Trying to be Sneaky and Failing

One does not have to put on a tin-foil hat to be suspicious of this:

Several major holster manufacturers/providers received notices from the Department of Commerce Census Bureau requesting order numbers, product descriptions, and where the items were being shipped. A few holster companies have refused to turn over the requested information to the federal government.

Some companies reached out to Arbiter Weston Martinez of Texas for help. Mr. Martinez is the former Texas Real Estate Commissioner under former Governor Rick Perry. Mr. Martinez is well connected in the political sphere and believes that the companies are being targeted to gather intel on the gun market. He has vowed to help push back against the alleged government overreach.

If they were asking what state the holsters were being shipped to, and without order numbers, then okay, I could imagine the requested information was not intended for abuse. As it is worded here, I just roll my eyes. That isn’t fooling anyone.

Via email from Rolf


8 thoughts on “Trying to be Sneaky and Failing

  1. Asking what guns are being bought, and where, and by whom, is too suspicious.

    So instead they’re asking about gun-specific accessories, which gets them almost the same information.

    “We’re not asking who bought AR-15s. We just want to know who bought AR magazines, single-point QD slings with AR-pattern mounts, and .223/5.56 ammunition. Not at all the same thing!”

    Yeah, right.

    If I were a holster maker (or any other firearm accessory) and received this notice, I’d be contacting my attorneys — along with this Weston Martinez guy — to find out what authority this agency has to request such information on a completely non-regulated product. It’s definitely sketchy as hell.

  2. And I would ask the question again; What you going to do when you find out?
    Find out your up against a 100 million and counting? Or that ,that figure is low?
    Was it Mike Tyson who said, “everyone has a plan till they get punched in the face?”
    A plan to disarm America is totally different creature than actually doing it. Just because you can take down a grandma in New Orleans after a hurricane. Or burn a church full of woman and kids and get away with it. Don’t mean you got what it takes.
    With the UN and the Chinese military on top of the transition-troopers/migrant army of America thrown in you still couldn’t get it done. We would be a savaged wreck in the attempt. But nothing we can’t fix.
    But it proves the brainwashing is pretty deep to even try planning it.
    And empirical evidence of only one way to stop communism.
    Assuming they have all your numbers is the only safe bet.
    You should have planned accordingly long ago. But better late than never. Almost there.

    • Back when boys were allowed to protect their self-respect in schoolyards, the principle used to be, “I may lose the fight, but by that time, you’ll know you’ve been in a fight.
      As Aesop’s Moral to the Parable of the City Mouse and the Country Mouse, “Crusts eaten in peace are better than cakes eaten in fear.” The only think I can add would be to substitute Liberty for peace.

  3. If they find out about my collection of holsters, they’re going to think I’m a damn army.

  4. Hmm, seems to me that having a holster for a handgun, or a sling for a long gun, would tend to paint a person as a more capable, or serious, gun owner than those who scoff at the idea that they might need one of those ‘useless’ objects.
    I’ve known a few gun owners that fall into that category. Not only won’t buy one, you can’t even give them one… And, if they do accept it, you are fairly sure it will stay in the packaging, never to see the light of day.

  5. Of course, the actual criminals who misuse guns fall right through this dragnet: they don’t use holsters for their fun-switched Glocks.

  6. The $500 fine is a cheap way of continuing to do business. Let them fine you, cut the check and be done with it.

    I work in a field where we have fines and penalties as a matter of law. However, people don’t realize the law isn’t a one-way street. It merely lays out the penalties for non-compliance. In several cases we looked at the cost of implementation versus of the cost of paying the fine and chose the fine! People are astonished when they hear this.

    “But…but…you’re breaking the law!”

    “No, I’m not. The law gave me a choice of compliance or checkbook and I chose checkbook. Paying a $10K fine for non-compliance on a report that costs $300K to implement is a simple business decision. Want me to pay the fines for the next 30 years while I’m at it?”

    I wish more people would start to realize the law is not an absolute but just another cost/benefit analysis. $500 fine? Pfft. I’d shred the survey and wait for the citation to show up. I’d consider it a safe bet playing Federal survey chicken with the Census Bureau will have you not out of pocket in the end.

Comments are closed.