Video Highlights
- The lawsuit aims to stop the ATF's new Zero Tolerance policy, which allows them to revoke FFL licenses for simple clerical mistakes.
- The ATF does not hold itself to the same standards of perfection in record-keeping that they require from FFLs.
- Examples of ATF's poor record-keeping include the theft of firearms from their headquarters, false reports of destroyed firearms, and errors in the National Firearms registration and transfer record (NFRTR).
- Former ATF Chief Timothy Bussey admitted to a high error rate in the NFRTR.
- ATF personnel commit perjury by testifying that the NFRTR is 100% accurate.
- Operation Fast and Furious is another example of ATF's failure in tracking firearms.
- No serious repercussions have been faced by ATF personnel for their record-keeping failures or involvement in Fast and Furious.
- ATF personnel admit to committing clerical errors that would result in license revocation for FFLs.
- ATF has maintained their own federal firearms licenses in the past, but information about them is now unavailable.
- The ATF would not be able to withstand the same scrutiny that they impose on FFLs.
Video Summary
Welcome to another episode of Washington Gun Law TV. In this follow-up video, we will discuss the case Morehouse Enterprises vs. ATF, which challenges the ATF's Zero Tolerance policy. This policy allows the ATF to revoke Federal Firearms Licenses (FFL) for simple clerical mistakes. The plaintiffs in this case have raised an important question: What would happen if the ATF held themselves to their own standards?
The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court in North Dakota, aims to stop the ATF's Zero Tolerance policy. This policy has serious consequences for FFLs, as the ATF can revoke their licenses for minor errors in record-keeping, even if there is no connection to unlawful firearm transfers. It is important to note that this is not clickbait, as the ATF has crafted rules and regulations that allow them to revoke licenses for simple clerical mistakes.
The plaintiffs have drafted well-crafted and thorough pleadings, which shed light on the hypocrisy of the ATF's record-keeping practices. The ATF does not hold itself to the same standards of perfection that they require from FFLs. They have a history of poor record-keeping, as evidenced by several examples.
One example is the case of Christopher Lee Yates, an ATF contractor who was convicted of stealing thousands of firearms from the ATF's headquarters. The theft went unnoticed by ATF headquarters, and ATF personnel falsely reported that the firearms had been destroyed when they were later recovered on the streets. If an FFL had committed similar violations, their license would have been swiftly revoked. However, no ATF employee has faced any serious repercussions for the Yates scandal.
Another example is the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (NFRTR), which is the registry of all firearms registered under the National Firearms Act of 1934. The ATF's record-keeping in the NFRTR has been found to be erroneous, with variations in data entry and inconsistent decisions on registration and transfer applications. In contrast, FFLs have been found to have more accurate records. The ATF's own former Chief, Timothy Bussey, openly admitted that the error rate in the NFRTR was between 49 and 50 percent. This level of error would never be tolerated from an FFL.
Despite their poor record-keeping, when ATF personnel testify in court, they claim that the NFRTR database is 100% accurate. This amounts to institutionalized perjury, as they knowingly provide false information under oath. This is a clear double standard, as FFLs can have their licenses revoked for similar clerical errors.
Operation Fast and Furious is another example of the ATF's failure in record-keeping and tracking firearms. The ATF allowed illegal gun sales to track sellers and purchasers connected to Mexican drug cartels. However, the ATF had little to no knowledge of the whereabouts of the trafficked firearms until one was used to murder a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent. Despite this failure, no ATF personnel have faced serious repercussions for their involvement in Fast and Furious.
The ATF's hypocrisy is further highlighted by the fact that they admit to committing the same clerical errors that result in license revocation for FFLs. In a revocation hearing, an ATF investigator admitted to misspelling the name of a firearm and importer in her report, which would have been a chargeable violation for an FFL. The ATF's defense that they are not an FFL does not hold up, as they have maintained their own federal firearms licenses in the past. However, information about these licenses is now unavailable.
In conclusion, the Morehouse Enterprises vs. ATF case is an important one to watch. The ATF's Zero Tolerance policy and their hypocrisy in record-keeping standards are being challenged. The ATF's own record-keeping failures, such as the Yates scandal and errors in the NFRTR, are evidence that they would not be able to withstand the same scrutiny that they impose on FFLs. This case shines a light on the need for accountability and fairness in the ATF's enforcement of firearm laws.
