Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

With the change of Presidents, there tends to be a change of federal officials. One of the recent changes is in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, which if you think about it is an awesome way to start a party. Instead of party tips, the BATF helps to regulate the items in their name and to enforce the laws/regulations surrounding them. And former ATF agent David Chipman wants to be in charge of it.

This got me thinking about the nature of the organization and its place in this world. The Left obviously tolerate it or else they would be attacking it constantly (while simultaneously not doing a thing to get rid of it because reasons). And we could do worse than a former agent heading up the organization, right? Well, that’s a sticky question, as we’ll find out!

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms

What the Left thinks it means – a necessary government agency charged with the purpose of protecting Americans

What it really means – what would happen if you gave Paul Blart federal policing power

The ATF as we know it came into being in 1972, the decade that gave us the Pet Rock, polyester leisure suits, and disco. But unlike the three things I just mentioned, the ATF hasn’t gone out of style and still affects society. For the most part, they’ve kept out of the public eye and done their jobs. But when you’ve seen what they’re doing, it’s usually not because they’re handing out hot dogs and balloons for the kids. Just ask David Koresh…oh, wait…

Regardless of where you stand on what happened to the Branch Davidians, it’s clear the ATF doesn’t always do the right thing. The Clinton Department of Justice’s investigation admitted the ATF screwed up, but blamed the fiery outcome on the Branch Davidians because, well, reasons. If someone with the kind of power the federal government wields makes a boo-boo that results in property destruction, mass death, and bad PR for decades to come, we might not want it involved in our daily lives. Even if these mistakes are few and far between, it’s hard to overlook them.

Which bring us back to David Chipman. Seems he was on the ground in Waco and had a part in how everything went down. Doesn’t that instill a buttload of confidence in his leadership?

Typical government incompetence aside, the real problem I have with the ATF is redundancy. I’m a simple man, so I skew towards simple things. But Leftists don’t like simplicity because it makes it harder for them to install bureaucratic “upgrades” to consolidate their power base. Remember, the sole purpose of bureaucracy is to become necessary to as many people as possible, and the ATF is no different.

Think about what is in the name of the agency. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. Alcohol and tobacco are considered to be drugs. If only there were an agency already in existence that would handle drugs…oh, wait! We have one: the Food and Drug Administration! With a little work, two-thirds of the ATF’s focus would be taken over by an agency that actually deals with drugs. And I’m guessing the policing actions would come in handy when trying to get drugs approved, too!

That leaves the firearms. For the Leftists and the Constitutionally ignorant (but, I repeat myself), the Second Amendment gives people the right to be armed if they want. Still, there are some elements such as background checks that might be necessary to determine if a potential owner lacks a serious criminal record or has issues that might prevent him or her from operating the gun safely. Well, why not put that responsibility on the Department of Justice? If they have time to issue threats against Republican Governors who might defy the notion of a national mask mandate, they could spare the time to do a couple of background checks.

“But what about the ‘well-regulated militia’?” Leftists might ask. Simple. If you’re going to use that approach, it would fall under the Department of Defense. Either way, the ATF goes the way of an elderly person moving next door to a COVID-19 patient in a New York State retirement community. (And, yes, that was a Cuomo joke.)

With all of this, the next logical question is why we need a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. And the logical answer is…we really don’t. So, why do we keep it around? Easy. Our government officials don’t want to get rid of it. The same goes for any number of agencies and programs currently in place across multiple Cabinet offices and departments. Just think of the ATF as a federal office that went through a copier, oh, 943 times.

Even so, it still has quite of bit of influence over our lives, especially for purveyors and fans of booze, drugs, and guns. As nice as it would be to see someone like a Ted Cruz or Rand Paul tear David Chipman not just a new one, but several, the fact remains the ATF isn’t essential to the operation and defense of our country. To that end, we shouldn’t have Chipman testifying and looking like a giant albino flounder because there shouldn’t be an office for him to occupy in the first place. The only way to end it is to keep on our elected officials to cut the fat. (And, no, that’s not a threat of violence against Jerrold Nadler.)

And this is where the Right needs to make good on their stated desire for smaller government, not big government they can control. The fact we have one government agency, let alone multiple ones, existing when they don’t need to be is a black eye to Republicans and conservatives. Either get rid of the excess, or just say “Hey, I only said I’m for small government because I wanted your votes and money.” Then we will know what kind of snakes you are and who we will need to vote for to get rid of you.

I hear there’s a guy from Ireland who’s pretty good at getting rid of snakes.

Author: Thomas

I'm a writer and a ranger and a young boy bearing arms. And two out of the three don't count.