Leaked ATF Whitepaper Explained – The Legal Brief ~ VIDEO

The Gun Collective
The Gun Collective

USA – -(Ammoland.com)-Welcome back to The Legal Brief, the show where we CRUSH the various legal myths and misinformation surrounding various areas of the gun world.

I’m your host Adam Kraut and you if you haven’t already voted in the NRA Board of Directors Election, go vote!

If you aren’t sure how to vote be sure to check out the video I did on that and remember Kraut for NRA!

Today we are talking about a paper that caught everyone’s attention recently, the leaked ATF Whitepaper. *(embedded below)

Recently, an internal memo from the Associate Deputy Director of ATF (number 2 in charge) Ronald Turk hit the internet and took off like a wildfire. In it Deputy Director Turk outlines options to reduce or modify firearms regulations. After reading the paper, I have to admit, I’m actually kind of impressed. Given the timing of it…Inaguration Day and point number 15 in the document, the need for an ATF confirmed Director…one has to wonder, is this a job application to the current administration?

Either way, there are several points that Deputy Director Turk makes which are refreshing to see from an ATF official.

One of the biggest ones that popped right off the page was the desire to reissue a study into the sporting purposes exemption. He explains “ATF could re-examine its almost 20-year old study to bring it up to date with the sport shooting landscape of today, which is vastly different than what it was years ago.” Then goes on to explain the expansion of shooting sports such as USPSA and the rise of other such as 3-gun. It’s almost as if he read my comment in opposition to ATF’s Proposed Notice of Rulemaking to reclassify Armory Piercing Ammunition where I made a lot of those points…Hi ATF, I know you’re watching. 😉

The current ban on importation of certain firearms dates back to a study that ATF did in the late 1990’s. In that study, the ATF declared that “while some may consider practical shooting a sport, by its very nature it is closer to police/combat-style competition and is not comparable to the more traditional types of sports, such as hunting and organized competitive target shooting. Therefore, we are not convinced that practical shooting does, in fact, constitute a sporting purpose under section 925(d)(3).” It’s definitely time that ATF revisit the sporting purposes exemption.

He also suggests that ATF create a database for rulings that it has issued. This would be a welcome change as the lack of a centralized, searchable, public database where individuals like myself, as well as industry members and you, could see how ATF has previously ruled on different topics. The lack of a database has cause a lot of unnecessary anguish. But it’s a government agency, so that might be expecting too much. However, he does not go as far as saying that all rulings would be available to the public, but only open rulings. At the very least, it would allow ATF to become more consistent in its rulings by being able to search through previous opinions, although it would be great to have an entirely open database.

Deputy Director Turk also points out that ATF should support the removal of silencers from the National Firearms Act or NFA because the change in public support for such indicates that the reason for their inclusion in the NFA is archaic and the reluctance to remove them should be reevaluated.

He provides some statistics that you may find useful when calling your representatives to ask for their support of the Hearing Protection Act. He also points out that a revision to the definition of a silencer would be important. As you may remember from looking at the definitions from the episode I did on the NFA, a silencer is not only defined as the silencer itself, but any combination of silencer parts and any part that is intended only for use in a silencer. And before you ask, we’ll be doing an update on the Hearing Protection Act shortly.

He also points to a laundry list of regulations that are obsolete or have obsolete provisions which should be removed from the Federal Regulations. Other provisions you may find interesting include the re-importation of certain surplus firearms from overseas, firearm stabilizing braces and armor piercing ammunition.

As you may have guessed, the paper is not the official position of ATF. I would not hold your breath for any of those changes to occur overnight. It is just one man’s opinion that wasn’t intended for public consumption…at least that is what the paper says. At the very least, it does shed some light into what some ATF employees are thinking. In this case, it happens to be the number 2 man at ATF. As always, we need Congressional action to change the actual laws. So, you may want to pick up the phone and encourage your representatives to support pro-gun legislation. I know I sound like a broken record when I say that, but that is the way to effect change right now.

