There are about 3,000 federal firearm license holders in the state of Florida, and Chris S. is one of them.
You see, Chris owns Gulf Coast Gun & Outdoors in Milton.
He’s a local business owner and outspoken critic of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
At one point Christ testified in court about the way the ATF handles federal firearms licensing.
According to Chris, after testifying in court the ATF retaliated against him for criticizing the agency.
“This is no coincidence,” Chris said.
The way Chris says the ATF targeted him was by showing up at his business to audit one of his federal firearms licenses soon after he criticized the agency in court.
“It backfired on them because we weren’t using that ’07 license,” Chris said.
“We were transitioning to it. So, there were actually no transactions on that 07 license. So, they showed up here, wasting government resources for absolutely no reason. And this is obvious retaliation for me testifying in the hearing and doing that interview on Newsmax.”
Now, make no mistake, there is no one more supportive of law enforcement than me.
But like in any profession, there are bad apples.
Who knows if the ATF targeted Chris for an audit or if it was truly a coincidence?
Either way, the ATF is not perfect.
And lately, there has been talk from the current president about merging the ATF with the DEA.
While this might make sense from a budget standpoint, there are countless ways this could be bad for gun owners.
In fact, here are a few ways an ATF and DEA merger would hurt legal gun owners.
More power:
A merger between the ATF and DEA would mean there would be one federal agency with greater enforcement power.
It would combine the ATF’s authority over firearms with the DEA’s greater enforcement power and resources.
It would also lead to increased surveillance and investigative resources.
The DEA has broad and robust surveillance capabilities such as wiretaps and informants.
A merger between the two agencies could create expanded investigative scope over lawful gun owners and manufacturers since the ATF would have a lot more resources.
Guns treated like drugs:
The DEA operates under a prohibition-type model, with zero tolerance for people who violate drug laws.
This is a good thing for the war on drugs.
But that philosophy shouldn’t apply to federal firearms license holders.
Because, if someone makes a simple paperwork mistake, they shouldn’t have the book thrown at them.
With all the forms and paperwork, mistakes are bound to happen.
And gun owners shouldn’t face harsher penalties or crackdowns on minor firearm violations such as paperwork or modification errors.
Redefining guns:
Anti-gun activists have long tried to define guns as a public health concern, and if the two agencies merge it could lead to that.
Because there would be the potential for guns and drugs being redefined on the same level.
If firearms are tied to drug enforcement the agency could make it easier to justify stricter gun laws and restrictions.
The agency could use the same tactics and power to go after both drugs and guns.
Gun grabbers could declare gun violence a national health emergency and use pandemic like emergency powers to strip the 2A rights of lawful gun owners.
And innocent gun owners could be caught up in criminal investigations, arrest, or imprisonment if they don’t comply.
Increased tension:
The ATF and lawful gun owners have already had a few missteps in the past (Ruby Ridge, etc. will always be reminders of that).
But merging with another high-power agency could deteriorate the trust even more between the ATF and gun owners.
And in a wild turn of events anti-gun activists say merging the ATF and DEA is a bad idea…
Which might be the first time that gun owners and anti-gun activists agree on something.
A merger of the agencies would require congressional approval, so we’ll have to wait and see.
