Posts Tagged ‘ATF’

One would get the impression listening to gun control advocates or, indeed, to President Obama and those Democrats vying to succeed him that the United States is in the midst of an epidemic of violence; awash in blood with murderers and mass killers roaming the streets carrying guns they’ve bought at gun shows, over the Internet or from crazed neighbors. In fact, many Americans share this view. A recent Pew poll asked respondents if they believe the U.S. homicide rate has gone up or down over the last twenty years. Fifty-six percent of those polled said it has gone up and only twelve percent believed we are safer today than two decades ago.

The perception here and abroad has little to do with reality and a lot to do with political grandstanding. In fact, over the last twenty years or so the U.S. homicide rate has not just receded, but has been cut in half. The United States does indeed have a higher homicide rate than some industrialized nations in Europe and Japan, but is very, very different in size and complexity to those nations usually cited by those who wish to blame guns for the differences.

Here is one simple fact for those who blame firearms ownership and availability in this country for the murder and violent crime rate that plagues some of our major cities: while crime and violence were being cut in half, gun ownership was doubling.

It is too simple to claim that there is less violence in the United States today because more of our citizens are armed, but it is clear that there is no correlation between the number of guns in private hands with either the murder or violent crime rates as claimed by most gun control advocates.

The president likes to talk about ‘gun violence’ which is something that includes firearms accidents, suicides and those killed with guns. There are statistically very few firearms accidents in this country thanks to safety training and common sense. Two-thirds of all gun deaths are suicides and while some claim that making it more difficult for potential suicides to get guns would decrease the total number of suicides, international data suggest otherwise. That leaves two additional categories although former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s groups lump those killed by police and even the death of the Boston Marathon Bomber as a firearms homicide. They are criminal gun violence and so-called mass shootings.

Criminals using firearms are the biggest problem, but it is a problem we as a society know how to handle. If a thug walks into a convenience store with a gun and robs it, he has committed both a state and federal crime. Robbery is a state crime, but committing a felony with a firearm is a federal crime and prosecutable as such with a five year minimum sentence. A felon in possession of a gun is also prosecutable and can get five to ten years for having one in his possession.

Back in the nineties, the NRA partnered with law enforcement officials and prosecutors in Richmond, Virginia, which was at that time listed as America’s murder capital. The message was simple. Use a gun to commit a crime and you will get five years in a federal penitentiary with no possibility of a plea bargain. The murder rate dropped 32 percent the first year and another 20 percent the next, but the U.S. attorney who participated in what came to be known as “Project Exile” was criticized by Eric Holder, then Deputy Attorney General, for wasting prosecutorial resources.

Today felons or criminals using firearms are rarely prosecuted by the federal government. In fact, today’s U.S. murder capital is Chicago, the jurisdiction with the lowest rate of such prosecutions. Before President Obama issued his recent series of “Executive Orders” on gun violence, it was suggested that they would include instructions to U.S. prosecutors to begin charging gun criminals under existing law. That idea was dropped in favor of actions that don’t target criminals, but will make it harder for non-criminals to buy firearms.

The final category involves mass shootings such as the killing at the Sandy Hook Elementary School and the Washington Navy Yard. These tragedies rarely if ever involve criminals. They are invariably perpetrated by the severely and dangerously mentally ill. This category of violence is the most difficult to deter or prevent, but beefed up school security, getting the states to put the most potentially dangerous into the background check system and rebuilding the U.S. mental health system are the keys to dealing with them.

The American people are lucky in that the nation’s founders wrote the age old right of self defense into our Bill of Rights. Many nations don’t recognize such a right, but Americans do. It is estimated, in fact, that as many as 200,000 crimes are deterred in a typical year by armed potential victims. It’s why in every jurisdiction that has legalized what we call ‘concealed carry’ has seen a drop in violent crime. Burglars don’t break into a house with a Rottweiler in the yard and are reluctant to use violence against a man or woman who just might be able to fight back.


