permits, via Item 29, were used in lieu of recording a valid government issued identification in Item 26.a . [Id; HT pgs. 61-62). IO(IDIUJ]explained that this is an impennissible practice and that there is no exception to completing Item 26.a. [HT pg. 62). In response, Licensee stated, "[l]fl messed up, I messed up big time."

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

Literally anytime someone mentions the atf, agalaska pops in.

---

Listen you can either want a good understanding of what is actually happening or you can want to be an ignorant sheep that just laps up the narrative. That's up to you.

I can see how someone who just wants to be spoon fed a narrative would see my explanations as support.

I was pretty clear in my personal feelings about the ATF.

Y'all carry on.

Way worse than you would think. A friend of a friend has run a store for 30 years. He had small paperwork errors that had previously passed ATF reviews, but they have told him to give up his license. He is taking them to court, but the damage is already done. This is clearly their plan. Go after everyone and dry up the sales market.

It is about attrition in the market, and I would guess, lawsuits to drain funds. Most won't fight it and just give up.

Oh yeah, and you can watch all about it here.

This ain't happening. Agalaska just told you it was fine.

agsalaska said:

---

eric76 said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

We had this discussion last week. It is not exactly as described but is awesome for the message.

• There is zero doubt that the current ATF bosses are tightening the screws and it is clearly on orders from Biden.
• This happens periodically and is not nearly as bad as it was in 2002-2004
• They are NOT, contrary to what yall want to believe, just revoking licenses at random for clerical errors.
• Most of these dealers have major violations. The article will make them sound like they did nothing but the one from the partisan rah rah article last week was a guy that released a gun without an active approval. Liek it or not thats a big problem.
• The most recent one I heard of had an employee selling guns to illegals and instead of reporting it tried to cover it up and got caught.

I am not a defender of the ATF, though I worked with them for 16 years and am very aware of their processes. Believe me when I say I would be first in line to abolish the ATF. And I am the one calling out the idiots who want bill of sales on private gun sales.

But this article is one of a thousand examples of partisanship based very loosely on the truth, and that general problem has us on a bad path.

---

One of the examples in the article involved a firearms dealer who sold a firearm to an out of state resident who had a valid concealed carry license for his home state.

Quote:

---

Leslie Gifford, an 82-year-old retiree who sold firearms out of his garage in Burlington, Kan., for the past three decades, tried to fight back when the ATF pulled his license last year for several violations including selling a gun to a man from Nebraska. Such sales are required to go through a dealer in the purchaser's home state.

At a hearing, Gifford said he thought the sale was allowed because the man had a concealed-carry license from Nebraska, and he apologized, according to ATF documents. He attributed other violations to being too busy.

The ATF wasn't moved by his pleas, ruling that "there is no legal justification for a licensee's claim that circumstances, such as being busy or overwhelmed, excuses the failure."

Gifford said he believes the government was determined to revoke his license, rather than reach a reasonable compromise.

"Mr. Biden wants to get rid of all of us little dealers," said Gifford. "Gets me wound up, boy. It's a political game, sure as hell."

---

What is the reason for banning dealers from selling firearms to people from other states possessing valid concealed carry licenses for their state? I wonder what his other violations were about.

I have read that there are so many laws that it is nearly impossible to avoid violating some.

---

To your first, because it is against the law and is a big no no. That's nothing new.

To your bold part, that is absolute bull***** It is not hard to satisfy the ATF. They are a lot easier than the EPA, CFPB, and OSHA. Lots easier. Not even close. Go to Seattle and have asbestos and mold found in the same building you house 20 employees in(and an FFL license) and get back to me on what government agency is difficult to deal with.

---

Your whole argument is moot. The 2A is clear, "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!" The NFA is fraudulent and should be discarded whole sale. Please take you're bureaucratic mindset back to your agency and friends. Please remind them of our rights!

Edit to add: I hope your agency is dissolved as it is an affront to our American ideals and way of life.

Ok tiger.

Typical response from an agency representative. Way to look out. What other mom & pop shop do your ilk want to take down next?

JoeAggie1010 said:

---

Typical response from an agency representative. Way to look out. What other mom & pop shop do your ilk want to take down next?

---

Any that have a dog on premises.

JoeAggie1010 said:

---

Typical response from an agency representative. Way to look out. What other mom & pop shop do your ilk want to take down next?

---

Man that is awesome. You even got the work 'ilk' in.

I would normally just leave threads like this where ignorance is preferred, but the laughs you and Naveronski keep bringing me have me coming back.