Red's New Blog and a Q&A

Ryan Horsley has created a new blog to provide updates on his case.

Head on over and check it out.

Then bookmark it.

Then ask every pro-gun blogger you frequent to add Red's to their blogroll.

I had the following email exchange with Ryan about his case, and he OK'd my posting his response. It really illustrates the petty hoops BATFU is forcing him to jump through--knowing that if he trips on one, they have another "willful violation" to take to the judge so that they can close down this family business and then find another host to attach their parasitic mandibles to:

DC: Ryan, a possible tack to mention to your attorney the next time you
speak:

Other industries subject to govt regulation have clear audit expectations and clear guidelines for the auditors to follow. In your case, this seems arbitrary and capricious--especially reporting you to the judge instead of just noting on their form they want something in alpha order and making sure you put things that way.

Are their audit standards and criteria in writing, along with clearly defined penalties for violations?

If not, a strong case could conceivably be made the rules are too vague to enforce and they are singling you out on things they give others a pass on--can they demonstrate they have required the same black and white criteria from everyone else? If not, this is subjective and you're not being afforded equality under the law.

Another question: are ALL of their audit procedures, forms and checklists available to you, so you can use them to ensure compliance?

-------------------------

RH: The problem is that when the Judge wrote the injunction, he had stated: "The Court finds that the continued oversight by the ATF via the above conditions will adequately address the need to protect the public safety. However, if these terms prove to be unworkable to the parties, the Court would be willing to entertain a joint stipulation addressing procedures for oversight during the pendency of judicial review. If the parties do not submit a joint stipulation, the terms the Court has outlined herein shall be binding. The Court urges Red’s to be vigilant and meticulous in complying with these terms, as failure to do so will result in a termination of the injunction. If this occurs, the revocation of Red’s license will become effective immediately and Red’s will no longer be able to engage in any firearms activity for which a valid license is required, including selling any remaining firearms in inventory during the pendency of the judicial review."

So that is why they were digging so hard, so to shut us down entirely. The problem is that until the Court Process...anything goes. Because DIO Van Loan uses his "When justice so requires" statement, which means he makes up the rules until the Judge rules otherwise.

There are no audit procedures, there are former ATF agents that will teach seminars (for profit of course) and tell you what they will look for GENERALLY! They will constantly send you to "the books" for all of the answers, when you question where they came up with it. At this point they are not trying to win the case they are trying to bankrupt us.

They wouldn't let you have a checklist, we have asked for this before or some guidance as to what they were looking for. In fact in the 2005 audit, the Agent used the same switch the ATF advised in a recent seminar. Dealers were getting used to the "Y" or "N" and other petty traps they were using so they started using the Poster, Pamphlet and Free trigger lock violations.