ATF preparing to regulate private gun sales with background check, whistleblower says.

[Ingomike]

“In a letter Wednesday to Attorney General Merrick Garland, Empower Oversight said it had learned from two sources that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives was directed by the White House to make the change and “has drafted a 1,300-page document in support of a rule that would effectively ban private sales of firearms from one citizen to another by requiring background checks for every sale.”

ATF preparing to regulate private gun sales with background check, whistleblower group alleges

Empower Oversight says power grab would be unconstitutional, usurping powers on Congress and infringing 2nd Amendment.

justthenews.com

 

[JAL]

Be certain to thank Senator Todd Young for his TREASON in voting YES on the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. The ATF now claims the new law allows them to redefine who is in the business of firearms sales. DoJ and ATF are Hell bent for leather to redefine it as a single sale of a firearm, regardless of how long it's been owned, how many have been sold in the past (and how long go), or the price it's sold for. Sell a single firearm at any price for any reason, and you're now in the "business" which requires an Dealer FFL. Do a private sale and you're going to prison for a decade.

When is his next "Meet and Greet" with voters in Indiana? Folks should thank him in person.

 

[Magyars]

Does the fedgov tell us what we can do with any other personal property? I guess I can give away the gun and sell the box.

 

[jwamplerusa]

I am still struggling with where the Federal government has authority over an intrastate transaction between two citizens of the same State.

9th Amendment, 10th Amendment seems one of those should restrict the Federal government from infringing upon the 2nd Amendment within a State.

 

[XDdreams]

Land of the free (except you're not really free because we systematically create law after law that remove all of your constitutional rights). Seems like we are well on our way to, "you have the right to do exactly what we say, when we say it, how we say it, where we say it, because we said it."

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Please let this be true.

I know Loper Bright v. Raimondo is coming but we need ATFE to be squirrel's breakfast insane right now.

Yes, you are getting Oyez because I went to Chicago-Kent for the JD, deal with it:

{{meta.fullTitle}}

 

[Pepi]

Todd Young is a POFS

 

[chipbennett]

Be certain to thank Senator Todd Young for his TREASON in voting YES on the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. The ATF now claims the new law allows them to redefine who is in the business of firearms sales. DoJ and ATF are Hell bent for leather to redefine it as a single sale of a firearm, regardless of how long it's been owned, how many have been sold in the past (and how long go), or the price it's sold for. Sell a single firearm at any price for any reason, and you're now in the "business" which requires an Dealer FFL. Do a private sale and you're going to prison for a decade.

When is his next "Meet and Greet" with voters in Indiana? Folks should thank him in person.

Many of us read him the riot act for this vote at his last meet-and-great in Plainfield.

That said: such an interpretation of the federal statute in question is as explicitly incorrect and egregious as ATF's bump stock-is-a-machine-gun interpretation.

 

[JAL]

Please let this be true.

I know Loper Bright v. Raimondo is coming but we need ATFE to be squirrel's breakfast insane right now.

Yes, you are getting Oyez because I went to Chicago-Kent for the JD, deal with it:

{{meta.fullTitle}}

The other case heard concurrently is Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce, also an Atlantic herring fishery lawsuit with similar claims regarding the agency's rulemaking.

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2023/22-1219

That's an interesting take on it . . . letting ATFE hoist with its own petard . . .
Those who know about it and the other case are praying for a broad SCOTUS wooden stake in the heart of Chevron. It leaves me wondering how many will be ground up under the wheels of the ATFE Juggernaut while this ATFE rule that's undoubtedly going to be inflicted on us spends years going through the courts. The ATFE in concert with the U.S. Attorneys will do anything and everything to force plea deals so they can rack up a trophy wall of them to point to as defendants whose guilty pleas prove the rule is valid . . . or the convicted felons wouldn't have told the court they were guilty of a crime.

We were hoping for the Chevron death knell with SCOTUS West Virginia v. EPA decision in 2022, but it didn't occur. Like Freddy Kruger, Chevron keeps coming back to life.

