Well, whaddaya know? Somebody noticed. Outstanding editorial on ATF "rule making."

From the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review -- "ATF's blind shot: Fix the regulations."

Firearms makers aiming to confirm the legality of new weapons need a clear target. Instead, the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives forces them to shoot blindly by denying them guidance from prior industry hits and misses.

ATF's regulations for weapons manufacturers are maddeningly unclear. And its arbitrary, ambiguous process for determining whether new firearms are legal only compounds that problem, too often costing manufacturers big bucks.

The process results in "letter rulings." The Washington Times reports they're "sometimes contradictory," with nearly identical prototype firearms "approved for one manufacturer but denied for another."

Only a new weapon's maker gets the letter. Thus, prior letter rulings provide no guidance for the industry as a whole and no way for it -- or the American people -- to know when a new letter ruling contradicts a past one.

U.S. Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga., has a bill in House committees to require that ATF document its new-firearms tests on video. That might help. But we doubt it would solve the problem.

What's needed are clear, unambiguous standards that pose no puzzles and need no interpretive videos -- with all rulings on the public record to guide gun makers.

Sans such a commonsense solution, reasonable people might be left to conclude that ATF's confusing approval system is by design.

By design indeed. See previous post on U.S. vs. Clark below.