Insane! ATF Proposes New Rule!

This strategy, familiar to those who have followed recent ATF rule changes, involves modifying the definition of who is required to obtain a Federal Firearms License (FFL). Similar tactics were employed in the implementation of the pistol brace rule, frames and receivers rule, bump-stock rule and Forced Reset Triggers (FRTs). With these "rules" the ATF seeks to change the definitions and wording of existing law to include items or actions already owned or committed by millions of gun owners, essentially making them criminals (Felons to be more specific) retroactively. 

While each of these rules has faced legal challenges due to concerns over their constitutionality, the ATF appears determined to push forward with this latest proposal, raising questions about their commitment to preserving the rights of the people. And the overall purpose of the ATF in general. We don't hear too much about the Alcohol and Tobacco part of their name. They seem fixated on Firearms only.

ATFs New Rule Would Certainly Violate the Right to Sell Personal Property

Under the proposed rule, individuals who meet specific criteria, even in the context of private sales, could be compelled to register as FFL holders. This effectively creates a scenario where law-abiding citizens could be subject to regulatory burdens and oversight that go beyond the limitations of the governments reach. As an FFL, individuals would be required to disclose their firearm inventory by way of Firearms Log and maintain records of serial numbers, which the ATF could review at any time through audits. Under the proposed rule, some of the criteria to be considered a dealer in firearms is as follows;

Critics argue that this move not only amounts to a potential gun registry but also sets a concerning precedent for government overreach into individuals' rights to acquire and sell property. The 5th and 14th Amendments. By redefining terms such as "dealer," "purchase," and "sale," and introducing new definitions like "responsible person" and also create a standalone definition of  "terrorism," the ATF seeks to wield greater control over labeling and categorizing individuals in society. A frightening precedent to say the least. This shift has raised fears about the potential for government agencies to subjectively label citizens as "responsible" or engaged in "terrorism," eroding due process and civil liberties.

The ATF's justifications for these changes revolve around the stated goal of "keeping guns out of dangerous hands." While this is a laudable objective, critics argue that the proposed rule does nothing to target criminals and instead places undue burdens on law-abiding citizens who wish to exercise their Second, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. They contend that the focus should be on enforcing existing laws that prevent illegal firearms transfers and penalizing those who seek to arm criminals.

As with previous rule changes, legal challenges are likely to emerge against the proposed ATF rule. Advocacy groups and legal experts are expected to question the constitutionality of the measure and its potential implications for Second Amendment rights as well as other rights mentioned. Given the track record of recent ATF rules facing legal hurdles, there is a clear and real likelihood that this latest proposal may ultimately fail to withstand judicial scrutiny.

In this political landscape where discussions around gun control remain highly polarized, the ATF's proposal to broaden its authority and redefine key terms raises fundamental questions about the balance between government oversight and individual rights. As the debate continues, proponents of Second Amendment rights are gearing up for what could be a pivotal legal battle to safeguard the principles enshrined in the Constitution. The Rule is now open for public comment.