Estimated reading time: 4 minutes

By now, you’ve probably noticed a pattern in modern gun control politics.

• Step 1: Find data.
• Step 2: Remove context.
• Step 3: Call a press conference.
• Step 4: Blame gun stores.

According to NSSF Senior Vice President Larry Keane, that’s exactly what’s happening with Brady’s latest lawsuit against the Department of Justice and the ATF.

And frankly, he’s got a point.

Brady Sues ATF

Brady is suing the federal government to force the release of information connected to ATF’s Demand Letter 2 program, a long-running reporting requirement for firearm retailers whose guns are later traced by law enforcement under specific circumstances.

The problem? That data isn’t public for a reason.

For more than two decades, Congress has protected firearm trace data through what’s known as the Tiahrt Amendment. The restrictions weren’t put in place to protect bad gun dealers. They were put in place because law enforcement agencies, ATF officials, and even the Fraternal Order of Police have repeatedly warned that releasing trace data could compromise investigations and endanger officers and witnesses.

Yet here we are. Brady wants it anyway.

The Magic Trick

Here’s where things get interesting. A firearm trace does not tell investigators where a criminal got a gun. It tells investigators where the firearm was originally sold at retail. That’s a huge distinction.

As the ATF itself has repeatedly warned, a firearm being traced to a dealer does not suggest that dealer did anything wrong. In fact, ATF has published disclaimers saying exactly that.

Think of it this way:

If police recover a stolen Ford F-150 used in a bank robbery, nobody assumes the dealership that sold the truck was part of the crime. But somehow when it comes to firearms, some activists look at a trace and immediately start pointing fingers at the retailer. That’s the entire problem Keane is highlighting.

The Numbers Brady Doesn’t Like

The irony is that ATF’s own data undercuts much of the narrative. According to ATF’s National Firearms Commerce and Trafficking Assessment, investigators examined roughly 9,700 firearm trafficking cases between 2017 and 2021.

Only 136 involved a corrupt Federal Firearms Licensee. That’s about 1.6 percent. At the end of 2021, there were more than 134,000 FFLs operating nationwide.

SEE ALSO: M&P 2.0 10mm Review: Big Power, No Brick Feel

In other words, roughly 99 percent of firearm dealers weren’t implicated in trafficking investigations.

Meanwhile, ATF found that straw purchases and private transfers accounted for about 80 percent of trafficking cases. That’s not exactly the headline gun control groups want printed on bumper stickers.

Why Demand Letter 2 Is Going Away

The ATF has already announced that the Demand Letter 2 program is being phased out.

Current ATF leadership has acknowledged concerns that advocacy groups have repeatedly attempted to misuse the data and circumvent disclosure protections.

Translation? The gravy train may be leaving the station. And Brady appears determined to chase it down the tracks.

Follow the Real Story

Keane argues this lawsuit isn’t really about transparency. It’s about keeping alive a “name-and-shame” campaign that uses incomplete trace data to paint lawful firearm retailers as villains.

Reasonable people can debate gun policy. Reasonable people can debate ATF programs.

But if the federal government, Congress, ATF leadership, and law enforcement organizations all agree that certain data should remain protected because it could jeopardize investigations and officer safety, that’s probably worth taking seriously.

Especially when the alternative seems to be generating another round of misleading headlines. At some point, the real question becomes simple:

If the data doesn’t prove what Brady claims it proves, why are they fighting so hard to get it?

*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! ***

https://gunsamerica.com/listings/search