The recent "White Paper" from Ronald Turk of the ATF, addressing matters that the ATF might wish to revisit, together with published reports that the ATF has solicited industry participant views concerning changes in the regulatory environment, have prompted an inquiry of the ATF concerning its views on LEOSA. I shall attempt to attach the inquiry, recently sent to the ATF, concerning whether LEOSA preempts state and local magazine limits.
The inquiry provides a number of reasons why LEOSA should be construed as to preempt state and local magazine limits for qualifying persons. The document identifies six reasons why the ATF should reject the view that magazine limits are not preempted, including, among others:
(i) One would need to ignore the legislative history, which indicates LEOSA was intended to allow qualified persons to possess “any gun,” other than those (such as fully automatic firearms) whose features by express provision are not subject to preemption.
(ii) One would need to reject a position expressly taken by the United States in litigation, that LEOSA preempts restrictions on firearms that have particular features (there, a semi-automatic sporting rifle).
This is being posted so that anyone who wishes to communicate with the ATF on the subject while the ATF has the inquiry before it has the opportunity to do so. Insofar as observations may be relevant to the ATF's consideration, I should think that observations as to the materiality of the impact would be of note.
I am hopeful that I have configured the post so that the attachment does not get embedded in the post (but is left as a clickable link)--the letter's rather long.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by TGS
