The storm winds surrounding the proposed merger of the embattled Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) are reaching deafening levels. Attorney General Pam Bondi recently defended the controversial move during congressional testimony, arguing that consolidating the two agencies would empower the federal government to gain better control of violent crime and dismantle organized illegal operations across the country.
Bondi Argues Merger Will Strengthen Crime-Fighting Capabilities
In her remarks, Bondi stood firm in support of the Trump administration’s proposal, emphasizing how closely intertwined drug and gun trafficking operations tend to be. “Guns and drugs go together,” Bondi asserted. She explained that merging the two agencies under a single umbrella would enhance coordination, streamline resources, and ultimately result in a more efficient crackdown on the country’s most dangerous criminal networks—especially drug cartels that rely on weapons to fuel their operations.
From Bondi’s perspective, the proposed merger isn’t just logical—it’s necessary. She envisions a stronger, more agile federal force capable of addressing violent crime at its core. The idea is to reduce bureaucratic overlap, improve interagency communication, and apply pressure where it’s most needed. Supporters of the merger argue that with both agencies working under a unified chain of command, there would be fewer gaps in intelligence and enforcement, making it harder for criminals to exploit loopholes or miscommunications.
Despite these arguments, Bondi faces fierce opposition, particularly from gun rights advocates and industry groups who see the proposal as a threat to civil liberties and lawful gun ownership.
Gun Rights Advocates Condemn the Proposal as a Dangerous Power Grab
While Bondi believes the consolidation is a step toward public safety, gun rights organizations across the country have launched a wave of criticism, warning that the merger could lead to unprecedented overreach and weaponization of federal authority.
Texas Gun Rights, one of the nation’s most vocal Second Amendment advocacy organizations, strongly condemned the plan. President Chris McNutt issued a scathing statement, declaring, “The ATF is a rogue agency that’s been violating the rights of law-abiding gun owners for decades. It doesn’t need to be restructured or reformed—it needs to be abolished.” McNutt characterized the merger as “a bureaucratic Frankenstein,” arguing that combining the ATF and DEA would only serve to intensify federal power in a way that could severely infringe on constitutional rights.
Instead of merging or reforming the ATF, McNutt and other critics are calling for its complete elimination. He pointed to House Resolution 221, which seeks to abolish the agency entirely, and urged lawmakers to support that effort instead of expanding the ATF’s authority.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), which represents the firearm industry, also pushed back. Lawrence Keane, President and General Counsel of the NSSF, warned that combining the two agencies could have long-term negative consequences—especially if future administrations with anti-gun agendas gain control of the new, more powerful entity.
“You know, DEA is much larger than ATF,” Keane told Bearing Arms. “So just imagine, whatever you call the entity—the Violent Crime Bureau or whatever—you now essentially have the ATF on steroids and supersized. What happens under an anti-gun administration the next time around? Now you have this behemoth that can be wielded against the industry and gun owners. We don’t think that’s advisable.”
Keane and others fear that the merger could lay the foundation for sweeping enforcement measures that go well beyond addressing criminal drug activity. By integrating gun and drug enforcement into a single, centralized agency, the government could gain the tools to push aggressive gun control efforts under the guise of combating crime.
In the wake of the ongoing controversy, Congress appears deeply divided. Supporters of the merger see it as a logical, efficiency-focused solution to combat dual crises of violent crime and drug trafficking. Opponents, however, view it as a calculated power grab that endangers constitutional freedoms.
As the debate intensifies, one thing is clear: the future of federal law enforcement is at a crossroads. Whether the merger moves forward or is blocked, the decision will shape the balance between public safety and civil liberty for years to come.
There’s no better way to support the 2A than with merch that speaks before you do.
The Anti Anti-2A Social Club is more than a name it’s a stand against censorship, double standards, and the erosion of our rights. Every tee, hat, and mug is a symbol of unapologetic defiance. Wear it with pride because defending your rights is a badge of honor.
Click the link below to join the club.