Alphecca: ATF Closes MD Gun Shop

February 25, 2006

ATF Closes MD Gun Shop

It's not like he wasn't warned. From the Baltimore Sun:

Federal agents revoked the firearms license yesterday of a prominent Baltimore County gun shop owned by a National Rifle Association board member, pointing to his repeated failure to account for hundreds of guns listed in his inventory since 1997.

[...]

"You're not allowed to make a mistake. That's essentially what they're saying," [store owner] Abrams said. "I have had the entire federal government to battle. I'm sure we'll appeal."

[...]

The investigation that led to the license revocation started nearly nine years ago when, the ATF said, it found problems in Abrams' bookkeeping. In July 1997, agents compared the number of firearms listed in the store's books with the number of firearms on the premises.

The store came up 45 weapons short, according to agents.

After more missing weapons were identified after a 1999 inspection, the bureau held a "warning conference" with Abrams, who promised to improve record-keeping.

Agents returned in 2001 and noted 133 missing weapons. They held another "warning conference." Abrams again pledged to make progress.

Finally, in May 2003, an audit of Abrams' books found 472 weapons unaccounted for. The ATF issued a notice of license revocation in May 2004. In October, an administrative hearing officer ruled that Abrams' violations were "willful."

Whether "human error" or not, that's more guns missing than from the Bull's Eye shop in Washington where the Bushmaster the DC Snipers used "disappeared" from.

Besides missing guns, shops like these create other problems. They fuel the feeble attempts by municipalities such as NYC to try to sue them for the city's crime problems. I'm not saying that's the right thing to do, just that it gives these city's and their greedy lawyers the opening they need.

Further, they provide an excuse for zoning boards to prevent others from opening new gun stores where residents might not want them.

I'm not even saying that BATF rules or regulations are fair (or not). But when you operate a business, there are things, be they record keeping or taxes or procedures that have to be followed. Just or unjust, that's part of being a business owner.

Posted by Jeff Soyer at February 25, 2006 07:25 AM

Comments

Being an NRA board memeber, you would think he would know better. This is sad... I'm sure this will be used by the Brady crowd.....

Posted by: Paul S at February 25, 2006 08:48 AM

Who knows what the story REALLY is? Not me..but I suspect that the story ISN'T what the BATFU SAYS it is.
Would the BATFU like to take down an NRA Board member? Enough to falsify records/case/perjure themselves? Would the BATF EVER lie/kill/destroy evidence?
I bet the truth is NOT what the BATFU says it is. Just based on experience.

Posted by: robert at February 25, 2006 09:46 AM

Robert--the fact that the BATF took nine years to shut him down says more for BATF's incompetence than the store owner's negligence.

Posted by: Lornkanaga at February 25, 2006 01:04 PM

At least ATF didn't come over the wall, shooting. So maybe they have learned something since Waco.

Posted by: Steve Skubinna at February 25, 2006 01:33 PM

I've got to think Roberts right. Having dealt professionally with similar instances involving the EPA where records are forged or facts are deliberitly changed for purposes of press releases, I wouldn't be shocked to find some funny things going on here.

Heck, i wouldn't be surprised to find its only a couple of guns missing and that they keep counting the same guns over and over and over each time they come back. Or it could be that he actually accounted for them in the proper fashion, but ATF decided to change their guidance documents (not necessarily the law or the regulations) and are now accusing him of violating something he hasn't violated (which is what the Clinton era EPA did with their bogus New Source Review enforcement actions against power plants)

Posted by: countertop at February 25, 2006 04:57 PM

I guess he should try to be at least as accurate as the BATF is in their own record keeping :rolleyes:

Posted by: ben at February 25, 2006 05:40 PM

Read the fourth amendment.
The BATF must give evidence to a court that Mr. Abrams is committing a crime, meaning he is violating a law passed by congress, NOT a regulation by a beauracrat.
The ATF is wrong.
The ATF must answer to the people, the people do not have to answer to the ATF.
That is the foundation we live on.
Its because we, the people, do nothing when the Feds break their oath and committ a crime, is the reason all our rights a slowly, but surely, being sliced away.
And when we have no rights, America doesn't exist.
Abrams has done nothing wrong. The ATF's very existence violates the US Constitution, hence every thing they do is wrong.
Yes, it is that simple.

Posted by: Terry at February 25, 2006 09:00 PM

I wonder if Abrams has not kept the records of those sales(from the ATFU)to protect the rights of the buyers. Don't know why he would jeopardize himself in that way, but ya never know where a patriot will pop up.

Posted by: AtackDuck at February 26, 2006 09:39 AM

The owner of this shop should not have to keep any damned records. His customers should not have to fill out any damned forms. He should not be under any scrutiny for exercising a basic human right.

Filling out government paperwork is not the price of doing business ... it is the price of not violently pruning functionaries, politicians, and JBTs on a regular basis.

Posted by: Kristopher at February 27, 2006 11:14 AM

Terry: I don't see what part of the Fourth Amendment says those things. Please explain.

It certainly doesn't say "BATFE is unconstiutional, and you don't have to obey the NFA or GCA" - those statements may in some sense (other than the strictly legal, given that the Courts are unanimously opposed to your view, to my knowledge) be true, but not because of the Fourth Amendment, in any way I can comprehend.

If you have an argument that it's somehow an unreasonable search and seizure, well, I'm not very sanguine about that, and it's not exactly obviously true. I'd far rather live without the GCA, NFA, and bad parts of FOPA, but I'm also not at all convinced that the 4473 and bound book requirements are obviously unconstitutional, especially on Fourth Amendment grounds.

Posted by: Sigivald at February 27, 2006 04:19 PM

Note: Comments close down on posts after seven days and then
the comment input form disappears.

Your comments are welcome. You don't need to enter a URL and you don't need a "valid" email address, either. Note though that MT Blacklist is installed to flag suspiciously spam-like strings. Unfortunately, because of the bastard spammers, the strings "google.com" and "yahoo.com" (even in your email address) are currently banned as well. So are strings such as "cialis" (a common spam) which rules out words such as "socialism". Try putting a hyphan in a word like that.

By Golly, you're reading an archived post. Click Here to head to the main page and read current stuff...

Into science fiction? Check out my group blog novel, Colony: Alchibah.
See the reader's guide there for first-timer tips.

Alphecca

Check it out: My group sci-fi blog novel: Colony: Alchibah

February 25, 2006

ATF Closes MD Gun Shop

By Golly, you're reading an archived post. Click Here to head to the main page and read current stuff...

Check it out:

My group sci-fi blog novel:

Colony: Alchibah