ATF Raids Lake of the Ozarks Gun Store Confiscates All Firearms

SFC Casey O'Mally - The warning is on the application for an FFL. Want an FFL? You have to acknowledge the possibility.

MSG Stan Hutchison - I just pulled up the application. I see nowhere where you acknowledge the right of the federal government to seize your property without due process. I see nowhere where you acknowledge that the federal government can seize every firearm based on an unproven allegation, without charging you and without arresting you.

Heck, I see nowhere an acknowledgement of the federal government's right to seize anything, period.

I looked up 18 USC 923 to see if it was in there. Nope. There is a part where the Attorney General can revoke a license - and even that is subject to appeal (and REQUIRED to be stayed while being appealed) - but nothing anywhere about seizure of the weapons.

You are the licensed dealer, what am I missing? Where is it IN LAW that BATFE can seize property without due process?


Also, looking at 18 USC 923 (c) "Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prohibit a licensed manufacturer, importer, or dealer from maintaining and disposing of a personal collection of firearms, subject only to such restrictions as apply in this chapter to dispositions by a person other than a licensed manufacturer, importer, or dealer."

So it looks like a licensed dealer CAN sell a private firearm privately.

SFC Casey O'Mally - Now I stand corrected. The issues of impoundment is under RICO. Anyone in the gun business should be aware of that.
To be honest, I do not like those RICO laws, though I understand the reasoning behind them.
In this case, I do not believe it was warranted, unless they revoke his FFL. However, until the FFL is settled, the weapons should be secured in some manner.

MSG Stan Hutchison - That I can agree with. Lock up the guns, lock up the store, resolve the FFL. If you have other NON-gun business, (like selling gun gear or tactical stuff), continue to run your business, but don't even think about selling a gun.

I do not at all doubt that the feds like to use RICO for impoundment. However, looking at the law, dealing in firearms (even dealing illegally in firearms) is NOT part of racketeering, therefore NOT subject to RICO. I assumed it would be, but it is not included in the definition (although just about everything else under the sun is). I also searched for "firearm," "gun," rifle," ammunition," and "explosive" and none of those terms are mentioned anywhere in the RICO Act.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/content/rico-act.html

I am not trying to fight, even though it may seem like it. I am legitimately trying to understand and learn - and you to be knowledgeable to set me on the path of enlightenment.

I am really trying to parse how the heck they were LEGALLY able to do what they did, because I just do not see it being within Constitutional limits. So I am trying to look at the laws you are discussing to see what I am missing.

Because this story seems like it is pretty routine, and I have to imagine that if they are doing this on the regular, it *has* to have some legal basis.