Some comments from our Director, Daniel G. O’Kelly ATF SSA (Ret.)
March 16, 2015
By Daniel G. O’Kelly
ATF SSA (Ret.)
Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) has reintroduced legislation to do away with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).
Concerning the latest proposal to ban the ATF, we at International Firearm Specialist Academy do NOT support efforts to ban the ATF. We believe that the ATF should be required to act within it’s own boundaries as to the definitions which it has written, and to not be allowed the freedom to contradict itself once a precedent has been set by one of it’s rulings.
Here are some facts. Proposals have been made to ban the ATF since the Reagan administration. As a matter of fact, that one came so close to actually happening that ATF Agents were given written notices of a reduction in force, which was soon to eliminate their job. Many Agents immediately applied and were accepted by the Secret Service and other federal law enforcement agencies. Many stayed and waited the outcome. In the end, believe it or not, it was the PRO-GUN associations which asked for a halt to the end of the ATF, BECAUSE they didn’t want the FBI to be the agency which would be put in charge of gun regulation.
On January 24, 2003, while serving as an ATF Agent, I witnessed the ATF go from being an agency under the U.S. Treasury Dept., to being an agency under the U.S. Justice Department. I indirectly saw tons of Treasury-ATF stationery, plaques, badges, emblems and ID cards etc… be replaced with those which bear the ATF- U.S Justice Department logo. Other than those who were tasked with physically carrying the suppies out and in and installing or issuing the indicia, we never broke stride. The very next day, it was the same people enforcing the same laws the same way, with a different emblem on their badge. What purpose would banning ATF supposedly serve? The same people would be doing the same jobs, only with a different badge.
The Federal gun laws will always be enforced. As long as there is an anti-gun administration in Washington, and anti-gun politicians in blue states, we will continue forever to see the proposal of anti-gun policies, rulings and bans. If the responsibility for enforcement of the Federal gun laws went to the FBI, then those who despise the idea of a Federal Agent serving a search warrant or making an arrest for a violation of them, will have to start shouting “Abolish the FBI”.
The FBI is no less an arm of the White House than the ATF, and the FBI has literally 6 times more people, and a budget to match.
My other question to those who support this ban are; Would you really rather have the FBI investigate you?
There have been two or three other proposals to merge the ATF into the DEA or FBI since the Reagan administration. None have gained much momentum. The FBI has always seemingly been in favor of such a merger, because they are envious of ATF’s primary jurisdiction over bombing and arson cases.
If the gun laws went to the FBI, who would be the Agents enforcing them? Take a guess. It would be the same people that enforce them now. They would either be assimilated into the FBI or apply and be hired for their knowledge and experience. So what would the “ban” have served to do?
The existence of the ATF is not the problem. The problem is the personnel within ATF or any other part of the Federal Government who have an anti-gun agenda, rather than the ability to differentiate criminals from inanimate objects.
By Daniel O’Kelly
February 18, 2015
Everyone is surprised that ATF has announced plans to ban M855 ammunition (steel-core 5.56 NATO). The issue has been raised as to whether the cartridge has sufficient “sporting purposes” as a means to fight the ban. Make no mistake, the “sportability” of the cartridge is not the real issue.
We at IFSA agree that M855 ammunition should NOT be banned. However we would like to offer some explanation as to the methodology being used by the Government in this situation.
The definition of Armor Piercing (AP) Ammunition is;
“A projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely (excluding the presence of traces of other substances) from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium;”
This definition was agreed upon in the mid-’80s between the pro-gun and anti-gun forces as a middle-ground against the Senator Charles Schumer’s catch phrase “cop-killer bullets”. At first it was suggested that any bullet be banned which can penetrate a cop’s vest. Law enforcement and many others were all for that definition until the NRA fought it because the unthinking hadn’t realized that it would ban ALL rifle ammunition.
That was the only definition of AP ammunition until the Swedish M39B (9mm Luger) cartridge arrived on the surplus market in the late 80’s. Being intended for use in the Carl Gustav M45 (Swedish K) submachinegun, it had a much thicker jacket than normal 9mm Luger cartridges and a higher velocity, which allows it to penetrate soft body armor.
So, since the problem didn’t fit the solution (the M39B didn’t qualify as AP), a new definition was added to the definition of AP ammo. It was added that AP ammo would include;
“A full jacketed projectile larger than .22 caliber designed and intended for use in a handgun and whose jacket has a weight of more than 25 percent of the total weight of the projectile”.
Notice that the definition didn’t just say M39B, because that would leave the possibility to re-name the cartridge all allow it to come into the U.S.
During a career with ATF, it was obvious that it is not the ATF itself that takes the initiative to rule on many of the anti-gun issues that arise, rather they receive directives from anti-gun administrations in Washington, and are directed to write whatever needs to be said in order to make the intended action occur.
Keep in mind that ATF applied the first AP definition to steel core 7.62×39 ammunition on 2/2/94 during the Clinton administration, in order to prevent it’s importation. Then ATF Director John McGaw said at the time that “…(t)hese bullets when used in handguns pose a life-threatening risk to all law enforcement officers.”
Someone should have pointed out to him that ALL 7.62×39 rounds with penetrate soft body armor. But having been a Secret Service Agent until he became ATF’s Director might explain his lack of familiarity with ammunition technology. So concerning the ability to penetrate safy armor, there is no difference between any other load in that caliber and the ones having a steel core.
Then, about a year ago, ATF stopped the importation of 5.45 x 39 cartridges with steel core bullets by ruling them to be handgun ammunition. Do you see the pattern? Just recognize any cartridge with a bullet made of the listed metal(s) (more on that in a minute) as being useful in a handgun, and it becomes un-importable and un-manufacturable.
It was surprising to IFSA at the time of both “bans”, that although there are pistol versions of the AK47 (7.62 x 39) and pistol versions of the AK74 (5.45 x 39), that ATF left out 5.56 x 45 ammunition with steel core. There are certainly more AR15 pistols in circulation than either of the other two models, and the AR15 pistol emerged onto the market much before the other two did. Again, not that we support the ban in any way, but it was apparent that the anti-gun administration was behind both additions to the list, so why did they leave out the most obvious one?.
We teach the topic of Armor Piercing Ammunition in our seminars and it’s well-covered in our online course on Ammunition as well. We always point out first, that there is a difference between what will penetrate a Policeman’s body armor and what qualifies as “Armor Piercing Ammunition” under the definition. Many cartridges, including all rifle ammunition will do so, For instance
Again, ANY loading in 7.62×39, 5.45×39, or 5.56×45 will penetrate all soft body armor, so why are the steel-core loadings being singled out? Easy. Because once the Armor Piercing wand is waved over them, they can no longer “be imported or manufactured except for Government use”. The definition is again being used as a tool to keep ammunition out of the hands of pro-gunners.
Here’s the real tool that should be used to fight the ban. Point out to ATF that the bullet of M855 is not within the definition of Armor Piercing ammunition. Because the bullet is partially made of lead, it is NOT “constructed entirely from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper, or depleted uranium;” Therefore the definition of AP does not apply.
But then it doesn’t apply to the 5.45×39 or the 762×39 cartridges either.
And that’s the problem. Sometimes ATF rules that things fall within definitions that they clearly do not fall into if you only read the requirements of the definition . If you’d like to see more examples, read the Declaration we wrote for U.S. District Court, in Ares Armor vs. B. Todd Jones, wherein we pointed out that most of the firearm “receivers” on the market don’t fall within ATF’s own definition of a receiver.
You can find it at https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B99vEBRSpVxrWnZRV1BxZWFSQ2c/view?pli=1
We at IFSA are all for the regulating of firearms in an attempt to keep them out of the hands of criminals, but what happens if ATF were to be ordered to rule solid lead bullets as “armor piercing” next, even though they don’t fit the definition? A regulatory agency should at least be required to operate within their own definitions.
Timing is everything, again today. It doesn’t matter B. Todd Jones announcing he is resigning as ATF Director gives less than two weeks notice. What’s relevant is it comes less than two weeks after publicly holstering the proposed ban of M855 ammunition by re-classifying it as “armor-piercing ammunition.”
Jones barely had enough time to wipe the green-tip egg off his face from the botched ammo ban. Now, he is leaving to pursue opportunities in the private sector as of March 31, 2015. It is rumored he might be leaving the games in the White House for a high-powered gig with the NFL.
We can thank Mr. Jones for joining the U.S. Marine Corps after he graduated from law school. He served as an infantry officer with the 1st Marine Division. In 1989, he left active duty, and spent years as an assistant U.S. Attorney.
Unfortunately, we don’t have much to thank Mr. Jones for regarding his time at the helm as ATF Director.
President Obama appointed Jones as his nominee for the director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) on January 24, 2013. You may recall it was in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre and the ATF’s Fast and Furious scandal.
On July 31, 2013, B. Todd Jones received Senate confirmation for the post. The rare Obama victory was perhaps some sort of a Washington compromise. The president’s attempted gun grabs (and now assaults on ammo) all get shot down in Congress.
Under the tenure of B. Todd Jones, the ATF seemed to have a carry and conceal permit for Obama’s assault on the Second Amendment.
One year ago, the ATF raided Ares Armor, storming into Southern California like it was Baghdad or Kabul. It wasn’t Kabul, just plain bull.
The agency also came under renewed fire for its tactics. Jones and the ATF were hit with bipartisan blistering for a wide variety of mistakes and failures in undercover sting operations. C’mon now.
- Could anyone really think using people with mental disabilities in ATF operations was a safe or good idea?
- So, it’s okay for the ATF to put guns into the hands of Mexican drug cartels. But, it’s not okay for law-abiding American citizens to bear arms and have the ammunition they want? That’s how we roll?
The proposed M855 ammo ban turned out to be the last round for Jones. This generated even more harsh criticism and outrage from both sides of the U.S. House of Representatives, and the U.S. Senate. Plus, it drew tens of thousands of written objections from American citizens.
The ABCs of B. Todd Jones Resignation
It seems obvious given the extensive background Mr. Jones has with the law, he had to know the proposed ammunition ban was doomed. After all, it is unconstitutional.
Former ATF agent and world-recognized firearms expert, Daniel O’Kelly recently told Ares Armor the ATF was too overwhelmed to choose on its own to promote initiatives like the ammo ban. All we have right now is more questions without answers, such as:
- Did B. Todd Jones finally say NO to being the president’s “Yes man?”
- Did President Obama want Jones out in less than 2 years of his officially leading the ATF?
Before you go celebrating another victory for gun rights over the ATF, and the president, ask yourself these questions:
- What’s better for believers and supporters of the Second Amendment…is it the Devil You Know, or the One You Don’t? Isn’t it likely the president is going to insist on someone who will be able to finish the assault he started on the Second Amendment?
The ultimate power is back in the hands of the U.S. Senate. It took from 2006 until 2011 to confirm a permanent ATF Director. Republican senators still have the majority of weapons today.
So, who’s next?
When B. Todd Jones leaves, the new acting ATF Director will be Thomas E. Brandon. He was appointed Deputy Director of the ATF in 2011. Overall, he’s got more than a quarter of a century of service with the ATF. Most recently, Brandon has been the special agent in charge of the field division in Phoenix, Arizona.
Once again, here we go taking the high road. We can thank Mr. Brandon for serving in the U.S. Marine Corps from 1978 to 1982. Let’s hope we can have something to thank him for while at the top of the ATF.
(Originally published 7/2/15 by Ares Armor. Reprinted with permission.)
Yesterday, was the ATF’s birthday. Today, Ares Armor Inc. proudly turns again to Daniel O’Kelly for his unbiased but unplugged commentary on the ATF. After more than a decade as a Police Officer and Detective, Mr. O’Kelly had 23 years of awards and promotions as a highly-qualified agent and supervisor in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. As an Academy Staff member, he was chosen to be one of the writers of the new and improved ATF Curriculum which is still being used.
Today, as a world-recognized leading gun expert, Dan has taught firearm enforcement to law enforcement professionals around the world. He now runs the International Firearm Specialist Academy.
Ares Armor Inc.: As always, it’s an honor Sir. Thank you for your time. Let’s start by asking if you have you seen the ATF change, and how?
Daniel O’Kelly: “ATF has evolved from issuing revolvers when I came aboard, to Glocks, M4s and Armored Personnel Carriers. The aim of the enforcement has changed to a high degree also. As an ATF Agent, you’re allowed to specialize in one facet of ATF jurisdiction if you wish, be it firearms, bombing investigations, arson, armed organized crime, or a few others. Having been a full-time undercover agent for two years during my prior career on the police department, I specialized in undercover cases against armed drug dealers. When I came aboard with ATF in the late 1980s, the cocaine epidemic was at its peak. So, it seemed like a vast amount of the work we did was going after criminals who carried guns to protect their drug deals, which is a firearm-felony under ATF jurisdiction. I also investigated armed felons and gun traffickers.
The rules were not that strict. To begin an investigation, you were required to file a proposal with your supervisor saying, ‘This is who I’m going to investigate, and why.’ We were given a good amount of latitude in working our cases. That all changed in 1993.”
How a Wacko in Waco Changed the ATF
In 1993, the self-proclaimed final prophet, David Koresh, led the Branch Davidian religious cult in bearing Arms against an ATF raid of their compound in Waco, Texas. Four federal agents and six cult members were killed in the raid. After a 51-day standoff against the FBI, the compound caught fire. All 80 cult members, including children, died.
Ares Armor Inc.: How did that one tragic incident impact the way ATF operated?
Daniel O’Kelly: “Prior to Waco, if you were doing an undercover drug buy, you would gather a few other agents, and say ‘I’m going to x location to make a buy. The seller is Joe Whoever, and he drives a blue Chevy. I’ll be wearing a wire on channel 6, so grab a radio and hopefully you can hear the conversation. You guys park here. You other guys position yourself there.’ Then, off we would go. Most of the time it went smoothly, but working the Chicago, and Gary, Indiana area, there was more than one operation that ended up in a shootout, car chase or both. The occasional chaos was just an accepted risk.
Then Waco happened.
I still remember an Agent walking into my office and telling me that my friend, Agent Rob Williams, had been murdered during the raid at the compound. Rob had been a classmate of mine during basic training. I remember staring out the window in a daze for hours, trying to get my head around his death. Then I walked into my supervisor’s office and told him I wanted to join the Special Response Team (SRT). ‘So does everyone else’ he said. ‘It’s like the day after Pearl Harbor.’
Politicians and the public wanted heads to roll at ATF for what happened. Heck, everyone that ATF goes after is armed, but no one there believed they’d shoot. It hadn’t been considered the Branch Davidians believed Koresh to be Jesus in the flesh, and that they were all invincible and justified in shooting at us.
After Waco, you couldn’t go out on an operation without a written and approved plan. It required a positive ID of the suspect and everything about him, a map to the hospital, blood types of all involved, phone numbers of supervisors, local law enforcement and other emergency services. We used to call it doing, ‘The phone book,’ because it was so much paperwork. And, you had to have it approved in advance by two levels of supervision.
It only made sense to start using a more prepared approach after we had our eyes opened at Waco by a bunch of lunatics who thought Jesus told them to shoot at us, but it was a big change at the ATF, like night and day.
Prior to Waco, Agents who were not on the SRT only had ATF logo windbreakers and ball caps to wear on raids. After Waco we were all issued Battle Dress Uniforms (BDUs), and in recently years they’ve added helmets and armored personnel carriers.”
Ares Armor Inc.: Speaking of change, what do you make of the idea which surfaces from time to time about merging the ATF into the FBI?
Daniel O’Kelly: “I saw that merger proposed at least 3 times during my career. Even before that, it came so close during the Reagan Administration that some ATF agents transferred to other agencies in fear of losing their job, but the merger still never happened. I recently wrote an article on Linkedin called, Ban ATF, Why? It touched on why you should want the ATF to continue doing firearm enforcement if you are pro-gun, and not the FBI.
At end of the day, there are always going to be gun laws in America. Who do you want enforcing them? The DEA Agents whose experience and training are about drugs? The FBI, which is five times larger with a budget to match? Even if you put ATF under another agency, give them a new boss, or abolish the agency, the Agents aren’t going to be let go, because it still takes the same number of Agents to enforce all the federal laws. As long as there is an anti-gun administration in the White House, the Agents in charge of enforcing gun laws will be pressured by that administration to be anti-gun.”
Enforcing Federal Gun Laws
Daniel O’Kelly: “During my career, the first new federal gun law enacted was the Gun-Free School Zone Act in 1990. Since then, the category of persons with a domestic violence conviction have been added to the list of those prohibited from possessing a gun. I also witnessed a new initiative every few years with names like Operation Trigger Lock, Project Achilles Heel, and others, which focused on enforcing the laws against armed career criminals, armed drug traffickers, and those who used guns in violent crime.
Bureaucracies are a funny thing. Someone once said that the two aims of a bureaucracy are to increase its size and to justify its budget. These initiatives were a way to track our activity and show we were earning our budget. These projects gave the impression we were doing something new or different, but really it was just enforcement of the same laws with a new label on them.
It was also amusing to see the strategic focus of our cases flip-flop every year from a quest for quality vs. quantity. When a new fiscal year began, we would hear the mandate, ‘This year, we are going after quality cases. We want cases involving multiple guns and multiple defendants.’ Then at the start of the next year, we would always hear, ‘Last year, we had quality but our numbers were low, so this year we need numbers. One guy – one gun cases are fine.’ And our direction would switch back and forth contradicting itself every year.
In 1994, President Clinton signed the Federal Assault Weapons Ban pushed by Senator Feinstein, which was enacted for 10 years. (It was formally titled the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act). The law said that if you make a semi-automatic firearm which uses a detachable magazine, it can only have one of the following regulated features, such as:
Telescoping or Folding Stock
If a firearm had two or more of these specific features, it could only be sold to law enforcement. The ban prevented nothing but bayonets and grenade launchings. Nothing more than a way to try to make some guns, such as an AR-15, to be politically correct.
When I taught this complex law during seminars I would have to laugh. I’d ask a room filled with law enforcement professionals, ‘How many of you have more than 10 years of experience?’ Hands all over the room would be raised. ‘How many have more than 20 years of experience?’ Most hands would still be up. Then I’d ask, ‘How many of you have ever been called to the scene of a bayoneting?’ The room would burst into laughter. Then I’d ask, ‘How many of you have ever arrested someone for launching a grenade?’ There would be more laughter, and a single hand never went up. I’d close my point with the comment, ‘Well at least no one is pinching their fingers anymore in those folding stocks.’
That Federal Assault Weapons Ban was a classic Washington, D.C. example of people who don’t know anything about guns trying to find a problem to fit their answer in order to get rid of guns.”
Tune in again tomorrow, as Mr. Daniel O’Kelly shares how the ATF views firearms owners, how the public should view inside the ATF, and more.
Daniel O’Kelly spent 23 years as an Agent and Supervisor in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Proof of his rich expertise is he was selected as one of the writers of the new and improved ATF Curriculum still in use today.
Ares Armor Inc.: How do the employees of the ATF view firearms, and the people who carry or own guns?
Dan O’Kelly: “Great question. The truth is you might be surprised. There is a good percentage of ATF people who are pro-gun rights. I know many who are gun collectors, and even some who are NRA members. A large percentage of Agents are former cops, and to my experience they are generally in favor of private gun ownership.”
On the other hand, there are those who are anti-gun, and who equate gun ownership with crime. Since ATF is the federal “gun police” agency, it gets a lot of pressure from Capitol Hill and the White House to make rulings and regulations which restrict firearms. For many of those near the top, they have no choice but to support that agenda or sabotage their career. And in many cases, that agenda flows downhill.
It was always easy to tell who was anti-gun. Those in ATF who are gun-knowledgeable and pro-gun are commonly referred to by their anti-gun co-workers as a ‘Gunstroke.’ That term was used with varying degrees of malice to indicate you’re one of those weirdos who ‘likes to stroke guns’. That of course was all forgotten about when one of the anti-gunners needed you to identify something for them about which they had no clue.
Photo: BATFE Headquarters. Washington, D.C.
Ares Armor Inc.: How do you think the public should view the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives?
Dan O’Kelly: “People obviously have the right to think what they want. But let me supply some ammo here for taking an informed position. Some gun owners and dealers have a steamy hatred for the ATF. If you ask them why, it’s because of something they read or heard which supposedly happened to someone else. And, just like there are pro-gun citizens who don’t believe there should be any limits on guns, there are those in ATF who don’t believe in any gun rights. No one can deny there have been occasional abuses, but that is not something limited to just that agency. As a staunch gun rights advocate, I personally know hundreds of great people among ATF’s ranks.
A great many firearms dealers will tell you they haven’t been inspected by ATF in years, if ever, and if so, they’ve had no issues during their encounters. After I retired from ATF, I spent two years working for the corporate office of the largest firearm retailer in the world. That company, which sells a half-million firearms a year, has a great relationship with ATF.
If you read these accounts objectively, many of the people who hate ATF are angry about something the law will not allow them to manufacture or own. The law which prevents what they want wasn’t written by ATF. Just like the cop didn’t install the traffic light you just ran, although he’s writing you the ticket.
I’ll agree that ATF has contradicted themselves on several issues, and has made some rulings which do not stand up to logic, and we at the IFSA have gone on the record in Federal Court to point out some of those contradictions in an effort to get ATF to correct them. However, ATF has also ruled on several things which many gun owners seem surprisingly pleased about, such as exploding targets, “80% receiver blanks” possessed with completion jigs, the so-called “solvent traps”, etc…
When you see inside the gun industry, and talk with the people from the companies who manufacture firearms, and others like Ares Armor which make upper receivers, lower receivers, and other related products, most of them would tell us they have no real problem with the ATF. They understand it is just a matter of people doing their jobs. They acknowledge there has to be someone enforcing the gun laws.
You need to understand…
It is the leadership at ATF Headquarters who constantly gets contacted by Capitol Hill and the White House. It is those in power in Washington D.C. who are not gun-friendly. President Clinton and even more so, President Obama have proven themselves to be anything but gun-friendly. There is always some new anti-gun initiative coming along.
The ATF is not in a position to argue with the President or Congress. They must do what they are told. Unfortunately, the ATF are the ones who get hated most for it when it’s not even them who is thinking up these anti-gun legislations.
I’ve said it many times before, the ATF people are so busy in their jobs, they don’t possibly have time to dream up new anti-gun laws.”
Photo: Surveillance video of Dylann Roof entering church. Released by Charleston, SC Police.
Ares Armor Inc.: Final question, after the recent Dylann Roof church shootings in Charleston, we knew President Obama would seize the moment for advancing his anti-gun legacy. But now, other politicians who seemed to have been equipped with silencers, are acting like it’s safe to come out again and talk up the need for more gun control. What do you see happening here as it pertains to the ATF?
Daniel O’Kelly: “I’d ask them what it is that they want to prevent, which is not already illegal?
Like always, the President will use the ATF as a political tool for his anti-gun agenda. This kid’s act of shooting up a church is deplorable in itself, but like every mass shooting, it serves to further hinder the rights of the law abiding. Anti-gunners use tragedy as a new angle to do what they have wanted to do all along.
I expect them to try another gun grab as before. And of course they will tell the ATF what to do.
Anti-gunners betray their own foolishness by trying to legislate compliance. Have you seen the businesses with a “No Guns Allowed” sign on the door? Hilarious. Now the people who comply with rules will be unarmed. The fool inside who placed the sign is now even more vulnerable. The person who complies with rules is not the problem.
Let me close wrap up with a personal favorite…
In joining the ATF, during my panel interview with 3 senior officials, one of questions they asked me was, ‘What do you think of gun control?’ I said, ‘Sir, if you can prove to me you’ve gotten all of the other guns, then I will give you mine. But, that ship sailed 200 years ago.’ Surprisingly, they later told me that realistic answer was one of the reasons I was hired.
There are an estimated 290 million guns in the U.S. Let’s say for illustration that they are all outlawed, and as many as 95% have been turned in or confiscated. I don’t believe that you could ever get to that high a percentage point, but even if you did, you would still have over 14 million guns in circulation. But now, 95% of the American population is unarmed and defenseless against the people who don’t care what the laws say and who didn’t turn in theirs. Therefore, gun control is not even a realistic concept anymore from where I sit. You either bear Arms, or are vulnerable to those who do.”
Ares Armor Inc.: Agreed. Well said Sir. Thank you. To learn more about Daniel O’Kelly’s International Firearm Specialist Academy, visit http://www.GunLearn.com.
Int. Firearm Specialist Academy
Comments are closed.