Via Christian Mercenary


“When it was revealed that the Obama Administration was responsible for walking illegally purchased guns to Mexican drug cartels claiming that they were tracking the purchases back to the true buyer, without putting in place a means of tracking the guns past the border, the media covered it up. Who knows how many lives were lost as a result of that policy? It was so bad that ATF agents contacted Mike Vanderboegh and David Codrea, often considered “anti-government,” to get the word out about the actions of the FBI. The story didn’t really get any traction until Brian Terry, a Border Patrol agent, was killed with one of the guns walked down to Mexico near Rio Rico, AZ.

We all know the names Woodward and Bernstein, but almost no one knows the names Vanderboegh and Codrea. Why is this? Why was no one ever convicted in the Fast and Furious scandal? The only ones punished were those agents who leaked the story to Vanderboegh and Codrea. Eventually, myself and many others contacted enough conservative radio talk show hosts and  Vanderboegh and Codrea chronicled it so successfully that Sharyl Atkisson of CBS took it up and put the national story out there. Not only has she not been celebrated by her colleagues in the media, her computer was hacked by federal agents and she has been harassed and drummed out of her job at CBS.”

Read the whole thing @ Christian Mercenary here

Via David Codrea

“A+”-rated* Sen. John Cornyn has the National Rifle Association’s backing for a “modest” bill “that would reward states for sending more information about residents with serious mental problems to the federal background check system for firearms purchasers,” Fox News is reporting. The legislation is generating no small amount of debate among gun rights advocates, with some supporting it as a pragmatic move designed to thwart more draconian proposals, and others characterizing it as a preemptive surrender (and worse).

Without getting into that debate, because there will be plenty of others weighing in on both sides, I’d instead like to just ask a few questions that all who are interested in due process ought to be interested in seeing answered. By way of disclosure, my longstanding contention is that anyone who can’t be trusted with a gun can’t be trusted without a custodian, but that’s not likely to be reflected in social policy anytime soon, so it’s not the focus here.

Backers of the bill tell us “due process” protections will be increased for veterans and others under Cornyn’s bill. Per his spokesman, “This bill codifies into law that individuals must get their day in court they’re entitled to, and no agency or state can make their own determination without that.”

It would help if we knew what protections equivalent to those provided in a jury trial  that will provide. Specifically, will decisions rely on those who may have biases of their own, as can currently be the case, with ATF’s “clarifying the term ‘adjudicated as a mental defective’ to mean a determination by a court, board, commission or other lawful authority,” and with some states applying even broader “standards”?

What protections will exist to offset politically-connected anti-gun judges, politically-appointed boards, and “expert” adherents of the American Psychiatric Association’s “Position Statement on Firearm Access, Acts of Violence and the Relationship to Mental Illness and Mental Health Services.” It’s fair to ask, because APA includes in its advocacy platform registration-enabling, background checks, “smart” guns, storage requirements, “gun-free” zones, doctor-patient boundary violations, tax-funded anti-gun “studies,” all outside the scope of the training and credentialing of those making these proposals.

Significantly though, even APA admits:

Only a small proportion of individuals with a mental disorder pose a risk of harm to themselves or others.

Casting a wide net and leaving the shot-calling up to those with subjective political motivations has historical precedence – predominantly in “gun control” havens.

Also of interest – or it should be – how will rights be restored when there is no longer a compelling mental health prescription to deny them? What universal appeal mechanism – affordable to all, not just to elites for whom money is no object – will exist to declare a person is once more “eligible” to keep and bear arms? What guarantees are there that the same biases that colored the disability ruling in the first place won’t reassert themselves in the “parole” process? And have we identified psychiatric evaluators, risk management administrators and insurers who will be willing to subject themselves to malpractice liabilities should a person deemed “fit” be misdiagnosed? Or will the pressure be to “err on the side of caution”?

Read the whole thing Here

Via The Aging Rebel here

How all of Waco must laugh at the Constitution. How all its bolo tied mandarins must giggle at the men who have died and suffered in the last 240 years for the silly notion that the natural condition of man is to be free.

This morning, a mere 47 days after Dallas Attorney Clint Broden filed a motion to remove a buffoon named Walter H. “Pete” Peterson from presiding over any further proceedings involving his client, Matt Clendennen, a retired judge named Joe Carroll, photo above, granted the motion.

