Did anyone else get one of these?

[jimpeel]

Got this in my e-mail. Apparently, when we petitioned for relief from the BATFE's mandate that records all multiple rifle sales within a certain distance of the Mexican border, they took notice; but they will continue anyway. The OMB wants to record all of those purchases which is a de facto registration scheme.

Ms. Taylor expounds on the "successful" ATF efforts to deter crime. What a crock. Once again, they use the law, or the appearance of law, to cover up their own crimes when it comes to cases like F&F.

RE: On multiple rifle sales
[email protected] ([email protected])

11/10/14

To: [email protected]
[email protected]

ATF would like to thank you for your submission of comments for OMB Collection 1140-0100/ Report of Multiple Sales or Other Disposition of Certain Rifles. ATF has the authority to collect this information in accordance with 18 U.S.C 923 (g) (5) (A). The OMB Collection 1140-0100 has not been extended to any states outside of the Southwest Border, as it was originally intended. This collection is merely an extension of the existing collection, which has been successful in ATF’s efforts in reducing and preventing violent crime. The Southwest Border is targeted due to a culmination of crime statistics deriving from these states that indicate many crimes are being committed with not only handguns, but also with certain types of rifles as well. By requiring the reporting of multiple sales of the specified rifles, this extension provides significant investigative leads to law enforcement in pursuing firearms trafficking to Mexico and along the southwest border.

Thank You

Firearms Industry Programs Branch, ATF

[barnbwt]

At least they were up front about their lacking authority to extend this to the whole nation. There had been some talk earlier this year about that camel's nose being pushed northward.

I do agree there doesn't seem to be any clear argument for them holding onto the reporting information. Checking into buyers of multiple guns may be legally within their authority, but storing the list of them for any length of time beyond which they'd elect to follow up the purchase with a visit/investigation seems clearly illegal. Small distinction, but an important one, especially as this F&F-instigated multi-gun reporting scheme drags on.

Toss it in the pile of things we should ask our legislators address (or rather, un-address) through law-making if they really wish to show themselves as pro-gun. There's enough Democrats in the South and pro-gun areas, that I don't even think a veto-override would be out of the question come January. At least it'll be possible to bring something like this up for a vote, at long last.

TCB