Is the Biden administration using covert efforts to compile a federal gun registry? Looks like it.


This editorial is brought to you by a US Veteran and current staff writer for Law Enforcement Today.

The Biden administration just might be using the Commerce department to do their dirty work in an effort to know where all the guns are.

Of course, they aren’t coming right out and saying that. They are just doing it. And they are using a twice-a-decade process to get it done.

Federal law prohibits the government from establishing a database of information that would comprise a gun registry.

That hasn’t stopped some states from doing it. And it certainly hasn’t stopped this administration from taking illegal and unconstitutional actions against American citizens in the 19 months they have been in the White House.

So, here is what is happening.

In years that end in 2 and 7, the Department of Commerce sends out what is referred to as a Commodity Flow Survey.

OK. But what is it?

It is a survey that is used to gain information on numerous goods and services sold or traded in the commercial marketplace. But it is randomly selected as to who receives it.

According to the Census Bureau website, it creates datasets, which are: “data files with all personally identifiable information removed to ensure confidentiality. Users analyze, extract, customize and publish statistics.”

But who is that information confidential from? Users that read the survey after it is published.

The federal government has access to all of the information.

Great, but why does that matter? What is the exact information that is being sought.

According to Erick Erickson, they are looking for any or all of the following:

“Shipment ID number, shipment date, the month and the day, not the year. The value of the shipment, the weight of the shipment in pounds.

The commodity code for standard classification of transported goods, which is a list from the Department of Commerce, the commodity description, a hazmat number if it applies, the modes of transportation by which it was transported, the city and country if it’s a foreign destination, how it was transported abroad if it was transported abroad, and if transported domestically, the city, the state, and the zip code of where it went. So not the physical address, but the city, the state, and the zip code.”

OK, but what does all of this mean from a registry standpoint?

This year’s survey was sent to an alarming number of gun accessory manufacturers, more specifically, holster manufacturers.

While they aren’t collecting names and exact addresses, they are going to be able to potentially create a heat map of locations around the country where these accessory purchasers live.

Sounds like a conspiracy theory, right.

But you don’t typically buy accessories if you do not have a weapon for them to accessorize.

According to Ammoland, some of the companies that they have spoken with acknowledge that they received the survey but will not be responding. That refusal could lead to a fine of $5,000, according to the survey website.

But these particular companies have said that they will opt to be fine rather than divulge this type of potentially identifying information over to the government.

“We will never turn over any information on our customers to the government no matter the cost us,” Chad Myers, President of JM4 Tactical, told the publication.

“To do so would violate our core beliefs. We need to stand up to an overbearing government. Our customers can rest assured that their information is safe with us!”

We reached out to a small business that makes some fantastic customized holsters, mag pouches and dump trays. Jessica Hazelaar, founder and owner of Eclipse Holsters, said that she has not received a survey or any other requests for the type of information sought in the survey, but affirmed that Eclipse would not participate if they should happen to receive a survey in the future.

So many of these companies that received the survey are willing to be fined $5,000.

Turns out that the amount of the fine was either a typo or a blatant attempt to scare and coerce the selected recipients into compliance.

According to Ammoland:

“After looking into the law, the statutory limit on fines is $500. It is unclear if the web designer made a typo on the site or if it was a scare tactic to compel companies to turn over information.”

But without actual identifying details like names, phone numbers or physical addresses, how will the federal government use this information to their advantage from a registry standpoint?

Now that the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision has started flipping state laws prohibiting concealed carry, they can simply work with the anti-2nd Amendment states to cross reference that information with the details the states have as part of their licensing process for concealed carry permits.

To some, this may sound very conspiratorial, but the Biden team has shown that they will stop at nothing to destroy the very tenants of the 2nd Amendment and come after the very people who hold it dear.

US Veteran: Joe Biden just said the 2nd Amendment is not absolute. The words of the amendment prove otherwise.

WASHINGTON, DC – In addressing the mass casualty shooting at an Uvalde, Texas elementary school, President Joe Biden declared that a very specific section of the United States Constitution was limited, amiss, bad, censurable, defective, faulty, flawed, or imperfect.

What he actually said was, “The 2nd Amendment’s not absolute.”

The list in the opening sentence are all antonyms of absolute.

So he must have been referring to one of those words when he said that it was not absolute.

One should have confidence the words of the Amendment itself make it absolute.

“…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

That sounds absolute to most people.

It doesn’t say that it shall not be infringed, until the government finds a way to make it infringeable.

The President went on by regurgitating his often debunked talking points that the 2nd Amendment has always had limitations.

“When it was passed, you couldn’t own a cannon, you couldn’t own certain kinds of weapons,” he falsely stated. 

He doubled down.

“The idea that an 18-year-old can walk into a store and buy weapons of war designed and marketed to kill is I think just wrong,” Mr. Biden said. “Just violates common sense. Even the manufacturer, the inventor, of that weapon, thought that as well. You know, where’s the backbone?”

When it was ratified on December 15, 1791, not only was there no law preventing private ownership of cannons, but the Constitution also carved out provisions for private ownership of cannons. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 allows Congress to “grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal.”

Mr. President, perhaps you would benefit from a quick history lesson and some Constitutional perspective.

The War of 1812 began on June 18, 1812, almost 21 years after the ratification of the 2nd Amendment you frequently prove to know nothing about. President James Madison issued approximately 500 letters of Marque.

These letters allowed private citizens to legally commit acts of piracy. They did so by the individual citizen purchasing cannons and arming their vessels with cannons. The letter only made legal the acts of piracy. It did not do anything to open a temporary loophole for private citizens to purchase cannons…because they could already do so.

During that nearly three-year war, American naval forces had roughly 1,200 cannons spread across 65 ships. The privateers, on the other hand, deployed more than 15,000 cannons.

Ok, well maybe you could own cannons, but not other weapons of war, right?

The President certainly seems to think so.

Reality, however, showed that private citizens could and did own the same types of weapons that the US military had access to, at least until the National Firearms Act of 1934. Private citizens were permitted to own Gatling guns if they could afford to buy one. In fact, they still can, as it is not classified as a machinegun.

In short, the arguments being thrown about by the President, Hollywood, the hosts on The View, and countless blue-check Twitter accounts, that we were never meant to have military grade weapons are patently false.

Their go-to statement of “the founding fathers never intended…” just do not pass the logic and common-sense filter.

Sadly, so many people blindly believe much of what they read because they refuse to do a little research on a topic.

But, hey, Joe Biden has been in politics forever and done absolutely nothing worthwhile. So, he must know what he is talking about, right?

On the topic of how long Joe Biden has been at it, there was less time between Abraham Lincoln’s second inauguration and Biden’s birth than there was between Biden’s birth and his own inauguration.

The man spent two years working as a lawyer before entering politics. Aside from those two years and Donald Trump’s four years in office, he has been in politics his entire professional life. You would think that somewhere in those 49 years in office, he would have learned that what he is spouting about the 2nd Amendment is blatantly false.

Or maybe he has and just doesn’t care.

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today? With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing! (See image below.) Thanks for being a part of the LET family!

Facebook Follow First

Submit a Correction
Related Posts