In his motion for recusal, Broden argued that the buffoon had violated the law when he rubber stamped 177 criminal complaints that were identical except for a blank space that could be used to fill in any name – like Benedict Arnold or Charles Manson or Daffy Duck. Peterson broke the law when he allowed the charging officer, a piece of work named Manuel Chavez who wouldn’t have known any of the men he accused if he fell over them, to just swear that a full ream of affidavits was the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.


Broden argued that the $1 million bonds Peterson set for all the defendants were oppressive and unreasonable. Broden also complained that the August 10 date Peterson set  for Clendennen’s “examining trial,” comparable to what most states call a probable cause hearing, essentially undermined the whole point of an examining trial – which is to see if probable cause exists to prosecute. Peterson later refused to expedite Clendennen’s examining trial without explanation.

Broden also complained that Peterson is “not neutral and detached.” He wrote, “It appears that Judge Peterson was at the scene of the alleged incident related to which Mr. C1endennen was arrested. Indeed, upon information and belief, Judge Peterson,
a former Department of Public Safety Trooper, may have injected himself into the law enforcement investigation.”

Broden also accused Peterson of colluding with the McLennan County District Attorney’s Office in choosing the date for Clendennen’s examining trial.

Bottom Line

Peterson is self-evidently biased. He told both the Waco Tribune Herald and the Los Angeles Times that he set all the bonds at $1 million to “send a message” because many of arrested “were from out of town.” And, his actions arrantly violate the Cannons of Judicial Ethics. Broden has filed a complaint against Peterson with the State Commission on Judicial Conduct.

And the result of this seven week long legal dance is nothing. C1endennen’s examining trial was not rescheduled this morning. It is still scheduled for the second Monday in August. A regional judge named Billy Ray Stubblefield will now decide who will preside over it. Perhaps he will select Judge Roy Bean or Popeye the Sailor Man. Clendennon and Broden are still forbidden to publically discuss Clendennon’s case. And today’s ruling will have absolutely no effect whatsoever on the cases of the other 176 defendants charged by Peterson.


Recent history shows why Congress had to rein in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) with the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act of 1986.

On Friday, Feb. 13, 2015—the eve of a three-day weekend, with members of Congress back in their home states—BATFE quietly announced its intention to ban the manufacture and importation of the M855 cartridge. The plan was to take the second-most common variety of ammunition for the most popular rifle in America, the AR-15, off the market.

Your National Rifle Association (NRA), ever vigilant, caught the move and immediately sounded the alarm. Staunch opposition from the public and the law enforcement community (which rejected the Obama administration’s fairy tale that this was all for them), along with stalwart leadership from U.S. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and U.S. House Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman John Culberson (R-Texas), forced BATFE to back down—at least for now.  Were BATFE to formally adopt the Framework, it could jeopardize access not just to M855, but to almost all ammunition…

BATFE laid out its absurd case for the ban in its “Framework for Determining Whether Certain Projectiles are ‘Primarily Intended for Sporting Purposes’ Within the Meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(c).” I encourage everyone to carefully read the “Framework,” which we linked to in our online alerts on Were BATFE to formally adopt the Framework, it could jeopardize access not just to M855, but to almost all ammunition if any of the ongoing attempts to ban lead ammunition were also to succeed.

The law that BATFE cited as the basis of the Framework was added to the Gun Control Act of 1986. It prohibits the manufacture and importation of so-called “armor-piercing ammunition.” This includes “a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely … from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper or depleted uranium.” The law was passed because several special-purpose handgun bullets made of hard metals had been developed for law enforcement use, and concern arose that some of them might fall into the hands of criminals.

The core of an M855 bullet is made of lead, rather than one of the hard metals listed in the law, but BATFE designated the bullet as “armor-piercing ammunition” because of its steel tip. At the time, this didn’t present a problem in practical terms. Congress had recognized that many rifle cartridges “may be used in a handgun” chambered in a rifle caliber, so it passed the law with an exemption for projectiles “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes.” From the outset, BATFE said that the exemption applied to M855. Problem solved—or so it seemed.

