Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BATFE Requests “Emergency” Authority To Track Semi-Automatic Rifle Sales
NRA ^ | December 17, 2010 | NA

Posted on 12/20/2010 9:21:16 AM PST by neverdem

·11250 Waples Mill Road ·   Fairfax, Virginia 22030    ·800-392-8683

BATFE Requests “Emergency”
Authority To Track Semi-Automatic Rifle Sales
Friday, December 17, 2010

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has proposed that it be given emergency authority for six months, beginning January 5, to require about 8,500 firearms dealers along the border with Mexico “to alert authorities when they sell within five consecutive business days two or more semiautomatic rifles greater than .22 caliber with detachable magazines.”  A Washington Post story reporting on the BATFE proposal described that definition as being applicable to “so-called assault weapons,” but it would also apply to many rifles that have never been labeled with that term. 

The reporting requirement will apparently be imposed under the “authority” the BATFE has used in the past to demand reporting of other types of transactions from certain limited groups of dealers over the past 10 years, but the new proposal is far broader than any previous use of this authority.  Of course, there's no law today that prevents dealers from reporting suspicious transactions (or attempted transactions) to the BATFE, and dealers often do so. The BATFE is also free to inspect dealers' sales recordseither for annual compliance inspections or during a criminal investigation.

NRA-ILA’s chief lobbyist, Chris Cox, denounced the attempt to establish a registry of Americans who purchase semi-automatic rifles that gun control supporters ultimately want to see banned. "This administration does not have the guts to build a wall, but they do have the audacity to blame and register gun owners for Mexico's problems," Cox told the Post. "NRA supports legitimate efforts to stop criminal activity, but we will not stand idle while our Second Amendment is sacrificed for politics."

The Post says “The plan by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives revives a proposal that has languished at the Justice Department and in the Obama administration for several months,” and that the gist of the plan was proposed by Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG) last year. It its August 2009 Blueprint for Federal Action on Guns, MAIG indeed proposed that “ATF should identify the long guns most linked to crime and require dealers to report multiple sales of such guns.”

The idea must have appealed to the BATFE, because in June of this year Congress’ Government Accountability Office released a report noting that BATFE officials had claimed that U.S. efforts to stop the smuggling of firearms to Mexico are hindered by “a lack of required background checks for private firearms sales, and limitations on reporting requirements for multiple sales.”

Curiously, in September, a draft of the Department of Justice’s Inspector General’s Office’s unfavorable review of BATFE’s Project Gunrunner, established to combat the trafficking of firearms to Mexico, didn’t mention multiple sales at all. But the final version of the review, released in November, mentions “multiple sales” 43 times and says “the lack of a reporting requirement for multiple sales of long guns – which have become the cartels’ weapons of choice – hinders ATF’s ability to disrupt the flow of illegal weapons into Mexico.”

Whether BATFE intends its plan as another expansion of its oft-criticized firearm sales record tracing empire, or to lay the groundwork for legislation or regulations restricting “assault weapon” sales, or to fatten the files the agency keeps at its National Tracing Center in West Virginia remains to be seen. And the legality of requiring sales reports on any long guns is also in doubt. When the Congress specifically imposed multiple sales reporting on handguns only, it implicitly stated its intention that the same requirement not apply to sales of long guns. 

However, it is crystal clear that some in the Obama Administration agree with those who believe the answer to crime is always more gun control. In September, MAIG blamed crime in states that have “strong” gun laws, on states that don’t have the same laws. And ever since President Obama took office, gun control supporters have been blaming Mexico’s crime problem on America’s gun laws.

The fact that Mexico’s multi-billion dollar drug cartels have machine guns, rocket launchers, grenades, and other potent weaponry you cannot buy in the United States is, to gun control supporters, irrelevant. The fact that most of the cartels’ guns have never been on this side of the U.S. border is, as far as they are concerned, a trifling inconvenience. The fact that the cartels will never have enough “assault weapons” or any other guns from the U.S. to hand out to all the Mexican policemen, soldiers and politicians on their payrolls, is, in their view, an unimportant detail.  And the fact that the murder rate in the United States is at a 45-year low, while crime in Mexico is through the roof (the murder rate in Juarez is 115 times higher than in El Paso) is, they would certainly say, a contradiction best ignored.

