Wednesday, May 7, 2014

ATF's proposed reporting requirement expansion illustrates 'slippery slope'

And now, the BATFE evidently believes it no longer needs even that dubious justification. If not, is there any reason to believe they will feel the need to limit themselves to "certain rifles," as Judge Collyer describes detachable magazine-fed, semi-automatic rifles of greater than .22 caliber? Maybe the existence of the .204 Ruger cartridge means that "greater than .22 caliber" will be seen as too limiting. Maybe "bullet buttons" and ARMagLocks mean that the BATFE will decide it should not limit itself to requiring the reporting of only detachable-magazine fed firearms.

2 comments:

SWIFT said...

If the reporting requirement of long guns to the ATF, follows the path of pistols, then those purchasing more than two long guns can expect a visit. In Pennsylvania, many times the ATF uses their lap-dogs in the Pennsylvania State Police, to do the actual visit. Due to the fact that purchasing multiple guns is not illegal, anyone from either agency visiting me, can expect to be treated to a lesson in law. Further, they can expect to be treated as trespassers, as my land is off-limits to both agencies.

Anonymous said...

A friend of mine is a FFL and ATF is already making contact with FFLs when people buy multiple weapons in a short period of time - and this is in the Midwest. There is no slope, we are already at the bottom of that hill.

Every gun purchase is being tracked and that info is being collected and KEPT. ITS A HUGE LIE to say the mighty NRA negotiated the FBI destroying all the background check info because "others" are actually keeping the "list".

See, they KNOW each gun sale and every gun purchase, which is HOW they can holler about multiple sales in a short timeframe. I certainly wish a whistleblower would put that fact. Oh wait - Snowden already DID, I portend anyway.