Three years later, however, BATFE began showing signs that, in hindsight, could have served as a warning that M855’s “sporting purposes” exemption might one day be in jeopardy.

In 1989, BATFE prohibited the importation of 43 makes and models of detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles which, for many years previously, it had approved for importation as being “particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes.”

Attempting to justify its politically motivated reinterpretation of the law during the media-driven “assault weapons” frenzy, BATFE ludicrously claimed that shooting sports based upon defensive firearm skills were not “sporting purposes.” Equally indefensibly, it also said that recreational target shooting, which it dismissed as “plinking,” was not a “sporting purpose,” but was instead a “pastime.” By that ridiculous standard, sandlot baseball, a popular version of “the nation’s pastime,” would also not be a “sport.”

Sports, BATFE insisted, consist only of hunting, skeet and trap, and “organized marksmanship competitions.” But even by this overly restrictive definition, BATFE’s rifle ban had no legitimate basis. Virtually all of the general-purpose, magazine-fed rifles that it banned were no different than the American-made Springfield M1A. At the time, this rifle predominated in the most “organized marksmanship competitions” in this country, the annual National Rifle Matches, conducted every summer by the NRA and today’s Civilian Marksmanship Program at Camp Perry, Ohio.

Having redefined “sports,” BATFE next turned its attention to redefining “sporting” firearms. The Gun Control Act had originally sought to prohibit the importation of ultra-compact, inexpensive handguns. In 1993, however, BATFE again reinterpreted “sporting purposes,” this time to ban the importation of large, expensive handguns like the Heckler & Koch SP89, which it had previously approved for importation. BATFE didn’t pick and choose which sports to consider “sporting” this time, but it ignored its own longstanding Handgun Factoring Criteria. Handguns like the SP89 had satisfied BATFE’s criteria for “sporting purposes” by having features like adjustable sights, a long barrel and a mechanical safety.

In 1994, BATFE reinterpreted “sporting purposes” yet again to ban the importation of 12-gauge shotguns it had previously approved for importation. Then, in 1998, it reinterpreted its 1989 reinterpretation of “sporting purposes” to ban the importation of semi-automatic rifles made expressly to comply with the agency’s 1989 ban.

Fast-forward to the present. The BATFE attempt to ban M855 ammunition features its most far-fetched reinterpretation of “sporting purposes” to date. First, instead of considering, as the law requires, whether a projectile is “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes,” the Framework claims that what counts is the type of handgun in which the projectile can be used.  BATFE argues the new focus on handguns is necessary because AR-15-type handguns pose a “significant risk” to law enforcement officers.

Originally, the BATFE granted M855 a sporting purposes exemption because the ammunition can be used in rifles. Now, it says that a center-fire projectile is sporting only if the only handgun in which it can be used is a single-shot. When “a handgun’s objective design is not limited to primarily sporting purposes, such as handguns designed to be carried and concealed, it may be reasonably inferred that ammunition capable of use in such handguns is unlikely to be used primarily for sporting purposes.” I guess the BATFE never heard of either wadcutter .45 caliber rounds used for Bullseye Shooting (or the NRA’s Conventional Pistol) competitions or hunting projectiles designed for revolvers.

BATFE argues the new focus on handguns is necessary because AR-15-type handguns pose a “significant risk” to law enforcement officers. That argument fails for multiple reasons. First, the exemption should not be based upon the type of firearm in which a projectile could possibly be used, but upon how the manufacturer or importer of the projectile intends it to be primarily used. Otherwise, ammunition designed for rifles can be jeopardized the minute someone creates a handgun that can fire it.

Second, the FBI reports that no law enforcement officer has been killed with any handgun chambered in .223 Rem. or 5.56×45 mm NATO during at least the past 35 years, and BATFE’s Framework makes no claim this has ever happened.

Third, the manufacturer or importer of a projectile cannot possibly know what type of firearm someone might use to fire the projectile. Congress could not have intended to place manufacturers and importers at risk of prosecution because their products might be used in a way for which they were not intended.

