Old Guy

To Veritas, My friend related to me that he understands that administrative process. It sounds really good in theory, just like the ATF personnel issues described on this forum.... However, it doesn't always work quite that way, does it? My same friend went through a license revocation hearing some years ago. Through FOIA, he obtained a copy of the inspector's report from ATF and discovered that the inspector lied about the major violation on the report, and then actually contradicted the lie (in a subtle way) later in the report, which conclusively proved it was a lie. This was pointed out to the Hearing Officer. It made no difference. My friend reported the lie to Internal Affairs, and they flew an IA agent (at considerable expense, I'm sure) to take my friend's account. IA was shown the evidence and received copies. Nothing further was heard, and ATF proceeded with the revocation. What was the outcome, you ask? It wasn't long afterward, the inspector was prominently featured in the news, in a high-profile firearms raid - as the lead agent..... He had been promoted to agent. Which left my friend scratching his head. This is not to denigrate those good, honest ATF agents - and I've known some. But it's clear there are some others.

Here's a factual story from an FFL point of view. This directly relates to Professionalism in ATF. A friend of mine is an FFL who was dealing with an ATF employee in Martinsburg. The ATF employee (not an agent!) was giving the FFL a hard time and giving him a bunch of bull regarding a technical issue. The FFL tried to respectfully disagree with the employee, but was rudely rebuffed. There was no supervisor to talk to. So, the FFL contacted his Congressman. Shortly afterward, the ATF employee (clearly angry) called the FFL. The employee mentioned the Congressional contact, and told my friend he was going to call for a special annual inspection on him - which was clearly a threat. Now, by law, an annual inspection is not supposed to be used as a pretext for an investigation of the FFL. Didn't make any difference. Within 30 days, multiple 'investigators' (as inspectors are now called) arrived at the FFL's shop, and commenced their 'inspection'. The FFL had been through many previous inspections before, and knew what to expect. However, this inspection went way beyond any previous one. Rather than do a random inspection, he was told the inspection would be 100%, going back years. The most obvious clue was that the investigators photographed his entire 'bound book'. They came back later with all the images printed out, and went through it, line by line. Weeks later, they completed their 'annual inspection' and provided the FFL with a list of his 'violations'. Some 'violations' were practices that are specifically allowed by ATF publications. Other 'violations' were simply made up out of whole cloth. In other words, there were no regulations or laws that required the practice. Yet other 'violations' were bookkeeping practices for which my friend had a letter from ATF HQ, specifically allowing! My friend said nothing further to the Investigators, and they left. Is it not illegal for ATF to retaliate in this manner? Or, if it is legal, it's certainly unprofessional.