The ATF has fired its first shot across the bow (pdf) regarding the Firearms Freedom Act that passed last month in Tennessee. In a letter recently sent to Tennessee Federal Firearms License (FFL) holders, they stated:
The passage of the Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act (…) has generated questions from industry members as to how this State law may affect them while engaged in a firearms business activity. (…) However, because the Act conflicts with Federal firearms laws and regulations, Federal law supersedes the Act, and all provisions of the Gun Control and the National Firearms Act, and their corresponding regulations, continue to apply.
The remainder of the brief memorandum simply reiterates the basic responsibilities of FFL’s.
So far, it’s just a “friendly” reminder. What happens this winter, when the Act takes place in several states, remains to be seen.
Theoretically, I don’t see FFL’s getting caught in the middle. There is no regulatory framework for firearms and parts manufactured locally under the Act, so those would not need to be sold through a licensed dealer. FFL’s would still exist to acquire and sell weapons not covered by the Act, which will still make up most of the market for the forseeable future.
You would simply have two different markets: one being a cottage industry for locally manufactured goods, and another for dealing with federally-regulated goods from out of state.
Florida has introduced their version of the Act, HB-21 (pdf). If passed, it goes into effect October 1st, the same day as it does in Tennessee, Minnesota, and Montana. The Texas Act will become law one month earlier.
Georgia is unfortunately not part of the movement. Though a generic state sovereignty resolution passed the Senate by a 43-1 margin, firearms are not part of the equation (the Tenth Amendment Center has posted a handy map detailing the locations and status of other states’ such resolutions).
So, what’s actually going to happen? Hard to say. At the very least, this is going to set up a national debate about the role of the 10th Amendment, and about the nature of the relationship between Federal and State authority. It will likely spur several court battles.
At worst, it could end up being a physical standoff between Federal and State law-enforcement in one or more states. If this occurs, the drain on Federal resources could be staggering. Consider the amount of money and manpower required to arrest one man in the Ruby Ridge operation, then imagine such a thing happening in several states simultaneously.
Either way, the repercussions are likely to be felt for a long time to come.