BATFE’s latest politically motivated twisting of “sporting purposes” has President Barack Obama’s fingerprints all over it. Obama is still livid over the fact that in 2013, the Senate voted down Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s “assault weapons” bill on a bipartisan vote of 60-40. He claimed if Congress wouldn’t act, he would.

To carry out the administration’s goals, BATFE didn’t just reinterpret the law, it effectively rewrote it. Untold millions of M855-type cartridges and projectiles have been manufactured, imported, sold and used for sporting purposes over the years. Since the mid-1990s, AR-15s have accounted for the vast majority of rifles used in  center-fire rifle shooting sports, and M855 ammo accounts for between a quarter and a third of all .223 Rem./ 5.56 mm cartridges sold. Simple math tells you the overwhelming use of those rounds has been lawful.

After creating a furor, BATFE retreated from its attack on the AR-15. Gun owners who contacted their senators and representatives to request congressional action to thwart BATFE’s ban were a key factor in this about-face. Majorities in both the House and Senate signed letters in opposition to the ban.

Nevertheless, as long as BATFE enjoys the support of an administration willing to bend the law to its agenda, the threat will linger. And that brings us to 2016.

Next year, we will have the chance to steer America back on course. A pro-Second Amendment Congress and president can curb BATFE from thwarting the will of the American people. Where BATFE’s ever-changing misinterpretations of “sporting purposes” are concerned, that must include revising federal laws to ensure they respect the right of Americans to acquire firearms and ammunition for all legitimate purposes.

Let’s ensure BATFE’s bogus Framework is trumped by America’s Framework, the U.S. Constitution. For the future of our country, we can strive to do no less.

threeper flag587db-zoomie_resistor2b22bshoot_move_communicate

For some of us, this cause is not a hobby.  It is not drum beating, or attention seeking.  It is not something we believe—it is something we are.  We could no more lay down and accept this tyranny than the blabbering sheep can rise to fight.  In the bottom of our souls, we know we were created for more than subjects in a kingdom, more than a commodity to be controlled and managed.  We were born free.

by | Apr 2, 2015 |

There are a hundred ways to speak of the fire that burns in the hearts of patriots in this nation. Those who are seeking those of like mind can see it, spreading like a wildfire across a parched forest. Those who do not understand it are afraid of it, for it signifies something they cannot grasp and do not have the intestinal fortitude to stomach.  Liberty for All (LFA III%), the hardcore patriot group in Washington State, may be the tip of the spear, but there are many others throughout this nation who have been in the trenches for decades.

There are those who dismiss us, who claim that standing the line is stupid or even dangerous.  They claim we are setting back the liberty movement, or that we don’t know what we’re doing.  We are crazy, we are arrogant, we are self-absorbed—or so the stories go. There are days it seems that there is no end to the accusations and the backbiting.  At times, I find myself attempting to defend that which needs no defending.  It is a difficult lesson to realize, but time spent defending this fight to those with no concept of its necessity is, quite simply, time wasted.

The truth is, I have seen the men and women who stand next to me.  I have looked in their eyes and seen their hearts.  They are not crazy, and they are not fools.  There is a kind of soul that already knows how this ends.  There is a kind of heart that sees the cost before it comes, and offers to pay it even still.  For some of us, this cause is not a hobby.  It is not drum beating, or attention seeking.  It is not something we believe—it is something we are.  We could no more lay down and accept this tyranny than the blabbering sheep can rise to fight.  In the bottom of our souls, we know we were created for more than subjects in a kingdom, more than a commodity to be controlled and managed.  We were born free.

We were born to fight.

The naysayers will always be there; the loyalists of our time will always seek to justify their inaction and even their blatant cowardice.  The fence sitters will always find a reason to stay settled where they are, constantly trying to figure out which side of the fence is more advantageous to be on at any given time.  Eventually, they too will be left without a place to sit.  Tyranny does not give special treatment to those who help its growth; soon enough even those who called for caution and denigrated us will have to recognize their own chains.

