Suppose I were a federal agency that had not only reflected, but amplified whenever possible, the opinions of my current boss. And suppose one morning, say November 9, 2017, I woke up to the realization that there was going to be a new boss in a few months, and I knew that new boss wasn't going to be, to paraphrase the Who, "the new boss, same as the old boss…"
What would I do? If I were a federal agency that had frequently been used as the focal point of everything from inefficient bureaucratic management to failed investigations, I'd starting thinking - fast and furious, if you would- about what I could do that could: 1) save my job, 2) limit the changes I'd have to endure until I had another new boss.
No one's commenting on the record, but it seems the officials at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) have had a few discussions regarding just what a Trump presidency could mean to their status quo.
Since the Hearing Protection Act is already in Congress, I might suggest that my senior managers assemble a few discussion points that might allow me to either derail the new administration's change train- or look cooperative enough that I would be one the aforementioned vehicle, not under it.
Yesterday, the Washington Post released a story that says Ronald B. Turk, Deputy Director and Chief Operating Officer of the ATF, has done just that. Turk's "white paper" - which I've read- calls for a variety of changes in the current way things operate at ATF, from removing restrictions on suppressors (which looks like one of two things with a very good chance of happening via legislative action) to the lifting of a ban on Curio & Relic- vintage American firearms currently banned from importation.
In his 11-page paper - which clearly states is "for internal discussion purposes only" and is neither intended as an ATF-position or for external distribution- Turk calls for a number of changes that would, in fact, address some of the major complaints about the ATF of today.
As you can imagine, these include expanding staffing and (although unstated) budgets to allow for modernization of everything from past ATF rulings to cutting back on the ridiculous time it takes to process purchases governed by the National Firearms Act (NFA). Suppressors, which Turk accurately observes are rapidly gaining in popularity, are currently covered in those restrictive regulations.
His suggestion? Since suppressors are a major source of delays, reclassify them and achieve a twofer: reduce the incoming NFA paperwork and positively address the fact that, despite their classification on the restricted list, their use in crime is negligible- but their benefit in hearing protection and noise abatement is inarguable. In fact, Turk says, "41 states currently allow suppressors to be used in hunting."
The document, while being clear in its intent- discussion- also points out another need: "to provide the new administration and the Bureau multiple options to consider and discuss considering firearms regulations."
The thoughts are only those of one official, albeit a very senior one. But Turk has one comment in this document that I find encouraging. His general thoughts are there to "provide ways to reduce or modify regulations, or suggest changes that promote commerce and defend the Second Amendment without significant negative impact on ATF's mission to fight violent firearms crime and regulate the firearms industry."
If they can simultaneously reduce their outdated restrictions on suppressors, relax the politically-motivated bans on importation of C&R firearms built in the U.S. and distributed to our allies so some of these guns can home to collectors who would cherish them- not use them for some nefarious criminal undertaking, streamline their processing backlog and police criminals, not gun dealers, the ATF might find it had more allies and fewer enemies inside the firearms community.
Like Turk's document, that's just my personal opinion.
—Jim Shepherd