To read the BATFE's Federal Register notice about the plan, and for information on how to send your comments, click here (  Comments about the proposal will be accepted for two months; if you choose to comment, please state your firm but polite opposition to the plan.

Needless to say, the NRA will not only comment, but take whatever other action is appropriate to block this sweeping expansion of federal recordkeeping on gun owners.  Stay tuned.

Find this item at:

TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Mexico; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: atf; banglist; batfe; bootthebatfe; castaway; dea; democrats; doj; donttreadonme; fastandfurious; fbi; guncontrol; gunrunner; gunwalker; holder; lastweek; liberalfascism; maig; melson; mythof90percent; obama; rapeofliberty; shallnotbeinfringed
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last
They took the Congress back in 2006 and expanded their majority in 2008 by dropping the issue of gun control and running nominally pro Second Amendment candidates. They passed the Coburn Amendment which allows concealed carry in national parks and other places.

They got thumped last November. It doesn't make much political sense to add gun control and taxes to the 2012 election issues on the agenda.

1 posted on 12/20/2010 9:21:20 AM PST by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem

From whom did they request this authority?

2 posted on 12/20/2010 9:23:34 AM PST by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Come on neverdem,
Let these horses patooties put this and every other thing they are doing or trying to do get on record so 2012 will be a watershed.
This congress will not defund the B.A.T.F. but like so many other gub mint agencies it would be good to see it gone.
I think the American people are slowly coming to understand how out of touch this baboso crowd is.

3 posted on 12/20/2010 9:27:18 AM PST by Joe Boucher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Wow, I hope their psychics are good at finding private purchases.

4 posted on 12/20/2010 9:29:18 AM PST by struggle ((The struggle continues))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I think this (which has nothing to do with Mexico):

If I was going to attack the US, I would do Mumbai in New York. But it’s a long trip from Pakistan in rubber boats.

So, I would buy weapons here.

So, I do favor BATFE doing something to track acquisitions sufficient to outfit a platoon.

That doesn’t mean two ARs. If it was up to me, if you had Abu or Mohammed or Hussein in your name, you couldn’t buy matches.

Anyway, SOME awareness of LARGE orders may be necessary.

5 posted on 12/20/2010 9:30:02 AM PST by Jim Noble (It's the tyranny, stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

If you Feds would secure the border and then do the jobs that you are supposed to be doing... which obamao is stopping you from doing... nothing would be sneaked into or out of America.


6 posted on 12/20/2010 9:36:10 AM PST by LibLieSlayer (WOLVERINES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
They got thumped last November.

Commies have short memories. Hopefully the new Congress will reinforce the November message by de-funding the BATF

7 posted on 12/20/2010 9:47:09 AM PST by ASA Vet (Natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. De Vattel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
Anyway, SOME awareness of LARGE orders may be necessary.

They already are aware.

BATFE Form 4473

8 posted on 12/20/2010 9:58:20 AM PST by Yo-Yo (Is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
So, I do favor BATFE doing something to track acquisitions sufficient to outfit a platoon.

I would agree with you, but the government as of late (past 100 years) has not shown the discipline to control their "tracking efforts". You give them an inch and they take a foot.

9 posted on 12/20/2010 10:01:10 AM PST by justice14 ("stand up defend or lay down and die")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
This is just the Democrats and more of that "zone of control" stuff they came up with to put the Japanese Americans into camps.

The trick is you are there and somebody wants your "there" to be put in their pocket, so you go to the Democrats and they'll set up a "red zone" between the West Coast and the Rocky Mountains. If you fit their category for exclusion, you get excluded, or abused, or made to file reports that others aren't.

I think the Supreme Court was finally prevailed upon to rule that this sort of treatment was, in fact, in violation of the 14th Amendment's EQUAL PROTECTION clause.

Still, whatever value these zones might add the Democrats waste it all by focusing exclusively on the zone and reducing protective services elsewhere.

10 posted on 12/20/2010 10:17:03 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Future Headlines TODAY!

3 months from now: “Emergency” Authority To Track Semi-Automatic Rifle Sales has made a BIG dent in violence in Mexico.

(With no quantifiable data to how it’s Really working)

5 months from now: It’s a matter of Life and Death that the “Emergency” Authority To Track Semi-Automatic Rifle Sales be extended.