In the meantime, the patriots continue to stand.  We continue to push forward, to dare things not seen in this country in over 200 years.  We seek no glory, but we do demand liberty; its pursuit will not be stopped for anything.  For us, there is no other option.  Our Constitution unites us, and the truth that men are born to be free will bind us together in this fight, come what may.  We will stand with each other, and while every single day we pray that it never comes to violence, if it comes we will stand through that as well.  And if the sun rises on a day when we are asked to give our lives in the defense of this absolute truth, we will do so…without hesitation.

Even so, know this:  we will not go quietly.  We will not go easily.  We will go filthy and stained, with the blood of those whose appetite for our liberties pushed them past a line from which there is no coming back.  We will go with as many tyrants as we can take with us.

We will never shoot first; we will not cross the line into violence. Our creed does not make us monsters; it makes us defenders. But if we are pushed, we will fight, and we will fight until we are dead.  And in the wake of our deaths, others will rise and fight in our place, and eventually we will win.  Even in death, we will win, because death is always more desirable than slavery.


There are a hundred ways to say all of this; pretty words and glorious imagery that evoke emotions that most people have forgotten how to feel.  But when all is said and done, it can all be summed up in one rallying cry.  One basic concept that holds within it the promise to all tyrants that any attempt on our lives will result in the fight—and the end—of their own, for there will be no more free Ruby Ridge incidents, no more free Wacos, no more free bloodshed.  One simple statement that every patriot understands in the core of their very bones.

We will not comply.

We stand.


Resist-by any means necessary-no matter what…


Via David Codrea

“For those of us who do not live in the memory hole that shields this administration from any accountability, here are some relevant facts about Acting Director Brandon and his involvement in the Fast and Furious cover-up,” Mary C. Michel at American Thinker reminded readers Tuesday. Her thesis is that major news outlets have not told the public anywhere near enough about the man who will succeed outgoing Director B. Todd Jones, at least in an acting capacity unless and until confirmed.

Indeed. But that doesn’t mean everyone has turned a blind eye, only that the ones who haven’t have much less amplified voices that are easy for a deliberately indifferent media to ignore. Speaking from personal experience, I can assure you some of us have been banging pots and pans, but only with limited effect contained in a niche readership.

Still, I was told by an insider that this one resulted in some screaming over at HQ. And then of course there’s this, and this and this, and… (trust me, I could go on and on).

Read the rest @

Via David Codrea

B. Todd Jones will be resigning from his position as Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and accepting private sector employment with the National Football League, gun dealer compliance and legal protection firm FFLGuard claimed in a Thursday advisory. The report, while as yet not corroborated, is consistent with information Gun Rights Examiner has been investigating, including by attempting earlier today to obtain confirmation from ATF.

Read the rest @

The anti-gun zealots are all torqued up as usual,but they’re all over the place,no single issue focus.

They’re just throwing shit against the wall to see if anything sticks.

They have their panties in a bunch over 80% lowers,M855/SS109 ammo,”smart guns” that only work if you have a watch like device on,and it’s battery isn’t dead,or some work by fingerprint scanner as well.

The first guy to offer to sell the so-called “smart guns” withdrew the offer to sell them due to backlash from pro-gun groups,because the sale of such “smart guns” would trigger a NJ law mandating that EVERY handgun sold in NJ be a “smart gun”.

The backlash was well deserved-if so-called “smart guns” are such a great idea,make it OPTIONAL,not mandatory,and we’ll see how many are sold.

The anti-gun zealots can not comprehend this-they think anything that in theory makes it so that only the gun’s owner can fire it is a great idea,and we should all be forced to own only this type of firearms.

What they do not understand is the technology can be removed in under 10 minutes with basic hand tools.

Sort of like the other “technology” the anti-gun left wants to make mandatory-microstamping.

The technology works by having the firing pin stamp a serial number on every fired shell casing-actually it would be on the primer-but that’s to much to expect the anti-gun zealots to understand.

Anyone with a file and 90 seconds can defeat microstamping technology,or if they’re a home gunsmith-they can just swap the firing pin for a new one without the “microstamp” engraved on it.

It doesn’t take a genius to figure this out-yet the anti-gun zealots still insist on requiring the “microstamping” technology.

