{"id":109476,"date":"2025-04-21T19:08:50","date_gmt":"2025-04-22T00:08:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=109476"},"modified":"2025-04-21T19:09:07","modified_gmt":"2025-04-22T00:09:07","slug":"109476","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=109476","title":{"rendered":""},"content":{"rendered":"

Another ATF Bureaucrat Removed From Office<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Another long-term Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) employee is out as the purge of anti-gun advocates continues. The latest casualty, Megan Bennett, has been forced to retire.<\/p>\n

Ms. Bennett was the\u00a0Assistant Director of the Office<\/a>\u00a0of Enforcement Programs and Services (EPS). Recently, she came under fire for\u00a0presenting former ATF Director<\/a> Steve Dettelbach with what appeared to be an 80% AR-15 lower receiver in violation of Washington, DC law. DC requires all AR-15 lowers to be serialized and the transferee to go through the Federal Bureau of Investigation\u2019s (FBI) National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).<\/p>\n

It was clear by the ceremony that Dettelbach didn\u2019t go through background checks.<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In the ceremony, Bennett talked about her pride in being part of all the new rules implemented under the Biden Administration. Bennett was an advocate of rules such as the pistol brace rule. The rule reclassified pistols equipped with pistol stabilizing devices as short-barreled rifles (SBRs). Millions of Americans own braced pistols. These citizens would have to register their firearms with the ATF\u2019s National Firearms Act Division (NFA), or they could be charged with a felony, face 10 years in federal prison, and be forced to pay a $250.000 fine.<\/p>\n

Multiple gun rights organizations sued over the pistol brace rule, claiming that it violated the\u00a0Administrative Procedures Act (APA).<\/a>\u00a0The proposed rule had a checklist called the ATF Form 4999 with a point system determining whether a braced firearm was a rifle or pistol. The Final Rule lacked any resemblance to the proposed rule. The gun rights groups claimed that the Final Rule was not a logical outgrowth of the proposed rule. These groups also contended that the rule was arbitrary and capricious because it had a\u00a0\u201cyou know it when you see it\u201d<\/em>\u00a0clause.<\/p>\n

The courts would issue multiple injunctions against the ATF\u2019s pistol brace rule, preventing the Bureau\u2019s enforcement of its implementation. Braced pistols would return to shelves of gun stores. This injunction should have been a sign that the ATF should not try to enforce the pistol brace rule, but Ms. Bennett and EPS disagreed.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

A Gun Owners of America (GOA) member emailed EPS asking if he would need to register his CZ Scorpion equipped with a pistol brace to the ATF\u2019s NFA Division.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The EPS responded that even though the rule was enjoined, it could interpret the federal statute so that the ATF could still enforce a ban on non-registered pistols equipped with braces. This statement caused GOA to push back against the policy.\u00a0Bennett and EPS were forced to backtrack,\u00a0<\/a>withdraw their conclusion, and admit that they cannot enforce the interpretation that pistols equipped with braces are SBRs. Reading the letter that EPS issued after being forced to backtrack, it was clear they were not happy being forced to backtrack.<\/p>\n