ATF’s “Emergency” Long Gun Registry Back in Play

“A federal judge has dismissed a firearms-industry association’s lawsuit [NSSF] seeking to block the Obama administration from requiring gun-store owners in Southwestern border states to report when customers buy multiple high-powered rifles,” azcentral.com reports. “U.S. District Judge Rosemary M. Collyer [above] said the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives limited its requirement to purchasers of two or more semi-automatic rifles greater than .22 caliber within five days in the states of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas.” So that’s OK then? Lest we forget, the ATF’s illegal long gun registry was an emergency then temporary then provisional (automatically-renewed) regulation designed to stem the “iron river” of guns flowing from U.S. gun stores to Mexican drug cartels. A trade that the ATF actively encouraged in Operation Fast and Furious. Go figure.

comments

  1. avatar matt says:

    How does this do anything? So now they buy AR15s instead of AR10s?

    1. avatar TTACer says:

      .223 > .22

      That is why the rule is written that way.

      1. avatar matt says:

        22LR is .222.

        And 5.56mm technically equals 0.2188 inches. Even though thats not the bullet diameter, I’ve always wondered why its called 5.56mm. Is it the ID of the case mouth of a sized case?

        So now people could get around this by buying multi-cal lowers and stating they are making a AR-57?

  2. So the DOJ who let guns walk now wants to implement a program where law abiding FFL’s must report multiple long guns sales?….all under the guise of public safety?? Where was that same “concern” when they were letting the guns walk? 2 dead Americans due to the failure of the US government and now American law abiding citizens have to pay the price??? WTF?-ATF

  3. avatar Pro Libertate says:

    Anyone who can’t see right through their bullshit needs a good whack over the head with a heavy leather-bound collection of the federalist papers.

  4. avatar TTACer says:

    Judge Rosemary M. Collyer was appointed to the United States District Court in January 2003.

    So a Bush 43 appointee.

  5. avatar Silver says:

    Ain’t that always how the degradation of liberty works: “emergency” laws that are quietly renewed and made permanent, growing in ever increasing infringement.

    1. avatar matt says:

      So stop voting in these politicians, or participating in the process which provides them and their laws with legitimacy. Join the ~45% of Americas who cast a vote of no confidence in their government in the last election cycle, by abstaining from the process.

      1. avatar CarlosT says:

        Other than making you feel better, what does that accomplish? It’s not like there’s a quorum. Someone or other gets into office no matter how few people vote.

        1. avatar matt says:

          They will lack legitimacy, will no longer have the ‘consent of the governed’, and will allow us to begin engaging in hostilities to reclaim our rights. When have rights ever been gained without violence?

        2. avatar Ralph says:

          They will lack legitimacy

          They lack legitimacy now, but that isn’t going to stop them.

        3. avatar matt says:

          Really? 55% of the country considers them to be legitimate, and goes out of their way to ensure that their voice is heard every 4 years. Do you plan on voting in the next cycle?

      2. avatar Tom says:

        This is why I vote sometimes for the Libertarians; if I keep voting for the lesser of two evils, I still get evil. I know the Libertarians are not going to win, but is shows that I consider the tow party system and their politicians to be incompetent, illegitimate, and unenbraceable.

        1. avatar Tom says:

          Fat fingered that post. Editing bombed on me.

        2. avatar matt says:

          Opps, misread your post, thought you said independents rather than libertarians

    2. avatar Tom says:

      Mostly…everyday is an emergency.

  6. avatar ST says:

    Let’s back the thought train up for a minute.The de facto purpose of the ATF is to eliminate an armed citizenry.As such,that agency’s job has nothing to do with public safety and everything to do with slowly ensuring all of us-or our children one distant day-become disarmed subjects. I find it intriguing that three of the four states included are places the Feds would have a hard time otherwise tracking long arms;even California did not have a law mandating long arm registration when the ATF began the tracking program during the summer.

  7. avatar Scuba Steve says:

    If I were them (the lawsuit bringers), I would APPEAL.

    1. avatar Ralph says:

      They certainly will appeal.

  8. avatar Ralph says:

    When this judge first reviewed the case, she refused to issue an injunction against the registry. That was a huge signal, and I’m sure that the industry attorneys started prepping their appeal and lining up their industry support right then and there (I would have). We’ll have to see what the Circuit Court rules. It was the D.C. Circuit that ruled in favor of Dick Heller, reversing the District Court, so all is not lost.

    If the plaintiffs lose in the Circuit, they can’t expect any help from SCOTUS. SCOTUS is all done with Second Amendment jurisprudence for a while, and maybe a long while.

    The next 2A battleground will be indirect, hidden within rulings on the Commerce Clause. SCOTUS, especially Thomas and Scalia, is chomping at the bit to consider limitations on the Commerce Clause and have been since the Lopez case.

  9. avatar I_Like_Pie says:

    So will this increase sales of .204 Ruger chambered ARs?

  10. avatar JOE MATAFOME says:

    She reminds me of Judge Judy, and the stupid look on her face makes me wonder who’s foot is stuck up her A$$.

    1. avatar John Fritz says:

      “She reminds me of Judge Judy… “

      Can you say thirty mil a year to treat people like shit on the television?

  11. avatar Parthenon says:

    No one with that kind of smug look has any business being in a position of authority.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email