Sort of like how they do not comprehend that M855/SS109 is NOT armor piercing ammo.

The ammo does not even meet BATFEIEIO’s own definition of armor piercing.

Never mind the fact that all centerfire rifle ammo can penetrate the soft body armor worn by law enforcement.

Yet the anti-gun Democrats are still trying to get M855/SS109 banned even after BATFEIEIO backed down due to overwhelming opposition from those of us who support the second amendment and gun rights.

The ban was/is nothing more than an effort to curtail the use of A-R platform rifles-ban one of the most popular,most inexpensive rounds-then keep banning more 5.56/.223 ammo because officer safety-and by their logic,people will stop using A-R’s.

Multiple people from the leftist anti-gun movement have suggested banning ammo,or taxing it such a high rate no one could afford it-except those promoting/advocating for such asshattery.

Most of them have armed bodyguards,live in gated communities,and can get a CCW permit in NYC-something us serfs an not do.

We also have Bloomberg and his minions getting anti-gun laws placed on state ballots,like I-594 in Washington state.

We have clueless idiots braying about “ghost guns” from 80% lowers-what they refuse to acknowledge is that it’s legal to make your own firearms.

They’re so freaked out by 80% lowers that a guy who’s a gunsmith,has a few machine tools or owns a machine shop can no longer work on the lowers-or let you use his machines to finish your own lower.

3D printing can now be done using metals-so their bullshit about not being allowed to use another persons mill or lathe is a moot point-we can just print up a 100% finished lower-and it will still be a “ghost gun”-and it’s still legal to make your own firearms.

Bloomberg’s minions have a list,and they’re checking off states one by one-yours could be next.

The anti-gun zealots keep on astroturfing,claiming that they have “grass roots support” for their nonsense.

Fake videos are gaining in popularity with the leftists who want you to be disarmed,so they can enact their version of utopia-where everything is rainbows,unicorns,puppies and butterflies,there’s no burning fossil fuels,no crime,no violence,and everything is powered by unicorn farted happy gas.

You must be disarmed before the leftist anti-gun zealots can enact their utopia-only the state can have firearms-military and law enforcement-no guns for us right wing nutjobs.

They’re trying,and they’re never gonna stop.

Stand up

Speak out

Fight back

A House Republican is introducing legislation to abolish the beleaguered Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives amid a contentious debate over the agency’s proposed ban on a bullet used in AR-15 rifles.

Wisconsin Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, a senior Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said the policies under ATF’s jurisdiction could be easily incorporated into other agencies, The Hill reports.

And, he adds, the agency has been caught up in too many controversies in recent years, including the botched “Fast and Furious” gun-tracking operation.

“The ATF is a scandal-ridden, largely duplicative agency that lacks a clear mission,” the lawmaker said, according to The Hill. “Its ‘Framework’ is an affront to the Second Amendment and yet another reason why Congress should pass the ATF Elimination Act.”

The agency has come under fire recently for its proposed ban on some types of 5.56 mm rounds used in widely available and popular AR-15-style rifles because the bullets can also be used in some new types of handguns.

Republicans also have complained \hunters frequently use the bullets, The Hill notes.

But the bureau says it initiated the regulation to help protect law enforcement officers from bullets that can pierce armored vests – a contention that has been shot down by the leader of the Fraternal Order of Police.

Sensenbrenner’s bill would transfer the ATF’s functions related to guns, explosives and violent crime to the FBI; responsibilities regarding alcohol and tobacco laws would fall under the Drug Enforcement Administration’s jurisdiction, The Hill reports.

The ATF director would have 180 days, or about six months, to submit a plan to Congress on how to wind down the agency.

Michigan Rep. John Conyers, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, previously introduced a bill in 1993 to turn over the ATF’s duties to other parts of the Justice Department.

Meanwhile, 239 members of the House have now signed a letter opposing the bullet ban, Fox News reports.

“This attack on the Second Amendment is wrong and should be overturned,” Virginia Republican Rep. Bob Goodlatte, who started the petition, told Fox News. “A clear, sizable majority of the House agree.”