JUDGE RULES BATF “DEMAND LETTER” TO FFLs VIOLATES FEDERAL LAW

B

Bud Helms

Senior Member
NRA-ILA FAX ALERT (excerpt)

Vol. 7, No. 15 4/14/00

JUDGE RULES BATF “DEMAND LETTER” TO FFLs VIOLATES FEDERAL LAW

On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Marvin J. Garbis ruled that a BATF program designed to force Maryland firearms dealer Valley Gun of Baltimore (RSM) to hand over records on firearm transfers was a violation of the 1986 Firearm Owners Protection Act (FOPA). FOPA specifically prohibits any federal agency from maintaining records on firearm transfers and from developing any system or registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions.

... more ...

-end of excerpt-

[This message has been edited by sensop (edited April 15, 2000).]
 
This latest stunt by BATF has been described as their "pushing the envelope", which seems like a reasonable description for what they have done. Judge Garbis checked their antics at his level, now we shall see what, if anything happens via appeals.

What might be even more interesting however, I think, would be the following. For Judge Garbis to haul the Director of BATF into court, and require him to clarify the source for the instructions or direction that he obviously had, which have led up to the present situation.

Obviously, AFT have attorneys on the payroll, who were perfectly capable of telling them the likely outcome of this demand of theirs, and I'm certain that they had such advice from counsel. They also had instruction/orders from a higher level, these instructions certainly transmitted through the agency director. Let the judge demand the naming of names, along with dates and such background as would include who else was present and or involved.

Should the director decline to furnish the requested data, I suspect that a contempt of court citation might then be made, perhaps leading to the jailing of the person(s) held to be in contempt. Now that folks would make a really pretty picture, at least, I think so.
 
I agree with Alan.
Federal agencies should not need to be told by a judge that they are breaking the law.
If they do break the law, as in this case, there should be consequences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top