President Donald Trump has been making significant cuts to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). The anti-gunners are not happy about it, as evidenced by an op-ed claiming that this will only make it easier for criminals to obtain guns.
The Hill’s Robert J. Spitzer penned an opinion piece in which he claims weakening the ATF will lead to more bad actors getting firearms and using them on Americans. He referred to Trump’s approach as “the most criminal-friendly gun policy of any presidential administration in U.S. history.”
Spitzer details how the Trump administration is working to eliminate former President Joe Biden’s anti-gun policies. These include policies targeting gun dealers and the proliferation of so-called “ghost guns.”
While the author concedes that the ATF has not been perfect, referring to the massacre of Branch Davidian men, women, and children in Waco, TX, and the “Fast and Furious” gun-running scandal. However, he defends the agency, saying it “consistently ranks as the smallest and most poorly funding” federal law enforcement agency.
“Charged with monitoring the more than 80,000 licensed U.S. gun dealers, the ATF barely has the personnel to conduct routine dealer inspections once every 10 years, not to mention the ATF’s obligation to inspect the nation’s 9,000 explosives license holders,” Spitzer writes.
But the picture the author paints is not exactly accurate. The ATF isn’t some beleaguered and misunderstood agency. It has often been an instrument used by anti-gunner politicians to crack down on gun ownership.
It was recently revealed that the ATF is using the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to spy on lawful gun purchases by California residents. The objective is to gather this information and use it to bust people who violate the Golden State’s restrictions on firearms, such as its assault weapons ban.
Gun Owners of America (GOA) exposed the operation, noting that the ATF and FBI are pursuing “unconstitutional investigations,” and surveilling gun owners for up to six months without warrants or court oversight — even when they have not committed federal crimes.
This is precisely the method the ATF used to target Brooklyn native Dexter Taylor, who is currently serving a ten-year sentence in prison just for building his own firearms. The ATF monitored his online purchases and then notified New York authorities because the state prohibits residents from manufacturing firearms.
Moreover, the Biden administration used the ATF to make it harder for gun dealers to sell firearms. He imposed a “zero-tolerance” policy that allowed the ATF to revoke licenses for minor clerical errors such as typos or missing initials on forms. It was a quintessential example of government overreach.
The agency also tried to criminalize thousands of Americans by reclassifying pistol braces as short-barreled rifles, which subjected owners to ridiculous regulations such as a $200 tax stamp and fingerprint and photo requirements. Those who failed to comply could have faced felony charges.
Trump’s cuts to the ATF are aimed at reining in a corrupt institution that routinely violates the Second Amendment in order to make it harder for people to keep and bear arms. If anything, the administration should abolish the agency.
The Second Amendment does not include exceptions for unelected federal agencies to regulate how private citizens build or purchase firearms. It does not allow for a centralized gun control bureaucracy.
In a particularly interesting moment, Spitzer asks, “Why would any law-abiding citizen want a gun that cannot be traced?” Well, the answer is simple: People don’t trust the government. They are leery about allowing the state to track which guns people own.
Even further, requiring serial numbers of privately manufactured firearms doesn’t punish actual crimes. Instead, it only criminalizes law-abiding people in a “Minority Report” style pre-crime effort.
Trump’s action on the ATF is not about making it easier for criminals to obtain firearms. It’s about making it easier for law-abiding Americans to defend themselves against said criminals, who are already empowered by gun control.
When the government places more hurdles and obstacles in front of would-be gun owners, it is not saving lives nor is it protecting our rights. Instead, it is violating our right to own the means by which we can defend ourselves against criminals and a tyrannical government. These protections exist for a reason. Criminals will always figure out how to victimize the public. What’s the point of making it harder for private citizens to make sure they don’t?