Leaked ATF Whitepaper Explained - The Legal Brief ~ VIDEO
Leaked ATF Whitepaper Explained – The Legal Brief ~ VIDEO

Hopefully that gives you a better understanding of what the white paper is and what it actually means. What do you think of the proposed changes that Deputy Director Turk makes in the paper? Are you guys excited about it, do you think it’ll happen? Let me know down in the comments below! If you guys liked this episode, you know what to do, hit that like button and share it around with your friends. Have a question you want answered on this show, head over to The Legal Brief section on theguncollective.com. Be sure to check out my website adamkraut.com for more information on my quest to serve YOU on the NRA Board of Directors. Don’t forget to like The Gun Collective on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Full 30, Snap Chat and wherever else you can catch us on social media.

And as always thanks for watching!

Links for this episode:

  • ATF Whitepaper – https://princelaw.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/white-paper-options-to-reduce-or-modify-firearms-regulations.pdf
  • 1989 Sporting Purposes Study – https://www.atf.gov/file/61761/download
  • 1998 Sporting Purposes Study – https://www.atf.gov/file/57521/download
  • 2011 Report on the Importability of Certain Shotguns – https://www.atf.gov/resource-center/docs/january-2011-importability-certain-shotgunspdf/download

About The Gun Collective

The Gun Collective is dedicated to bringing you the highest quality, fast paced gun content possible. Started in June 2015 by Jon Patton, TGC has rapidly taken off to become a go-to source for the things you need to know without a bunch of BS. Please check out TheGunCollective.com to learn more and see what the hype is all about!

  • 15 thoughts on “Leaked ATF Whitepaper Explained – The Legal Brief ~ VIDEO

    1. I’m extremely sad that there was no mention of opening up the machine gun registry for the general public for the reason of a restoration of our 14th Amendment rights to equal protection under the law, which should include fully automatic weapons to be registered. I know there would be outcries by the hoplophobes, but the fixed number of machine guns created a closed environment and hyper-escalated prices that make this a rich person’s sport rather than being available to any law-abiding citizen who can pass muster of a background/psychological check, bonding and registration. I can’t recall any crimes being committed with full-auto weapons by registered owners, so what excuse is there for the government to restrict the public from enjoying the same firearms that our hundreds of FFLs, law enforcement agencies and rich people do? Since FA weapons are “current technology firearms”, there is no reason why everyone of sound mind and morals shouldn’t have access to them as legal private property rather than having to rent them at the rare shooting center halfway across the country.

    2. I am having a mechanic install a “silencer” or “suppressor” on my lawn mower. Do I need a government permit and wait nine months plus a $200.00 fee to do this?

    3. I wish that the so called pro-gun people would stop using the term silencer there is no such thing, only in the movies. It is a sound SUPPRESSOR, you people using that term are getting the left all “up in arms” and freaking out that they won’t hear the shots from criminals. Just like using the term ASSAULT WEAPON, I’ve never understood that phrase isn’t anything that you can use as a Weapon be considered an Assault Weapon? Knifes, ball bats, rocks etc…can all be Weapons, so if I throw a hand full of rocks at one time is that considered FULL AUTO? Terminology means everything when dealing with the children and I mean the media and everyone to the left of normal.

      1. Sir the first patent on a can was sent with the word Silencer, the first wording on them was silencer, I cal them cans, suppressor, muffler,nd silencers. and yes the word silencer is what they are stop being so P.C ,and relax

        1. @Am Pat, and James P. Well, you are, both, right. In the beginning Maxim’s ad guys wanted to call them silencers for sales purposes. But now a days the libturds are using that term to generate a parade of imaginary horribles. So we have to take control of the language so that ignorant legislators are not fooled by our gun grabbing and freedom hating enemies.

