Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« The Palm Pistol | Main | More on "the other NRA" »

Fed. district court rules for FFL

Posted by David Hardy · 18 September 2008 02:35 PM

Story here. The court turned down the usual rationale for license revocation, that a continuing series of errors proves the required "willfulness." I always thought that shaky. To log a firearm out to a customer requires 43 entries, if we count the 4473 and the bound book. If we suppose a human error rate of only a tenth of one percent that would still mean one error per 20 firearms. And that can't be changed by the dealer getting a warning; he still has to use human beings.

1 Comment | Leave a comment

deadcenter | September 19, 2008 11:52 AM | Reply

I can see why they would want to appeal, they need their vague, arbitrary, and capricious definition of "willful" to remain vague, arbitrary, and capricious. This offers up precedent that paperwork errors are simply that, human errors.

However, if they do appeal, I expect the defense to use the recent revelation that ATF has lost 76 firearms and over 500 laptop computers to attack the credibility of the ATF as they are the premier firearms law enforcement agency. After all, if the ATF makes human errors and loses guns, how can Joe Citizen be expected to be a better custodian of the firearms he is responsible for.

I'm not a lawyer, have never had a law class, don't play one on tv, and haven't stayed at a holiday inn express in over a year, so I'm probably wrong about the legal aspects of this case.

Leave a comment