Second Amendment Roundup: ATF’s Wish to Trace More Firearms Doesn’t Justify Redefining “Firearm”
ATF declares that its Final Rule at issue before the Supreme Court in Garland v. VanDerStok “will enhance public safety by helping to ensure that more firearms may be traced by law enforcement to solve crime and arrest the perpetrators.” Radically expanding the definition of “firearm” from what Congress enacted is allegedly justified by the policy argument that the agency will be able to “trace” more firearms. Whether that will solve more crimes is a big “if.”
We’re all familiar with the spiel. A criminal leaves his gun at a “crime scene” (how often does that happen?) but gets away, unidentified. Police find the gun and ask ATF to trace it. The gun is engraved with the manufacturer’s name and serial number. ATF starts with the manufacturer and, using the records kept by federal licensees, traces the gun to its retail purchaser. And voilà, the criminal is identified and arrested.
But now the sky is falling. ATF insists that its Final Rule is the Ghost Buster for “ghost guns,” a propaganda term used to describe privately-made firearms. Unless the kits from which hobbyists make their own guns are declared to be “firearms,” their homemade guns won’t be traceable. Criminals who lose their guns at “crime scenes” won’t be caught.
After years of ATF exaggerating the usefulness of tracing, Congress enacted a law in 2013 requiring ATF to “make clear that trace data cannot be used to draw broad conclusions about firearms-related crime” by including in its releases of information the following language: “Law enforcement agencies may request firearms traces for any reason, and those reasons are not necessarily reported to the Federal Government. Not all firearms used in crime are traced and not all firearms traced are used in crime.”
Consider the disconnect. ATF traces all firearms it encounters. A person is subject to a domestic violence restraining order and ATF learns that he has a very large gun collection. They raid his house, seize all 200 of his guns, and then trace them. That goes down as 200 “crime guns” seized at a “crime scene” that have nothing to do with his offense of mere possession while subject to the order.
As explained in my two previous posts (here and here), Congress defines a “firearm” as a weapon “which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive” or “the frame or receiver of any such weapon.” ATF’s Final Rule expands that definition to include partially-machined raw material, information, jigs, and tools that sufficiently-skilled persons may fabricate into a firearm. Whether ATF has such authority is the issue before the Court in VanDerStok.
One of the superior amici briefs filed in the case is that of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, author
Article from Latest
The Reason Magazine website is a go-to destination for libertarians seeking cogent analysis, investigative reporting, and thought-provoking commentary. Championing the principles of individual freedom, limited government, and free markets, the site offers a diverse range of articles, videos, and podcasts that challenge conventional wisdom and advocate for libertarian solutions. Whether you’re interested in politics, culture, or technology, Reason provides a unique lens that prioritizes liberty and rational discourse. It’s an essential resource for those who value critical thinking and nuanced debate in the pursuit of a freer society.