      2. Yes I see your point however we have to be aware of the war that is being waged on gun owners with words and phrases by politicians who wish to jump on a dramatic issue to gain attention as well as dishonest journalists . Assault rifles are small caliber lower powered select fire weapons which are for the most part illegal unless you pay a tax and pass another background check or something or other, its a lot of bother to own a machine gun and expensive to boot even just to shoot. There is no such thing as an assault rifle that is readily available to the public. The term assault rifle came from the ignorant or stupid journalist when they attempted to identify a Armalight rifle, and make it seem more lethal than it is, which is a non select fire automatic variant of the M16. Whew, do ya think that a journalist would be able to grasp a concept as simple as that? No of course not that does not sell newspapers or jack up the nightly news tv ratings

    4. Ya, he mentions the idea of removing suppressors from NFA control. But he then suggests placeing them in the same category as firearms. WHHAAAAAATTTT!!???? They are about as lethal as a can of Campbell’s Mushroom Soup. They SHOULD be in the same category as riflescopes, slings, tritium sights.
      They don’t make any firearm more lethal or to shoot farther, or more often, or more accurately.

      He’s a gummint stooge stumping for a better job. Ignore him.

      WHY was the repatriation of all the US made legal for public ownsership/use military weapons Korea want to get rid of? The kinyun is the one made a stink about that. “THEY MIGHT fall into the wrong hands”. Why, yes, expecially when his Fast and Furious agents start buying them to bring to the droguistas of the Sinaloa Cartel. Idiot forgets no one can buy those without going through an FFL and background check. Thus if any “prohibited person” got hold of one, it would be the carelessness of HIS minions to blame. But the illegal purchaser would almost certainly never be prosucuted. They haven’t been on the kinyun’s watch.

      As to the “sporting purposes” nonsense…. NOWHERE are FedGov granted authority to even MAKE such a determination, let alone make that a qualifier for import, particularly when an almost identical version is made here in the US and can legally be marketed to the public.

        1. Sometimes.. I have a Ruger American Predator in 6.5cm that shoots about .5 MOA without my Sig QD ti 7.62 suppressor and about 2 MOA with it. It depends on the rifle/suppressor combination.

    5. Let’s get one thing out of the way right away, ATF should never, I will repeat, NEVER have been given rule making authority by Congress. If ATF wants something accomplished, with the weight of law behind it, let them go through the law making process and have Congress enact it as a law. Allowing them this latitude is where we’ve come up with the half baked idea to turn a shoe lace into a sub machinegun component. Remember that one? It’s also how we got the ruling on rifle sales for, supposedly “border States”.

      Now, back to the “white paper”. How convenient that it was leaked just when a pro-Second Amendment President is taking office, by a career ATF agent who, previously, has had absolutely, to my knowledge, zero interest in preserving our rights or easing any restrictions. Does anyone believe this would have come about if Hillary Clinton had been elected?

      Stop looking at this as a gift and start understanding it for what it is, a political reality on their part with a couple of concessions that are probably foregone conclusions and one or two really bad items slipped in that they desperately want like the pistol brace being prima facie for a felony charge for SBR if it EVER touches your shoulder and they see it. And you know they’ll start looking to make cases as soon as this is codified.

      Congress and the President should send Turk packing, enact all the good parts of the paper, repeal ATF’s rule making authority and appoint someone completely pro-gun from outside the agency to head it up and clean house, and by clean house I mean change the entire direction of the agency.

      1. @Vanns I can only add, wistfully, that No agency should be given rule making authority, and the taxpayer sure could save a lot of money without the BATFE, a totally useless agency.

      2. @Vanns40,change its direction ? I prefer to get rid of it completely. The ATF serves no useful purpose other than to target and harass law-abiding firearm owners.

        1. Yes, change its direction to the part of investigation it does do well, dissecting explosions, what caused them who made the components for terrorists etc. That and taking away their powers of arrest should put them exactly where they need to be.

      3. The ATF is only thinking of keeping their rule making authority. They know if laws are passed telling them what they must do (like should be done in the first place) they will lose their power.

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *