In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Batfe abuse- remove chief nixon

falupfalup Member Posts: 18 ✭✭
? More Letters to
Sen. Chambliss

? Search All

Letters To Leaders

All messages are published with permission of the sender. The general topic of this message is Civil Liberties:

BATFE is out of Control

Sen. Saxby Chambliss

January 4, 2005

I think given their history (i.e., Ruby Ridge, Waco, etc.) it comes as no shock that the BATFE is out of control. However, I have come across the following information with regards to the abuse being delivered to citizens by the BATFE. This is absolutely outrageous unacceptable and the must be reigned in immediately. They are running completely unchecked. This info can also be examined on the JPFO's site at:


ATF abuses that affect YOU!
As Corriea will tell you all, I am not usually an alarmist. But we have a chance now to really change things. This is a compilation of some posts from another board but you all need to read this and get involved. Everything the ATF does and rules on affects all aspects of our gun ownership. They have taken some very direct steps to shut down dealers and manufacturers who have caused them problems of any type (I am probably next just for spreading the word) and worse are now charging people with crimes for actions they had previously approved of, IN WRITING, on a whim and based on personal vendettas. This is a long post but worth the read.

This all started about 2000-2001. I had an idea for a BREN semi and a ZB-37 semi. I could not get a ffl/07 to put it in production [most cited the hard to get BATFE "approval"]. Being a journeyman machine builder, and a lifelong firearms enthusiast, I formed an LLC, and applied for my ffl/07.

I received it without a hitch, and was impressed by agent Pauline Whooly who spent a great deal of time answering questions and pointing me in the proper direction [at my kitchen table may I add].

Problems started after I submitted my BREN MK-IIsa to TECH BRANCH. Quite frankly they were rude on the telephone. After three months I started calling them. I was told many times "industry submission are secondary to criminal cases" I would have to wait. I waited for a while and started calling them again. No luck. At this time Bob Barr was my congressman, I contacted him and gave him all the info. Boy did he raise hell with them. I got a phone call from TECH BRANCH being told "Oh your gonna get your letter ,but, your not going to like it".

They declared it "readily restorable" and cited three "issues" I would have to address. [note: I had no SOT at the time and they sent it back to me (in violation of there own regulations)].

I made corrections and sent it back, and received the "approval" [Yes, I know there is no such thing, just a "classification"].

I started on the RPD-SA project and made three different prototypes with three different operating systems this time and used a "shotgun" effect to get a faster response. It worked and one of them was "approved" out of the box. This was the start of a new problem, the "letter" was a cut and paste job on the BREN letter. Well the BREN has a spring loaded firing pin, a tilting bolt, etc.

I had to call, as the letter is only good for "the firearm described above" A new letter had to be written. They finally broke down and admitted that they had no clue how the RPD worked, but knew it was "a firearm" I had to for all practical purposes write my own letter, fax it, and wait for the "official" letter by mail. This seemed to piss off Branch Chief Nixon. My next submission [an RPD m-11 upper] was shot down in flames. I was told in no uncertain terms I was not the target "just make your semi's and count your blessings". You all may remember the thread here that I started by posting my letter...whew I got flamed....I pissed off Ernie Wrenn of get the point.

What I found out later was that they were targeting Ernie Wrenn. Seems they were pissed he did not seek "permission"[although not required by law]. Feeling that I may have put Ernie in a jam, I called him and apologized, and offered to help, if I could.

I also had received a phone call from Russel Weeks of RPB of atlanta. He asked me to please examine a rifle in U.S. V. GLOVER. I was busy at the time, but, I felt it was the responsible thing to do. I spoke with the attorney for Mr. Glover and plainly told I would come, but, if it's a machinegun then, I will call it one in court. In short no opinion for hire. He said "come on", but the BATFE had to cancel out 3 or 4 time before we actually got to look at it.

Last spring it seems U.S. V. WRENN must have been on a fast track. They didn't cancel and Ernie called and asked me to be present. There were supposed to be a lot more ffl/07's[you know who you are, shame on you!] at the test. I was it, when I arrived [not encouraging] I told the attorneys the same deal "if it's a machinegun, I'll call it one in court".

When we [attorneys, Ernie Wrenn, and myself sowed up at the BATFE branch office the TECH BRANCH expert Rick Vasquez[now Assistant Chief Vasquez] was beating the hell out of a maxim with a claw hammer. They dropped the hammer when they saw us enter [busted]. They were embarrassed and insulting remarks on their behalf ensued. When I looked at this semi maxim that they were beating on I could tell the rifle was obviously unfireable. You see Vasquez had did a "readily restorable" test and fired the rifle out of battery, blowing the side plates out to the point the top cover would not close. That is what they were beating on, trying to get it to close so it could be tested. It made a hell of a paperweight, IT WOULD NOT FIRE AT ALL. I would have been able to show this to the Judge, but, the local agent said "no documentation of any kind, or we leave with the rifles" "put away the cameras, or we leave with the rifles" When asked why he stated "because I said so" He refused to contact the USAS on the case and insisted we use their range[in a pit with no cell phone reception].

The next day a fellow who works for me left a message "call agent Baldwin ASAP IMPORTANT" with his cell number. I called him and he explained he "lost" some evidence, did I have it? When I told him no, how could I? I had three BATFE watching me at all times. He then went on to give a veiled threat against me, my family, and my company.[he later swore under oath that he did not said he only talked to me for 3, maybe 4 minutes [I have phone records to prove otherwise].

I have since sent submissions to tech branch with no "papered responses" Technician Vasqez is now Assistant Chief Vasquez, and former assistant chief Craze is now Technician Craze[currently over my submissions].

NOTE* Every response to date has been riddled with mistakes. Submissions from my company, and U.S. V. WRENN as well as U.S. V. GLOVER. It has become PAINFULLY obvious that they have no clue. I asked about credentials Not one person there has EVER worked in our industry, received an ffl, or ever designed a firearm. I have been given verbal news that no person there has a Engineer's Degree. Some forensic laboratory, don't you think.

They don't want you or anyone else to know this dirty little secret. That is why the threats and intimidation. It's up to D.O.J. and congress to jerk a knot in their tail now.

Now JPFO has put their butts on the line with making available the video tape[raw uncut footage] If there ever was a smoking gun, the video is it. I hope you all get a copy. The video would have never happened if U.S. V. WRENN wasn't denied his civil rights, you see his test happened 30 days before U.S. V. GLOVER allowing Glover's attorney to get it in writing. In a strange way Ernie paid for that tape with a piece of his hide. Don't let it go to waste. I was brought in to do an independent examination and test regarding U.S. v WRENN and U.S. v GLOVER.
I am happy to say that U.S. v GLOVER was dismissed, although they still refuse to return his property. I along with John Glover were allowed to video tape the examination and test. It clearly shows that the BATFE "expert" could not field strip an FAL lower receiver. He alleged that a modified/worn trigger axis locking plate allowed full auto fire. The video clearly shows this to be not to be the case. The rifle had a broken firing pin spring. Pieces of spring migrated throughout the rifles interior. I understand they are overextended, but they do not accept that excuse from any ffl holder.
I have been informed that the raw footage from the two cameras is being released worldwide by JPFO.
The WRENN case is still pending, I would LOVE to share that one with you but, I am unable to at this time.
P.S. To the BATFE Personnel monitoring this forum: I am and always have been cooperative with your bureau. I am available to do independent examinations and tests for anyone, including the BATFE at our standard shop rate.
Len Savage

Historic Arms L.L.C.
Assistant Chief Rick Vasquez
Dear Mr. Vasquez,
Pursuant to our telephone conversation of Dec. 30 2004. You stated that the preliminary examination of my companies MAG 58 (semi auto) is that, it is a "machinegun". That is impossible. It incorporates the EXACT fire control system and "blockers" that two of our previous submissions that your Branch has already classified "a firearm" under Title 26.
I have enclosed a (5) page letter from your Branch to VECTOR ARMS. This letter not only acknowledges that they submitted "a machinegun" but the changes that would be required to classify it "a firearm" under Title 26. I remind you that your Branch DID NOT require Vector Arms to file a form 2 to get the firearm back from your Branch.
I request that I get the same courtesy extended to Vector Arms. To not do so would be giving an unfair advantage in interstate commerce, therefore could be construed as criminal act.
If this determination of "machinegun" is put on my submitted sample simply because of my involvement with the cases U.S. v. WRENN or U.S. V. GLOVER, that would constitute a criminal act. As you surly know, witness intimidation is frowned upon by the U.S.D.O.J.
Branch Chief Nixon on July 7, 2003 made himself abundantly clear, He stated he would not only [on a whim] classify any rifle I made "a machinegun" but, would also put me in prison, if I "irritated" the BATFE. Any attempt at retribution, or "payback" will be reported, and not be tolerated. ( Editors Note- It was recently learned that making this type of threat from a personal stand point is classified as "Making a terroristic threat" by the Federal Government, a crime by itself. But doing so from a professional position is considered a felony and if legal action was taken by Len Savage against the Agent personally, the Agent would be forced to defend himself without the backing of the Federal Government. He could be found liable for damages and could end up serving jail time.)
I look forward to your cooperation,
Len Savage
Office of: U.S.A.G.
D.O.J. Inspector General
Glenn Fine
Congressman Phil General
11th Dist. Ga
Aaron Zelman
Larry Pratt
Douglas Truslow
Joseph Neal
Attorneys [U.S. V. WRENN]

The above letter was sent to Tech Branch, to put them on notice that the "monkey business" of the past is unacceptable.
BATFE TECH BRANCH ASSISTANT CHIEF Rick Vasquez was at the time of US.V. WRENN a technician who examined the submitted firearms in that case[and who showed up for the independent test].
PROBLEM: Conflict of interests, He is now in charge of all submissions that I and my company send to them for "approval".[even though we are involved in this case] I am now being submitted to an "economic waco" [i.e. remove yourself from the case, or else].
I WILL NOT! Ernest Wrenn is constitutionally GUARANTEED the right to defend himself. I will not be party to "selling him down the river". Let a court of law with a jury of his peers decide. I will go out on a limb and assume that Tech Branch doesn't know the law. I can say with clarity that Assist. Chief Vasquez HAS NOT ever purgered himself in court and has remained mute.
To ensure that the FFL community will KNOW the truth ALL correspondence will now be shared on this forum. If I receive a response, I will share it on this forum.
Branch Chief Sterling Nixon has shamefully acted in past with threats against me and my Company.[earlier thread this weekend] I will not tolerate that any longer.
This is the man who told the FAIR trade organization that if he has his way he will outlaw all parts kits. He is not elected, He is a appointed [a problem that must be addressed through Congress].
I will keep you all posted,
Len Savage

At around 14:00hrs (EST)4Jan05 I called Tech Branch. Chief Sterling Nixon is now answering the phones. He stated "I can't talk to you because of pending litagation against you, it wouldn't be proper".
Well I guess Chief Sterling must have a misprinted copy of the constitution, not only is it missing the Second amendment, but, the First amendment as well.
If you would like to discuss this with Chief Nixon you can call him at:
Please forward this post to all boards, and your Congressional Reps. ASAP
Len Savage

Here is where the video can be ordered from:
Anyone with a ruling from the ATF defining a shoe string, hole in a piece of metal or part that is clearly NOT a machinegun, a machinegun please forward those to the JPFO, Len or Richard at Special Interest Arms. If you have a video of the ATF conducting a test or conversion where things are not done properly or any monkey business is present please forward those to the JPFO and encourage them to make a compilation video for sale.
Please forward this email or post to your local talk radio and ask them to investigate this matter. Also please forward it to your local Congressman and pro-2A organization asking them to do the same. This agency can no longer conduct operations without a system of checks and balances. Their un-qualified experts are making arbitrary ruling based on a whim that not only affect people's lives and well being, but the industry and our Second Amendment rights as well.

Richard at SIA is working to form an NFA lobby or concern to address some very serious issues and help to remove some serious but un-constitutional rulings from the books thru the due process of the law. Anyone wishing to offer help in this endeavor please contact him. [email protected]

The JPFO website can provide more detail on what happened with the Glover case. All procedes from the tape sale go to the Glover legal fund.

For an example of the ATF rulings and how convoluted and stupid they can be check this site. Some of you may recognise the name as the legal editor for Small Arms Review, so you can rest assured that every scary detail is for real.
Sign In or Register to comment.