WA Commerce Dept. Has Previously Provided Funds to Gun Control Group

The Washington State Dept. of Commerce has apparently been providing public funding support to a wealthy private gun control lobbying group. iStock-884168778

Over the past two bienniums (2021-2023 and 2023-2025) the Washington State Department of Commerce has apparently provided more than $350,000 to the Seattle-based Alliance for Gun Responsibility, a billionaire-backed gun prohibition lobbying group which hardly needs taxpayer support, Ammoland has learned.

Public documents available online for both bienniums show the Commerce Department provided $263,750 to the Alliance during the 2021-2023 biennium for “Grants, Benefits & Client Services” and “Goods and Services,” In the 2023-2025 biennium, Commerce provided $102,102 in public funding to the Alliance, again for “Grants, Benefits & Client Services” and in July of last year, $30,000 for “Personal Service Contracts.”

The grand total for taxpayer money—including Evergreen State gun owners who pay taxes—over the past two bienniums comes to $365,852, and that does not include the proposed expenditure of another $100,000 this year for what is being labeled by Second Amendment activists as a ‘gun control conference” in Seattle. Checking back further, there does not appear to have been earlier allocation of state funds to the Alliance.

As explained by attorney Bill Kirk, president of Washington Gun Law, in a recent YouTube video, “They are using your tax dollars to disarm you.”

TheGunMag.com, an online firearms news publication owned by the Second Amendment Foundation—which does not receive funding from the Washington Commerce Department—has been probing state support for the Alliance, since the agency’s solicitation of proposals from individuals or groups to support an early June event called “Together We End Gun Violence (TWEGV).”

Up to $100,000 is available for this project, according to the solicitation, which is called a “Request for Qualifications and Quotes” (RFQQ), Ammoland reported recently.

In total, if the full amount is spent, the Commerce Department will have provided nearly a half-million dollars of public funds to a private organization whose goal is to severely restrict the public ownership of firearms, which is constitutionally protected.

Source: Washington Dept. of Commerce

In an email to the Commerce Department, TGM and Ammoland asked the following:

• “Why would a private gun control organization, which is supported by wealthy donors, need state/public money for grants, benefits and client services?
• “Why would the state Commerce Department provide such funding to a private group which lobbies heavily to restrict the rights of law-abiding Washington state residents guaranteed and protected by Article 1, Section 24 of the state constitution and the Second Amendment of the U.S. constitution?
• “Would such public funding allocations be available to groups such as the Washington State Rifle & Pistol Association, Washington Arms Collectors and the Bellevue-based Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms?”

Source: Washington Dept. of Commerce

There was no immediate response, other than a referral to a different individual within the agency, who did not immediately respond.

Attorney Kirk, in his video, had these observations:

“When you live in a state like Washington, and they start talking about ending gun violence, what they are actually talking about is ending gun ownership.”

“What this really is, is taxpayer funded propaganda on behalf of the Washington State Democratic Party.”

“Understand this, Washington. We probably do need our own DOGE program because, right now, the Department of Commerce is about to waste $100,000 of your taxpayer money so that they can put on a propaganda event in downtown Seattle and espouse the virtues of civilian disarmament.”

As Kirk and others have repeatedly pointed out, in the Evergreen State, gun control has become a top priority of the majority Democrats in the Legislature, along with former Democrat Gov. Jay Inslee and current Governor Bob Ferguson, who was state attorney general during Inslee’s 12 years in office. Ferguson has been a close ally of the Alliance and has appeared at several events.

TheGunMag has reached out to Republican State Rep. Jim Walsh, who also chairs the State Republican Party.

One thing is clear. Since Washington began pushing increasingly restrictive gun control measures starting in 2014, the number of homicides in the state has doubled. Yet, as reported last year, the Giffords gun control state scorecard gives Washington high marks for its restrictive gun laws. The state has banned so-called “large-capacity magazines” and “assault weapons.” Both bans are now being challenged in court. The state has imposed a 10-day waiting period on all firearms transfers, effectively creating a nightmare for gun show operators, which appears to have been the intention. There is now an education and training requirement, which opponents have likened to the long-unconstitutional “literacy test” for voting. And now Washington Democrats are pushing to adopt a permit-to-purchase requirement, which critics argue is wholly unconstitutional.

Perhaps the only conclusion to be reached is that restrictive gun control laws are important, but body counts are not.

RELATED:

• Fury as WA State Commerce Dept. Offers Funding for Gun Control Event
• Study Finds Opposite Facts of Anti-Gun Group’s State Crime Ratings!? Are They That Dishonest?

---

About Dave Workman

Dave Workman is a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, author of multiple books on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms, and formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.

from https://ift.tt/vV5O0tE
via IFTTT

Bureau of Land Management Ranges Near Phoenix Require Steel Targets for Safety?

Image public domain from BLM

On January 4, 2025, President Joe Biden signed H.R. 6492, also known as the Explore Act. The Act contains H.R. 1614, the previous Range Access Act. The act, as passed, requires bureaucrats in the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the United States Forest Service (USFS) to consider the establishment of a target shooting range in each National Forest district or Bureau of Land Management (BLM) district. This is not a difficult requirement.

In Arizona, there are only four BLM districts. Each district is much larger than some of the smaller eastern states.  BLM recently constructed three shooting ranges north of Phoenix, Arizona. These ranges were constructed before the Explore Act. The current rules on these ranges are extremely restrictive.

The experience of long-term desert shooters with the building of three ranges on BLM land north of Phoenix is a cautionary tale.  A significant amount of money was spent to build well-designed ranges that have minimal utility.

The only shooting allowed at the ranges is shooting at steel targets at fixed distances, mostly at long ranges.  No shooters are allowed to go down range.  The only targets that may be used are the steel targets provided at the fixed ranges. The steel targets are painted once a week. This does not appear to be the original plan put forward by stakeholders when they met with BLM planners prior to the construction of the ranges.

Here is a slide show/video supplied by Tony Urso showing what experienced desert shooters expect of a range open to the public. The show is about 11 minutes long. It is very well done.

The use of steel targets in fixed positions, along with the prohibition against shooters from going down range in front of the firing line at any time, prevents many normal and expected uses of public ranges.  Chronographs are generally not usable because most need to be placed ahead of the firing line. Shooting at close targets under 25 yards is not possible. Testing ammunition/firearms for accuracy is extremely limited because a shooter cannot determine where they hit the target with precision.  Shooting to sight in a rifle or pistol is virtually impossible for the same reason.

Image courtesy Tony Urso

Steel targets were chosen as a method to prevent people from going downrange. From the blm.gov/blog:

Because the sites are operated as self-service shooting facilities, they need special management to ensure public and staff safety. Each of the sites has steel targets installed to prevent visitors from going  downrange to place their own targets.

Shooters are not allowed to paint the provided steel targets.

Here is a video presentation from the Bureau of Land Management showing how the targets are made. It shows a glimpse of the BLM ranges north of Phoenix.

Image public domain from BLM

Tony Urso noted that when these ranges were opened, about 4000 acres of land suitable for recreational shooting adjacent to the now official ranges were closed to the public as a “safety measure.” Local managers have the authority to regulate adjacent lands for safety reasons.

BLM states an estimated 71,000 visits were made in 2023 to the 4 BLM constructed ranges near Phoenix. There are three ranges to the north of Phoenix, west of Lake Pleasant, in a roughly north-south line about four miles long. The three sites are:

• Baldy Mountain Recreational Shooting Site
• Church Camp Road Recreational Shooting Site
• Saddleback Mountain Recreational Shooting Site

The Box Canyon Recreational Shooting Site is in Pinal County, southwest of the City of Maricopa. We would welcome reports from users of the Box Canyon site.

Sites are available six days a week, or about 312 days a year.  The average estimated usage would be 71,000 divided by 4 X 312, or approximately 57 people per site per day. Some sites will be more popular than others. Weekends are probably more crowded than weekdays.

The lack of suitable facilities for pistol shooters is obvious. Pistols are designed for close-range use. Steel targets should not be shot at from close range because of the danger of backsplatter, bounce-back, and ricochet. Pistols are the most popular firearms purchased by the public.

All four sites ban shooters from going down range or from bringing their own targets. Those are site-specific rules which were not published in the federal register.  The mandatory use of steel targets is a local rule that can be changed. It is a local prohibition arising from an over-abundance of caution, which precludes most traditional uses of ranges.  These are the only public ranges this correspondent is aware of, which limit use to steel targets only to prevent shooters from going downrange.

The limitation of using only steel targets is an overreaction to potential dangers. The enabling legislation foresaw shooters would bring, set up, and remove their own targets. From the BLM site, rule 6:

You must only use authorized stationary targets as specified in the operating plan for each site. These targets may be made of cardboard, paper, self-healing, steel, and biodegradable clay (clay targets). All other items, such as aluminum cans, glass bottles, bowling pins, plastic bottles and other items which may leave debris, are not authorized to be used as targets. Exploding targets are prohibited. All user-supplied steel targets must be specifically designed for use with firearms and must be used at a distance of 100 yards or greater. Target frames must be designed to be reusable. The use of wooden pallets and other items not specifically designed as target frames are not authorized. All user-supplied targets, target frames, and debris must be removed from the site and disposed of properly after use and before leaving the site.

This correspondent’s experience as a bureaucrat leads to the question: was the decision to limit targets to provided steel targets primarily for the protection of the BLM decision makers? The idea seems to be that if you prohibit people from going down range, the liability of the decision-makers will be minimized.  This is a pernicious idea which greatly diminishes the utility of the ranges. Thousands of people have been shooting on BLM land for decades.  Accidents and injuries are minimal.

The idea of prohibiting people from safely going downrange to set up and remove targets is not a good innovation. The public BLM ranges should allow users to go downrange and use their own targets, especially for pistol shooting.  Shooters at public ranges normally self-regulate this conduct by calling for a cold range to retrieve targets. Volunteers at public ranges could do the same.

As a shooter, this correspondent would have preferred less money spent on the installation of expensive chain link fencing on rough terrain. The money could have been used to provide for shade structures on the firing line. Shade, in Arizona summers, has high utility.

---

About Dean Weingarten:

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

from https://ift.tt/qZ3N789
via IFTTT

Make Constitutional Carry the Law of the Land in North Carolina ~ Take Action

Glock Gun Flag

Senate Bill 50 (“Freedom to Carry NC”) and House Bill 5 (“NC Constitutional Carry”) are in the process of becoming North Carolina law. We are so thankful to Sen.Berger and Rep Kidwell for their sponsorship and support in this pursuit.

Grass Roots North Carolina has been pivotal in this endeavor. We presented a 7,000-signature petition to Berger in a press conference at his office, and GRNC supporters sent thousands of emails to legislators.

Additional sponsors for HB 5 are Reps. Jay Adams (R-Catawba, ****), Ben Moss (R-Moore, Richmond, ****) and freshman Brian Echevarria (R-Cabarrus, ****). Additional sponsors for SB 50 are Sens. Danny Britt (R-Hoke, Robeson, Scotland, GRNC ****), Warren Daniel (R-Buncombe, Burke, McDowell ****), and Eddie Settle (R-Alexander, Surry, Wilkes, Yadkin, ****). Both bills are currently in their respective Rules, Calendar, and Operations committees.

Immediate Action Required!

• IMMEDIATELY CONTACT REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP: Contact both Senate President Pro Tem Phil Berger and Speaker Destin Hall to thank them for their support and urge them to give prompt committee hearings to HB 5 and SB 50. Use the links provided in the previous sentence for their contact information. Call and/or email the two leaders to thank them and to encourage them to advance these bills.
• IMMEDIATELY CONTACT ALL RULES COMMITTEE REPUBLICANS: Both Rules Committees (for House and Senate) need to hear loud and clear that you want a prompt committee hearing for HB 5 and SB 50. See the contact information below.

Please send two messages. Below, find two copy-paste email lists, one for the House and one for the Senate. Below that, find the copy-paste email message.

NC HOUSE Rules Committee (copy-paste email list):

Reece.Pyrtle@ncleg.gov; Blair.Eddins@ncleg.gov; Brenden.Jones@ncleg.gov; Charles.Miller@ncleg.gov; Donna.White@ncleg.gov; Erin.Pare@ncleg.gov; Jimmy.Dixon@ncleg.gov; John.Torbett@ncleg.gov; John.Bell@ncleg.gov; Karl.Gillespie@ncleg.gov; Kelly.Hastings@ncleg.gov; Kyle.Hall@ncleg.gov; Neal.Jackson@ncleg.gov; Sarah.Stevens@ncleg.gov; Steve.Tyson@ncleg.gov; Ted.Davis@ncleg.gov; Tricia.Cotham@ncleg.gov; William.Brisson@ncleg.gov

NC SENATE Rules Committee (copy-paste email list):

Amy.Galey@ncleg.gov; Benton.Sawrey@ncleg.gov; Bill.Rabon@ncleg.gov; Brent.Jackson@ncleg.gov; Danny.Britt@ncleg.gov; Lisa.Barnes@ncleg.gov; Michael.Lazzara@ncleg.gov; Michael.Lee@ncleg.gov; Norman.Sanderson@ncleg.gov; Paul.Newton@ncleg.gov; Ralph.Hise@ncleg.gov; Todd.Johnson@ncleg.gov; Tom.McInnis@ncleg.gov; Vickie.Sawyer@ncleg.gov; Warren.Daniel@ncleg.gov

DELIVER THIS MESSAGE

Suggested Subject: “Advance Constitutional Carry Bills HB 5 & SB 50”

Dear Rules Committee Members:

As a Grass Roots North Carolina member, I thank you for your support and strongly urge you to give a prompt committee hearing to permitless or “constitutional” carry bills HB 5 and SB 50.

Fully 29 states have already adopted constitutional carry, with none of its naysayers’ dire predictions coming true. In fact, the Crime Prevention Research Center finds a small but significant reduction in violent crime among states which adopt permitless carry.

North Carolina Republicans are now lagging their counterparts in other states. Accordingly, I strongly urge you to bring constitutional carry to a prompt committee hearing and floor vote.

I will be monitoring your actions through Grass Roots North Carolina legislative alerts.

Respectfully,

NC: Mecklenburg County Sheriff McFadden Settles in Losing Gun Permit Delay Lawsuit

NC: Constitutional Carry & Phony ‘Gun Groups’ ~ Opinion

---

About Paul Valone

Author F. Paul Valone has been kicking leftist tail for twenty-eight years. Alarmed by the U.S. House passage of the “assault weapon” ban in 1994, he decided to take action. Finding no suitable organization, he organized a rally leading to the creation of a 501(c)(4) organization, Grass Roots North Carolina (GRNC), which remains North Carolina’s primary and most successful gun rights group to this day.

Paul Valone

from https://ift.tt/Urkwm6j
via IFTTT

President Trump Fires ATF’s Top Lawyer, Leaves a Spot Open for A Constitutionalist

Pamela Hicks LinkedIn Statement 02-2025

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF) top lawyer has been fired by Attorney General Pam Bondi after President Donald Trump instructed the AG to investigate any cases that might have violated any American’s Second Amendment protected rights.

Former ATF Chief Counsel Pam Hicks announced on LinkedIn that she received a termination notice from the Department of Justice (DOJ). Ms. Hick has worked for the government for 28 years. She has been the darling of the anti-gun movement for her aggressive targeting of gun owners and her almost blind devotion to legally dubious ATF rules and regulations.

“Earlier today, I was served official notice from the Attorney General of the United States that I was being removed from my position as the Chief Counsel of ATF and my employment with the Department of Justice terminated,” Hicks wrote. “I have had the privilege of serving in the federal civil service for almost 28 years, including 23 as an attorney for the Department of Justice. Serving as ATF Chief Counsel has been the highest honor of my career, and working with the people at ATF and throughout the Department has been a pleasure. I thank my colleagues for their friendship and partnership over the years.”

Ms. Hicks has been the driving force of the ATF behind several high-profile legal cases. One of those cases is a challenge to the pistol brace rule, which the courts struck down. The ATF is still fighting that case, but there are signs that the Bureau might change its position. The ATF has asked for a pause in all pistol brace cases. With the dismissal of Hicks, hopes are high.

The other rules that Hicks has defended deal with bump stocks, privately manufactured firearms (PMF), and being engaged in the business of dealing firearms. The Supreme Court knocked down the Bump Stock rule. The rest of the rules have been ruled against in the courts but are still being litigated at higher-level courts. Also, a letter from 30 Senators asked the ATF to review and get rid of those rules.

She was also the Chief Counsel who cleared the way for the nearly one billion digitized records in the Martinsburg, WV, Out of Business Office. The same Congressional letter asked the ATF to destroy the records. She has been a staunch ally of anti-gun groups and their attempt to subvert the right to keep and bear arms.

Brady condemned the firing of Hicks. It accused the DOJ of bending its will to the gun industry and implementing a pro-gun extremist agenda. Brady President Kris Brown claimed that Americans are less safe with the firing and accused “industry insiders” of putting profits above lives.

“The abrupt firing of ATF Chief Counsel Hicks is chilling. It is also no secret that ATF has historically been woefully under-resourced, and we pay the price for our safety, with guns now the number one killer of children in this country. Now, with this sudden removal at the federal agency charged with preventing gun trafficking and overseeing the gun industry, we are all at greater risk.”

“Without light being shed on the sources and suppliers of gun crime in America, and enforcement of the laws designed to protect the public from gun violence, we will not be able to stem the flow of firearms that are contaminating and plaguing our nation,” he continued. “This administration’s latest move clearly demonstrates its willingness to capitulate to gun lobby interests at the expense of public safety. The American people deserve leadership at ATF that will vigorously enforce our nation’s gun laws and hold bad actors accountable — not industry insiders who will protect gun manufacturer profits over American lives. The position must be filled by someone committed to public safety, not industry profits.”

With Hicks out of the ATF, the Bureau has a chance of replacing her with a Constitutionalist that will not prioritize making millions of Americans criminals over prosecuting dangerous transnational terrorist organizations.

---

About John Crump

Mr. Crump is an NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people from all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons, follow him on X at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.

from https://ift.tt/72nWuZB
via IFTTT

Senators Demand ATF Rescind Biden Infringements

Senators Demand ATF Rescind Biden Infringements, iStock-1154438278

A group of 30 Senators has sent a letter to the acting Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) head, Marvin Richardson, demanding that the Bureau stop exceeding its power.

Senator John Cornyn and 29 colleagues sent the letter after President Donald Trump issued an Executive Order demanding that the Department of Justice (DOJ) investigate Second Amendment abuses by the ATF. Mr. Cornyn has been heavily criticized in the past by gun owners for teaming with Democrats and passing the Bi-partisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA), which was a gun control bill. Many wonder if he is trying to buy goodwill with the gun community or if he is actually concerned with ATF overreach.

The letter reads: “Under former President Joe Biden, ATF adopted numerous policies and rules that infringed upon Americans’ Second Amendment protections. President Trump’s Executive Order directs Attorney General Pam Bondi to review and develop a plan of action regarding President Biden’s unlawful firearms regulations. We ask that you work with the Attorney General to quickly identify and rescind these policies. In particular, we call your attention to the following anti-Second Amendment regulations and policies, which must be immediately rescinded.”

BREAKING

30 Senators demand ATF rescind Biden infringements pursuant to Executive Order 14206, including:

Engaged in the Business Rule
Frame & Receiver Rule
Pistol Brace Rule
Zero Tolerance Policy

It also calls for the deletion of @ATFHQ‘s illegal gun registry. pic.twitter.com/tpRkxPzZpK

— Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) February 20, 2025

The first rule that the Senators want to be reversed is the “engaged in the business” rule. Under the Biden Administration, the ATF issued a rule that almost all firearms transfers require a federal firearm license (FFL). Even selling as little as a single gun could mean a person is “engaged in the business” in the eyes of the ATF. Many called this rule a thinly veiled attempt at backdoor universal background checks (UBC). UBCs was one of President Biden’s goals, but he was unsuccessful due to resistance in Congress. He used the rule-making process to accomplish his goals. Currently, there is a preliminary injunction against the rule.

The second rule under the Congressional microscope is the pistol brace rule. The ATF used the rule-making process to reclassify pistols equipped with a brace as short-barreled rifles (SBR). Gun owners would have to register their pistols with the ATF National Firearms Act (NFA) division and pay a $200 tax stamp. The rule reversed years of ATF opinions and affected millions of Americans. An injunction currently blocks the rule from being enforced.

The third rule is the so-called “ghost gun” rule. This rule reclassified what is considered a firearm and regulated certain parts of guns, such as unfinished frames, as firearms requiring a serial number to be sold. This move was meant to kill the privately made firearms (PMF) rule, but with advancements in 3D printing, the homemade firearms community has survived. The rule has been blocked at the Circuit Court level, although the United States Supreme Court placed that judgment on an administrative stay. SCOTUS has heard oral arguments in Vanderstok v. Garland, and the community is awaiting their opinion on the matter.

The Senators also ask the ATF to rescind its “zero-tolerance” policies. The ATF has used the policy to shut down FFLs nationwide for violations such as a simple clerical error. One Industry Operation Inspector (IOI) purportedly wrote that he loved shutting down gun shops on social media. The process was weaponized under the Biden administration to attack the firearms industry. Several cases are taking place nationwide, trying to block the policy.

The final action the letter demands the ATF do is destroy its illegal registry located at the Out of Business Office in Martinsburg, WV, during an investigation into Walmart turning over 1000s of ATF Form 4473s to the Bureau. AmmoLand was able to determine that these records were being digitized. Further inquiries from Congress revealed that the ATF had almost 1,000,000,000 records scanned.

Gun owners celebrated the action by Congress. Now, those same Americans must wait to see how the ATF responds.

---

About John Crump

Mr. Crump is an NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people from all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons, follow him on X at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.

from https://ift.tt/mOk0We4
via IFTTT

ATF’s Poorly Trained ‘Operators’ Are a Threat to Public Safety

This excellent article from Feb 10, 2025 appears here with fresh updates.

The training course for ATF’s Special Response Team is only two weeks long.

ATF Police Raid IMG ATFHQ Instagram

Selection, training and leadership are vital to any special operations team, regardless of their size or mission parameters. The more rigorous the selection process, the more comprehensive the training, the more professional the leadership, the better the unit will perform.

Delta Force’s Operators Training Course, for example, is six months long, and teaches advanced CQB, precision marksmanship, counterterrorism and a host of esoteric skills needed by Delta operators to meet their worldwide mission requirements. OTC is only open to candidates who survive Delta’s arduous Selection and Assessment phase.

DEVGRU’s Green Team selection and training course is also six months long, and only Navy SEALs who have completed BUDS and spent at last five years on an SDV or SEAL team can apply.

MARSOC Raider candidates must complete a nine-month course, known as the Marine Special Operations Individual Course, or ITC. MARSOC Officers must also attend a four-week Team Commanders Course after they graduate ITC.

Army Special Forces candidates can spend six months to two years training before they earn an SF tab and a Green Beret, and the pipeline for Air Force special operators can take 15 months to two years.

Special Agents who want to join the FBI’s Hostage Rescue Team must pass the New Operator Training School, which is 10 months long and extremely easy to fail.

United States Secret Service Counter Assault Team (CAT) members undergo a two-week selection course and then a seven-week basic training program. Secret Service snipers must pass a one-week selection process and then a 10-week sniper training course.

Candidates for Border Patrol’s Tactical Unit (BORTAC) undergo a three-week selection course and then a six-week training course before being assigned to a sector team. After a year, they can apply to join BORTAC’s elite national team.

By comparison, training for ATF’s Special Response Teams takes only two weeks, and ATF agents call themselves “operators” after they’ve completed the course.

Poor leadership

ATF refers to its SRT teams as “elite tactical groups.”

According to a September 2020 report from the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) titled “Federal Tactical Teams: Characteristics, Training, Deployments, and Inventory,” ATF’s Special Response Team was created in 1989 and has 114 members. From 2015 to 2019, the SRT was deployed 886 times. More than 85% of the deployments were to execute arrest and/or search warrants.

“Their work includes search and arrest warrants, high-risk criminal investigations, undercover operations, surveillance operations, and protective service operations,” ATF states on its website.

ATF claims SRT’s two-week training course is an “intensive program,” during which SRT candidates “learn specialized skills such as marksmanship, manipulation of numerous weapon systems, individual and team tactical movement, tactical medicine, chemical agent deployment, use of less-lethal weapon systems, armored vehicle operations, surveillance, helicopter operations and operational planning. SRTs also participate in rigorous activities such as defensive tactics, breaching, rappelling, fast-roping, rural patrolling and operations.”

Anyone with even a modicum of tactical knowledge must scoff at these claims. There is no way any federal law enforcement agency can sufficiently teach its agents all of these techniques and bring them to acceptable skill levels in just two weeks. Tactical movement alone takes far more time to train and master, and what ATF calls “marksmanship” is nothing much beyond their standard qualification.

ATF public relations officials posted a chilling interview on their website of Gerry Arena, an SRT team commander. Arena touts his team’s skills and stresses the dangerous nature of the criminals they encounter, but then he says the scary part out loud.

“Because we are a fully functioning tactical unit our team stays intact. We will never ever incorporate a member from an outside agency into our stack,” Arena said.

It is clear ATF doesn’t understand how truly bad their SRT teams are. In fact, they think they’re pretty good – fully functioning tactical units.

Sadly, the whole world now knows the truth – how poorly ATF’s SRT performs when called upon.

On March 19, members of ATF’s Region 3 SRT, which is headquartered in Dallas, conducted an early morning raid of Bryan Malinowski’s home in West Little Rock. A gunfight ensued, caused by ATF’s poor choice of raid tactics. An ATF agent who has never been named shot Malinowski in the head with his carbine. Malinowski, a 53-year-old airport executive with no prior criminal history, died of his wounds two days later. His family insists Malinowski didn’t know he was trading gunfire with federal agents. Instead, they say he thought he was defending himself and his wife from armed home invaders.

Not one member of ATF’s SRT wore a bodycam during the search warrant execution, which is contrary to ATF’s policy. To date, no one from ATF has made any statement about Malinowski’s killing, other than to say he fired first.

This is the latest example of the poor leadership of ATF’s teams. Real leadership is accountable. Real leaders take the blame when mistakes are made. And to be clear, ATF made a lot of mistakes that led to Malinowski’s killing, yet the team leaders remain mum.

Sara Abel, public information officer for ATF’s Dallas Field Division did not return calls seeking comment about the fatal raid.

Operators?

There is a lack of consensus even among the special operations community about who deserves the title: Operator. Some say only members of our Tier One units Delta and DEVGRU deserve the title, but this would leave out MARSOC Raiders, the majority of Navy SEALs, Army Special Forces, Air Force special operators and a whole bunch of Rangers.

Most special operators don’t care too much about the title. Besides, operator is a mindset, it’s not a tab or a badge, but one this is crystal clear: ATF SRT members are not operators. Their use of the term is an insult. They’re hardly even law enforcement. They are thugs with guns – poseurs in pricey Crye MultiCam – paid for by your taxpayer dollars. They are hammers who view every law-abiding gun owner as a nail.

Given their poor training and complete lack of professional leadership, it is only a matter of time before an SRT member kills another innocent American citizen in their home.

This story is presented by the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project and wouldn’t be possible without you. Please click here to make a tax-deductible donation to support more pro-gun stories like this.

---

About Lee Williams

Lee Williams, who is also known as “The Gun Writer,” is the chief editor of the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project. Until recently, he was also an editor for a daily newspaper in Florida. Before becoming an editor, Lee was an investigative reporter at newspapers in three states and a U.S. Territory. Before becoming a journalist, he worked as a police officer. Before becoming a cop, Lee served in the Army. He’s earned more than a dozen national journalism awards as a reporter, and three medals of valor as a cop. Lee is an avid tactical shooter.

from https://ift.tt/6R9AP1k
via IFTTT

Study on What Americans Would Pay to Stop ‘Gun Violence’ Built on Flawed Assumptions

If we’re going to spend money, spend it wisely. IMG iStock-515708952

“Americans willing to pay nearly $100 billion to reduce gun violence,” the headline from a Tuesday announcement from Duke University of findings published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences claims. “A new study finds that Americans are willing to pay nearly $100 billion for policies that reduce gun violence by 20%, underscoring the widespread desire for stronger intervention.”

The “research” is the brainchild of Philip J. Cook and Marc Jeuland of Duke’s Sanford School of Public Policy and Jens Ludwig of the University of Chicago’s Harris School of Public Policy that “uses a nationally representative survey to measure willingness to pay (WTP) for gun violence prevention programs. The findings show that there is widespread support from Americans of all stripes to invest financially in solutions.”

Their conclusion?

“Households are willing to pay an average of $744 annually for a 20% reduction in gun violence, totaling $97.6 billion nationwide.”

All that’s left is to figure out how to do that, and the affinity for “gun control” advocated by the “study” authors is a good indicator of why they won’t recommend investing in freedom solutions instead of financial ones. Because Americans are already invested up to our necks, and it isn’t working.

Think of all the taxes we pay at the federal, state, and municipal levels for government that has the prime directive to protect life, liberty, and property, and then look at how many agents and agencies are actively working against all three. Throw more money into that? What’s the definition of insanity, again?

The authors’ presumption is that the “wider desire [is] for stronger intervention.” More police? The “Only Ones”?  With higher rates of suicide than the general public, and higher rates of criminality than concealed carry permit holder? And none of whom have an actual duty to protect for which they can be legally held liable should they fail…?

For $744, you can get a pretty reliable handgun, shotgun, or rifle and some ammunition for it. And there are plenty of gun groups eager to provide training for nominal costs.

One example, the National Shooting Sports Foundation’s “First Shots” program offers seminars in most states (scroll down the linked page and click on the interactive map) that provide “An educational introduction to the safe and recreational use of firearms; A clear understanding of the local requirements for owning and purchasing a firearm; Individual and group training; A rundown of shooting sports opportunities for all levels of interest [and] A chance to give shooting a try!”

Do you want to reduce “school shootings”? Look at all the money on “hardening” schools, including on school resource officers and “first responders” (with the most “famous” ones notorious for sheltering themselves instead of the children they’re deployed to protect).  Then look at FASTER training (Faculty/Administrator Safety Training & Emergency Response) and realize:

“There have been no shooting attacks in schools where teachers can legally carry guns.”

That’s a heck of a lot more than 20%.

What’s to stop any of this? In a word, Democrats.

They’re the ones who push citizen disarmament. They’re the ones who make carry permits hard to get, and out of reach for lower income Americans. They’re the ones whose catch-and-release policies put career criminals back onto the streets where they easily bypass all the prior restraints the “law abiding” must overcome before obtaining a gun. They’re the ones conjoined with teachers’ unions that are the loudest and shrillest opponents of defending themselves and their charges.

Don’t look for the new “study” to tell you any of this. Its grant-funded ivory tower eggheads are too busy trying to convince us to keep doing what experience shows us will never work—throwing money at government hoping it will relieve us of our individual duties and responsibilities as “We the People”  to  “secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.”

---

About David Codrea:

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating/defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament. He blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” is a regularly featured contributor to Firearms News, and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

from https://ift.tt/20Hug9t
via IFTTT