Watch for gun laws in 2012

Several months ago, I had written and submitted a column talking about a pending United Nations treaty that would strictly regulate international trade in small arms. This treaty was titled something like, “A treaty to prevent and eradicate the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in all its aspects.” The hidden agenda was thought to be the outlawing of all privately held firearms worldwide and their eventual confiscation.

The entire online buzz was that President Obama planned to introduce the treaty in the U.S. Senate for ratification, effectively making the treaty the new law of our land. Rumors also had Secretary of State Clinton actively supporting and campaigning for the ratification of the treaty.

One of my editors did some fact checking after receiving the column and told me, according to the Snopes website, that what I had written was not technically correct and that the treaty would not do what some people thought it might. I scrambled to do a rewrite to present the correct facts as they were explained to me.

The National Rifle Association’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) released a statement dated June 17 that the NRA planned to be in attendance at the UN’s Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) Preparatory Committee meeting in New York from July 11-15. Quoting from that statement: “The so-called ‘Prep. Com.’ will be laying the groundwork for a final negotiation session in 2012. NRA’s message will be simple and strong — an ATT which in any way, shape or form affects the constitutional rights of American gun owners is simply unacceptable. Civilian firearms must not be within the scope of an ATT. There will be no compromise on this crucial point.”

Apparently there is concern as to what the treaty might actually do or the NRA would not be taking such a strong stand in its position. This concern is stated in a letter U.S. Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., has drafted and sent to President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton where Moran expresses “grave concern about the dangers posed by the United Nations’ Arms Trade Treaty.”

What influence would the NRA have in this forum? I’m not sure, but according to this same statement from the NRA-ILA, it “has been a recognized non-governmental organization at the United Nations since 1996.” The NRA has been engaged at the U.N. and elsewhere internationally in response to anti-small arms initiatives for more than 15 years. Further, the NRA has been “monitoring and actively fighting any and all attempts on the part of the U.N. to restrict our sovereignty and gun rights.”

That last sentence scares me. The U.N. is attempting to restrict our national sovereignty? Think about that for a minute and start to realize who your friends really are. I sincerely hope that isn’t a part of the promised “change you can believe in” we heard in the 2008 campaign!

The Justice Department has ordered all federal firearms licensees (FFL) in Texas, California, Arizona and New Mexico to report purchases of two or more of some types of rifles by the same person in a five-day period. This comes as an attempt to deflect interest in the flubbed Operation Fast and Furious orchestrated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE). This was reported by MSNBC in a story released July 11.

Federal law already requires FFL holders to report multiple handgun sales, but long guns were debated and specifically excluded from that same legislation. Now the Executive Branch is exercising their ability to circumvent congressional actions by making this requirement. Could the mandate spread to other areas of the country in the name of Homeland Security?

This Operation Fast and Furious was a BATFE program originating out of the Phoenix BATFE office where FFL holders along the Mexican border were specifically told to complete transactions they had reported as suspicious involving firearms possibly being bought for transfer into the Mexican drug trade. As many as 2,500 firearms were allowed to be sold illegally to known or suspected straw purchasers. Senior BATFE officials in Washington were regularly briefed on the operation and approved the tactics used. The operation backfired when a U.S. Border Patrol agent was killed in a shootout and firearms from the scene were traced to a sale where the dealer had reported suspicious activity and was told to complete the transaction by BATFE.

When concerned BATFE agents opposed the operation, they were threatened with retaliation from their superiors. Congressional investigations are under way to try to determine if criminal charges against BATFE staff are appropriate in this matter. So far, hearings have determined the operation was run in a “reckless manner.”

To further exacerbate the problem, the Justice Department has failed to fully respond to congressional inquiries of what happened in the failed operation. For instance, when asked in congressional hearings who had authorized the program, nobody seemed to know. Somehow, that sounds familiar!

We often like to refer to ourselves as Alaskans first and Americans second. As a state, we have some longstanding disagreements with the federal government over issues like subsistence. However, we are still bound by the same federal laws that apply to the rest of the country. I hold a FFL and must follow federal law when making a firearms transfer — to the extent that I’ve done background checks on state troopers who have purchased firearms because they didn’t have a background-check-exempt concealed carry permit. Sounds silly, huh? That’s the federal law.

Next year is shaping up to be a critical election year for more things than just the economy. Changes made in Washington do eventually trickle down to the Mat-Su Valley. Gun laws are one of the major items folks around here watch. Remember what you read come the next election cycle.

Howard Delo is a retired fisheries biologist with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. You can leave him a message by emailing sports@frontiersman.com.