Quote of the day—Dan O’Kelly

If you have a problem with the truth, who’s the bad guy?

Dan O’Kelly
February 7, 2020
Former ATF agent at center of legal dispute over AR-15
[The answer should be obvious. The problem is that the truth is a problem for a lot of people and they will insist the truth teller is the bad guy. Worst than that telling the truth can make you the enemy. And frequently it’s not just the enemy of one or a few people. You can be enemy of the state. In some countries that can get you prison or even death sentence.

O’Kelly is telling the truth and making himself the enemy of a lot of people. Fortunately, in this country he is unlikely to earn official sanctions from the government even though he is certainly making a lot of people in government very uncomfortable.

I wish him well in his continued truth telling.—Joe]


12 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Dan O’Kelly

  1. Institutional arrogance is an under statement with the BATF. This is the crew that put David Olofson in prison. Then turned around and gave 2500 AK’s and Glocks to Mexican cartels. And makes you wait up to a year to get a tax stamp on a muffler for your gun. Beautiful second amendment indeed! If there is an agency that needs to go bye- bye. This is it.

    • Agreed re getting rid of the agency. It is arguably institutionally irredeemable.

      But they are not responsible for making the law requiring a permission slip to buy a suppressor. Even if ATF is shut down, its enforcement duties would be taken up by others. The laws uselessly burdening the lawful need to go too.

      Of course in 2016-17 that could have happened, but no…

      • True, but they are responsible for the regulatory scheme of how one gets a suppressor. Fingerprint’s, photo’s, the format of forms, sending forms to the local sheriff, Were just so backlogged excuses. Very little of which is in the actual NFA.
        It could be as easy as filling out the form and mailing in your $200.00. Done at the FFL. And walk out the door with your muffler in 10 minutes.

        • The submission of fingerprints and photos and the basic format of forms with all the goofy questions everyone knows the correct answers to already, is not just regulatory. Those requirements are in the U.S. Code that Congress ‘wrote’ and passed both in 1934 and 1968.

          I agree that a transfer should be as easy as sending in the form with a ‘Proceed’ NICS check and buying the stamp directly from the FFL just like a Duck Stamp, (if we’re going to maintain the status quo within current law) but knowing what current law is, is important.

          • Ya, I’m not sure of all the provisions of 68′ GCA other than the closing of the federal registry for machine guns.
            But I have watched the BATF change the forms and procedures at the will of one president or another.
            I’ve also observed them sending form 4’s to the FBI for extra scrutiny on people that already had suppressors. With delays over a year! I think were in agreement there’s a lot that can be changed without all the pearl clutching.

  2. Agent A: This law is ambiguous, illogical, and unenforceable as written.
    Agent B: Perfect! Now we can just make shit up that sounds reasonable for each case, on a ad hoc basis, and harass, fine, or toss people in jail if we don’t like them, but we can also let our friends walk on technicalities.

    • That’s the current Supreme Court precedent, the notorious “Chevron decision”.
      Translated into plain English it’s pretty much what you said: if the law is ambiguous, agencies can make up whatever they want, and unless what they make up is utterly absurd and can’t possibly be a slightly reasonable interpretation of the law, it stands as the “expert” interpretation of the mess Congress created.
      The Constitutionally correct approach would be “if it has no meaning, it can’t very well be a law”.

  3. The “Kill The Messenger” philosophy is widespread from schools to board rooms to every level of government. ANYONE who presents truth and evidence that in any way contradicts what those in control WANT is risking at the very least being an outcast and at times the real possibility of death. It’s a problem as old as humans and kings.

  4. First of all, the statute itself is broad enough that the AR lower does qualify as the serialized “receiver”. Second, the ATF designated the lower over half a century ago. Its not like its unknown what it is.

    • The issue is that the designation doesn’t agree with the letter of the law. (Or is that the letter of the regulation?) That’s the core of the case quoted at the top. ATF has been papering over this, enough so that they have let cases be dismissed rather than have a court ruling against them on this error.
      What’s going to be done about it is a different question entirely.

Comments are closed.