(Accompanied by a story about how life is better in old Mexico with the ban in place and dire predictions if it’s not renewed)

8 months from now: Democratic lawmakers question why the: “Emergency” Authority To Track Semi-Automatic Rifle Sales isn’t made permanent and extended over the entire country

(With more sob stories about how it’s ‘made a difference’ – still with no quantifiable data and crazy [/sarc] talk from the right about the right of self defense.)

And suddenly after the “Emergency” Authority is made permanent over the entire country: “Emergency” Authority To Track Semi-Automatic Rifle Sales hasn’t curtained violence South of the border.

(With a story about how we need “Emergency”- “Emergency” Authority to track Semi-Automatic Rifle Sales more than 5 days – because – who need to buy more than one Semi-Automatic Rifle in the span of a month, then 6 months, then 1 year, then……. Well you get the picture.)

11 posted on 12/20/2010 10:46:37 AM PST by chainsaw56 (Do you have the right to defend yourself??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
"...I think this...has nothing to do with Mexico..."

I agree. The penultimate goal is the control of the American people and the abridgement of their liberties. Nothing new here, except that folks are more informed of these treasonous behaviors than in previous times.

When the FedGov takes over the internet, we have lost.

12 posted on 12/20/2010 11:16:04 AM PST by I Buried My Guns (Novare Res!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

My brother collects guns. He’s bought 30 or so in the last couple of years. He isn’t going to start a revolution. This is a foot in the door. I’ve bought 5 in the last two years - I live close to the border in TX, and I want enough guns I can have one close wherever I am on my property or in my car. None of your business what I buy.

13 posted on 12/20/2010 11:40:12 AM PST by TStro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: harpseal; TexasCowboy; nunya bidness; AAABEST; Travis McGee; Squantos; wku man; SLB; ...
Click the Gadsden flag for pro-gun resources!
14 posted on 12/20/2010 12:01:46 PM PST by Joe Brower (Sheep have three speeds: "graze", "stampede" and "cower".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Can someone provide the statistics for "traceable to the USA" versus "other sources" of arms confiscated by mexican authorities?
(I think it is somewhere around 17% traceable, or less)

I'd also like to see something on the date of last legal transfer of US sourced weapons.
(Was it stolen and then carried south, was it purchased sometime back and later migrated, or was it bought yesterday specifically to be taken south?)

I continue to believe that the vast majority of US procured arms picked up in mexico come from otherwise noncriminal citizens who went to a lot of effort to have a relative bring in a semi-auto for protection in a failed society.
An exception probably applies to body guards employed by the wealthy, mexican elites might find it necessary to buy up here although I'd expect them to have enough connections to get better arms from the same sources as the cartels.

The bad guys seem to have a fair supply of full automatics, which aren't available at the local Big-5, and they don't need onsies and twosies when they can buy all the untraceable hardware they need from sources that don't bother with any mandated reporting of sales.

The whole story about closing down the flow of US arms into mexico can only have two purposes.
First,to use as a lever in further restrictions on American gun ownership.
Second, to salve mexico's pride by pointing to the US (again) as the cause of their torment.

As an aside, even FOX is picking up on the "flood of US weapons" story line. Greta did a fairly long piece on it over the week end.

15 posted on 12/20/2010 12:01:57 PM PST by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TStro

“None of your business what I buy...”


I was in Manhattan yesterday, parked across 1st Avenue from a nosque. Lots of long beards and skullcaps all around.

Suppose Hassan went to Texas or Arizona and ordered 100 AR-15s.

What do you think should happen, and who do you think should do it?

16 posted on 12/20/2010 12:22:52 PM PST by Jim Noble (It's the tyranny, stupid!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

I know the dealer would report a suspicious sale. The BATF has historically trampled on the rights of law abiding citizens. Anybody with any sense would not trust them with any more authority.

17 posted on 12/20/2010 12:42:05 PM PST by TStro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower

This regime is unrelenting in its attack on the Second Amendment!!

We have to be as unrelenting in our defense of the Second Amendment!!

18 posted on 12/20/2010 1:01:23 PM PST by blackie (Be Well~Be Armed~Be Safe~Molon Labe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Lurker (ATF) probably considers anything other than a single-shot to be a machine gun!

19 posted on 12/20/2010 1:14:52 PM PST by 2harddrive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: justice14

“You give them an inch and they take a foot.”

Or a light-year!

20 posted on 12/20/2010 1:17:18 PM PST by 2harddrive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson