I saw this on another gun forum. Someone may have already posted this here but I haven't seen it. It looked real but you never now about the inter-web lately. It would be easy for someone to do a copy-paste.
If it is for real it sounds like ATF might go along with not require a tax stamp for suppressors.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-c ... ations.pdf
Is this for real, wiki leak or just fake news, ATF letter?
Re: Is this for real, wiki leak or just fake news, ATF letter?
If I am not mistaken, the letter is a "white paper". That indicates it was written as a matter of opinion. It carries no weight on policy change, just suggestions.
Re: Is this for real, wiki leak or just fake news, ATF letter?
It's real.
As Poikilotrm pointed out elsewhere, the BATF has seen the handwriting on the wall from the recent election of Trump/Pence and this is their way of signaling to the Administration, 'don't hurt us, we will change".
However, it's also a ruse to forestall changes in a more permanent way. Yes, all the changes proposed in that paper can be done with modifying and changing Regulations. However, Statutory law changes are higher than Regulatory law, since Regulations must correspond to Statutory law. Also, if we just change regulations, then the next Administration, if anti-gun, could just easily change the Regulations back again.
We need statutory law changes so that future administrations will find it almost impossible to bring about all these anti-gun regulations again. Therefore, we want stronger action than the weak sauce regulatory changes proposed in that paper.
As Poikilotrm pointed out elsewhere, the BATF has seen the handwriting on the wall from the recent election of Trump/Pence and this is their way of signaling to the Administration, 'don't hurt us, we will change".
However, it's also a ruse to forestall changes in a more permanent way. Yes, all the changes proposed in that paper can be done with modifying and changing Regulations. However, Statutory law changes are higher than Regulatory law, since Regulations must correspond to Statutory law. Also, if we just change regulations, then the next Administration, if anti-gun, could just easily change the Regulations back again.
We need statutory law changes so that future administrations will find it almost impossible to bring about all these anti-gun regulations again. Therefore, we want stronger action than the weak sauce regulatory changes proposed in that paper.
You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time...and those are pretty good odds.
Brett Maverick, gambler on TV (also used by Progressive leaders everywhere)
Brett Maverick, gambler on TV (also used by Progressive leaders everywhere)
Re: Is this for real, wiki leak or just fake news, ATF letter?
100%johndoe3 wrote:...
We need statutory law changes so that future administrations will find it almost impossible to bring about all these anti-gun regulations again. Therefore, we want stronger action than the weak sauce regulatory changes proposed in that paper.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDtd2jNIwAU MUSAFAR!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI This is Water DavidW
Complete Form 1s http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=79895
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI This is Water DavidW
Complete Form 1s http://www.silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=79895
Re: Is this for real, wiki leak or just fake news, ATF letter?
It's an opening compromise.johndoe3 wrote: ... However, it's also a ruse to forestall changes in a more permanent way. Yes, all the changes proposed in that paper can be done with modifying and changing Regulations. However, Statutory law changes are higher than Regulatory law, since Regulations must correspond to Statutory law. Also, if we just change regulations, then the next Administration, if anti-gun, could just easily change the Regulations back again.
We need statutory law changes so that future administrations will find it almost impossible to bring about all these anti-gun regulations again. Therefore, we want stronger action than the weak sauce regulatory changes proposed in that paper.
I'll just say it: as a gun and silencer owner, I'm more than a little tempted to cheer for this opening compromise. Take the first offer and be happy with it.
Not that it's the right - or even best - course of action, but it's been a bit of time since the federal government has treated current or potential gun-owners as something other than a criminal. Finger-prints, fines, and slow-as-molasses 'processing time'? Isn't that basically what a criminal goes through?
- whiterussian1974
- Silent But Deadly
- Posts: 2857
- Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 11:37 pm
- Location: On 8th line of eye chart.
Re: Is this for real, wiki leak or just fake news, ATF letter?
Codify it into Law, publish in CFR and mandate that any Suppressor/etc "Made or Acquired during the Time Period X" MUST be grandfathered in and NO Taxes or other Reqs be made on them in the Future, regardless of Admin Action or "refined understandings" by any Agency or Court.
Simply looking through the Keyhole isn't enough. We need to jam a foot and door stop into the sliver of opening and prevent future reversals or prosecutions.
Simply looking through the Keyhole isn't enough. We need to jam a foot and door stop into the sliver of opening and prevent future reversals or prosecutions.
The Darkest Corners of Hell are reserved for those who remain Neutral!-Dante
The Death of One is a Tragedy, a million only a statistic.-Stalin
silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=135314
The Death of One is a Tragedy, a million only a statistic.-Stalin
silencertalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=135314