ATF spends 3 million to ruin gunshop.

[Whiskey Delta]

BATFE Spends $3 Million to Ruin gunshop

By Mark Anderson

TWIN FALLS, Idaho—Ryan Horsley seems confident that he will triumph over a government shakedown that has cost his family business about $200,000 in legal fees, as he fights to keep Red’s Trading Post, a fourth-generation firearms store, in operation.

Red’s is Idaho’s oldest surviving firearms dealership. Sometime this summer, federal judge Ed Lodge, who’s best known for presiding over the dramatic Randy Weaver case, will decide if the federal government is right in claiming that Red’s “willfully” violated the law by making a relatively small number of clerical mistakes in its firearms sales records.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives (BATFE), a relic of the prohibition days whose modern-day legitimacy is an open question, has been poring through the store’s sales records since at least 2005, looking for such “willful” clerical violations.

Although Horsley at first thought that the BATFE would not push the matter into court, in order to avoid any bad publicity that may accompany a ruling contrary to the government’s position, the matter did go to court on March 3-4, 2008 in Boise—about a year to the day since the battle heated up.

In early March of 2007, the federal agency revoked Red’s Federal Firearms License, but a judge granted an injunction against the BATFE to halt that process, thereby allowing Red’s to continue operating in Twin Falls, where another firearms dealer, Blue Lake Sporting Goods, was shut down by the BATFE. In that case, the store turned in its FFL and buckled under the weight of legal expenses.

Horsley, a particularly irrepressible man who so far has resisted what could easily have plowed his store under, told AFP on March 26 that he feels good about the court proceedings, believing that the government did not convince Judge Lodge that the store is a menace to public safety and deserves having its FFL revoked.

The FFL allows dealers to buy and sell firearms; revoking it would doom the store. Horsley also recalled that when the BATFE first tried to revoke the FFL, it claimed that Red’s was a “threat to public safety” but turned around and said that Red’s still could sell the 1,000 or so firearms already in stock—as long as it did not order additional guns to sell.

“You see what I’m up against?” Horsley said. Horsley’s attorney, Richard Gardiner, told AFP that Red’s largest number of clerical errors on BATFE Form 4473 involved something simple, such as not listing the county of residence of the gun-buyers. But he added that all these forms included zip codes. Many of the purchasers are from Twin Falls County, which has a city of the same name.

Gardiner thinks that Red’s practices do not break federal regulations in listing only the city (plus the zip code), even if the county of residence is sometimes not listed.

“We take the position that the regulations do not require both [city and county]” Gardiner said.

So, why did the BATFE bring what appears to be a weak case to court? Horsley’s view is that the agency cannot very well spend $3 million just on its case against Red’s—to try to revoke an FFL that cost the store just $300 every three years to maintain—and then drop the matter.

“If they just back off, they would have nothing to show for it,” Horsley said, as he struggled to comprehend why $3 million in taxpayer dollars have been spent on a case where no evidence has been found to suggest that Red’s has knowingly put guns into the hands of criminals or committed some other serious act.

Horsley feels the BATFE simply is trying to portray Red’s as a bad place, which, however, is a little tough, considering that local police officers have worked there.

“Many times we’ve had part-time law enforcement officers working for us,” Horsley said.

The local sheriff, Wayne Tousley, told AFP in a 2007 interview that, as the chief law enforcement officer of Twin Falls County, the BATFE is supposed to come to him first to conduct its investigations. But he said then that the agency typically bypasses him.

[FromMyColdDeadHands]

More of the federal gun grabbers misusing and abusing their power, I read an article on this not long ago and the ATF agent that did the inspect was qouted as saying to the owner that they had fewer errors than almost any other FFL holder, yet they still insisted on revoking their license. The BATFE ultimate goal is to restrict all firearms ownership and sales to the government, they are by nature a socialist organization, the original intent was to maintain a government beauracracy that was no longer needed and they have become no less than a monster which abuses the constitutional rights of American citizens on a routine basis, apparently without any thought to moral justification and/or cost to the taxpayers they allegedly serve!!!

[jerkin]

Agreed, it never ceases to amaze me what the BATFE gets away with. They make this guy pay out $200,000 of his own money while spending $3,000,000 of ours because of clerical errors and there will be no repercussions whatsoever. Evidently they answer to no one.

[sluggie24]

There doesn't seem to be enough involved oversight of the BATFE. They have all this power and get to run around and use it as they see fit without having to answer for abuses.

They also seem to have way too much power over firearms laws which they seem to modify or change on a whim. I always though that laws had to be voted in by elected officials. Am I wrong in that theory?

[gold cup abuser]

Originally Posted by sluggie24

There doesn't seem to be enough involved oversight of the BATFE. They have all this power and get to run around and use it as they see fit without having to answer for abuses.

They also seem to have way too much power over firearms laws which they seem to modify or change on a whim. I always though that laws had to be voted in by elected officials. Am I wrong in that theory?

sadly the answer is yes.....

all a federal AGENCY has to do is publish in the Congressional Federal Record any propsed rule changes and allow a 90 response time. After the 90 days has passed the new regulation becomes law.

I belive this is how then Treas Secretary Lloyd Benson made the Street Sweeper and USAS 12 destructive devices. He published a rule change saying that those devices had no sporting purpose and in 90 days they became destructive devices.

The Congress is SUPPOSED to make law but since so many of them are too ignorant to make CHANGE from a dollar bill this is what they have allowed to occur.

Washington DC is in dire need of an enema...........