The ATF Wants Your Shotgun
Colorado ––(Ammoland.com)- Did you know the ATF is trying to re-define the law?
And they’ve got their anti-gun sights set on your SHOTGUN.
In January, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives released a document announcing a study that would dramatically tighten regulations on shotguns.
With the tacit approval of the Obama Administration, the ATF hopes to use bureaucratic rule changes to ban the importation and sale of certain shotguns based on their twisted view of the “sporting purposes” clause in the 1968 Gun Control Act.
There’s one major problem. As you know, the purpose of the Second Amendment isn’t to protect “sports.”
It’s to protect citizens — like you and me — from a tyrannical government.
This proposal by the ATF is an all-out flank attack on our right to keep and bear arms.
The ATF’s ridiculously anti-gun study suggests that certain, and in many cases very random, criteria would make a shotgun unable to be imported.
Those random criteria include:
- Folding, telescoping or collapsible stocks;
- Bayonet lugs;
- Flash suppressors;
- Magazines over 5 rounds, or a drum magazine;
- Integrated rail systems;
- Light enhancing devices;
- Excessive weight (greater than 10 pounds for a 12 gauge);
- Excessive bulk;
- Forward pistol grip.
You read that right. Excessive weight and bulk will get your shotgun banned. You and I both know, none of the items listed make a firearm more or less dangerous.
It is a list of completely arbitrary items that have more to do with appearance than anything substantial.
The ATF might as well say they don’t want anything “black” to be imported – it would be just as logical. But their blatant disregard for the truth doesn’t stop there.
The United States Practical Shooting Association (USPSA) and the International Practical Shooting Confederation (IPSC) might be interested to know that the ATF doesn’t consider their matches a “sport”…
But the ATF has made a mistake, and I need you to capitalize on it.
They have opened up a comment period – open until April 30 – by which the general public can voice their opinions on this “study.”
That means gun owners like you and I, simply MUST make our voices heard by the anti-gun bureaucrats in Washington.
They think that they quietly slip these regulations through without taxpayers and voters making a fuss.
Gun owners must let them know we’re watching their every move.
That’s why I need you to contact the ATF and tell them to keep their hands off your shotgun and to ditch their ridiculous, anti-gun study.
You can send them a message by emailing here [email protected]
Over the next few days, I intend to urge National Association for Gun Rights’ members like you to flood the ATF with emails stating exactly how ridiculous their proposal is.
This ban is not about public safety.
It is nothing less than the Obama administrations latest attempt to use bureaucratic wrangling to trample over your Second Amendment rights.
It is another example of a power grab by an already out of control government agency.
Apparently it wasn’t enough for them to funnel firearms into Mexico.
Now they want to keep you from having a home defense shotgun.
I need you to contact the ATF TODAY and tell them to keep their hands off your shotgun and to ditch their ridiculous, anti-gun study.
For Liberty,
Dudley BrownExecutive Director
National Association for Gun Rights
About:
The National Association for Gun Rights was founded in 2001 to serve as a grassroots gun rights group focusing on building state-level gun rights groups and lobbying for pro-gun federal legislation. Brown has been a gun lobbyist for more than 17 years. Visit: www.nationalgunrights.org
Before you start the crackdown on legal gun owners and shotguns, lets give the public the information regarding your little episode allowing and encouraging illegal sales to straw purchasers in the Southwest. I'm sure someone missed the memo where the guns that were allowed to cross into Mexico were supposed to be tracked. That means followed, maybe then Border Patrol officers wouldn't be in danger from these weapons. Typical of this administration, when confronted by facts the norm is to hide the truth. Then we can deny investigative authorities the facts until you have properly changed them to cover your… Read more »
TWIMC: I urge you in no uncertain terms to cease meddling with Americans' right to arms. U.S. v Miller (1939) defined protected arms as military-pattern arms normally issued to standing troops, which were commonly owned and used for lawful purposes by civilians (the unorganized militia). D.C. v Heller further refined that definition, explaining it in new-millenium terms, and stipulating that service in a militia was not a condition of keeping and bearing them. The firearms you are classifying as restricted are not 'common' only because that unconstitutional law has prevented the people from obtaining them. The GCA (1968) places an… Read more »