 

[INPatriot]

Todd Young is a POFS

I'm not sure what that is but in my family we'd just say he's a ****** p*ssy.

 

[INPatriot]

“In a letter Wednesday to Attorney General Merrick Garland, Empower Oversight said it had learned from two sources that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives was directed by the White House to make the change and “has drafted a 1,300-page document in support of a rule that would effectively ban private sales of firearms from one citizen to another by requiring background checks for every sale.”

ATF preparing to regulate private gun sales with background check, whistleblower group alleges

Empower Oversight says power grab would be unconstitutional, usurping powers on Congress and infringing 2nd Amendment.

justthenews.com

I'm not sure which lettered political puss bags in UNIGOV started shoving through 1,300 page documents but if they can't make their point in a single paragraph then they either are unable or unwilling and my guess lies with the latter.

 

[JAL]

I'm not sure which lettered political puss bags in UNIGOV started shoving through 1,300 page documents but if they can't make their point in a single paragraph then they either are unable or unwilling and my guess lies with the latter.

It's all about deliberately abstruse, nebulous ambiguity and vague technobabble that allows ATFE explaining what it means in a courtroom during a trial, using a plethora of polysyllabic technojargon that leaves jurors with headaches and only remembering the testimonial conclusion given.

 

[Twangbanger]

It's all about deliberately abstruse, nebulous ambiguity and vague technobabble that allows ATFE explaining what it means in a courtroom during a trial, using a plethora of polysyllabic technojargon that leaves jurors with headaches and only remembering the testimonial conclusion given.

Just curious, if they didn't drive the stake with W. Virginia, do you think they would now?

 

[Expat]

Well, I would be against all this.

 

[indyblue]

Chevron keeps coming back to life.

The T-1000 of rulings

 

[Cameramonkey]

We dont need chevron. I mentioned it somewhere else. Do it like we are doing gun law here.

Guy Relford: "We have a problem. Here is a law I wrote to fix the problem. I'm a SME so I know what I'm talking about. It must pass as a clean bill with no modifications or amendments unless you clear it with me, else you could break it due to ignorance."
Legislators: "Thank you. We will debate it as-is and see where it goes."

ATF and others can do the same. Write the law like they do with current administrative edicts. Just replace Guy in the exchange above with the ATF.

That way the unelected bureaucrats can still craft a law they want word for word, but they cant pass it without our elected reps giving it the thumbs-up.

EDIT: And if it is time sensitive, POTUS can issue an EO that expires at the end of the current legislative session.

 

[JAL]

Just curious, if they didn't drive the stake with W. Virginia, do you think they would now?

We will have to see what the SCOTUS decision and its narrative says. It's hard to project what will happen from the oral arguments and Justice questions/comments.

 

[JAL]

We dont need chevron. I mentioned it somewhere else. Do it like we are doing gun law here.

Guy Relford: "We have a problem. Here is a law I wrote to fix the problem. I'm a SME so I know what I'm talking about. It must pass as a clean bill with no modifications or amendments unless you clear it with me, else you could break it due to ignorance."
Legislators: "Thank you. We will debate it as-is and see where it goes."

ATF and others can do the same. Write the law like they do with current administrative edicts. Just replace Guy in the exchange above with the ATF.

That way the unelected bureaucrats can still craft a law they want word for word, but they cant pass it without our elected reps giving it the thumbs-up.

The agencies want the vaguest possible laws to allow them to do whatever they want to in creating rules to implement them, and then writing vague rules that allow them to interpret them in a courtroom to achieve the verdict or judgement desired.

 

[Cameramonkey]

The agencies want the vaguest possible laws to allow them to do whatever they want to in creating rules to implement them, and then writing vague rules that allow them to interpret them in a courtroom to achieve the verdict or judgement desired.

Oh, I get that. But we all know that is BS. I was just outlining how the agencies SHOULD and could do it to the same end. but my way is constitutional.

 

[Sigblitz]

I'm going to the range at 15:00 to shoot my Dutch style ar10. Anyone want to go with me?