Obama's Latest Move on Guns - Gun Hub
Gun Hub

Go Back   Gun Hub > Gun Hub Forum > Gun Rights

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-01-2016, 06:39 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
csmkersh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 10,725
Thumbs down Obama's Latest Move on Guns

Quietly last week

https://www.nraila.org/articles/2016...ve-gun-control
csmkersh is offline  
Old 08-02-2016, 12:51 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Diamondback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Seattle area--Sodom & Gomorrah on Puget Sound
Posts: 2,051
Top, I'm working on an article for this at RedState--a lot of the gunsmith members at NorthwestFirearms.com were going nuts all weekend, and I've sent Charlie Petty a PM asking if I can pick his brain about it too for my piece. Man, I wish Patrick Sweeney were still here so I could get his take on this monster...

Mentioned it with some links near the end of https://gunhub.com/politics/60737-hil...ica-movie.html
Diamondback is offline  
Old 08-02-2016, 08:16 AM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: MA
Posts: 75
From the article...
Quote:
The upshot is that DDTC is labeling commercial gunsmiths as “manufacturers” for performing relatively simple work such as threading a barrel or fabricating a small custom part for an older firearm. Under the AECA, “manufacturers” are required to register with DDTC at significant expense or risk onerous criminal penalties.
The left are masters at INCREMENTALISM.

They're coming after guns, manufacturers, dealers, gunsmiths, ammo makers, retailers, etc in every way possible to make guns and gun owners the next social pariahs.

Remember what happened to smokers, and anyone who supported traditional marriage?...social outcasts, and victims of activist judges, making new 'law'.
Phenix is offline  
 
Old 08-02-2016, 11:50 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Diamondback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Seattle area--Sodom & Gomorrah on Puget Sound
Posts: 2,051
First they came for the EPL guys, and nobody said anything because "What's an Eighty Percent Lower?"...

THAT's the real target of this, a market sector that they haven't quite been able to lockdown from Day One, along with the small-time local gunsmiths who can't afford all the costs of registering with the State Department to become an accredited and recognized International Merchant of Death like HK, FN Herstal and Glock.
Diamondback is offline  
Old 08-02-2016, 03:12 PM   #5
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: MA
Posts: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diamondback View Post
First they came for the EPL guys, and nobody said anything because "What's an Eighty Percent Lower?"...

THAT's the real target of this, a market sector that they haven't quite been able to lockdown from Day One, along with the small-time local gunsmiths who can't afford all the costs of registering with the State Department to become an accredited and recognized International Merchant of Death like HK, FN Herstal and Glock.
Even those who profess support for the 2A (falsely), are totally committed to drying up every aspect of civilian ownership, through whatever tactics they think they can get away with.
Phenix is offline  
Old 08-02-2016, 05:48 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Javlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Biloxi, MS
Posts: 1,523
Hell guys buy this decree I probably broke the law when I made piece for my M1a some years back if I did that today.
Javlin is offline  
Old 08-03-2016, 12:58 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Northern NV
Posts: 769
I'm not sure about this decree...the whole ITAR thing has been going on for a couple of years now. The gunsmithing community has been trying to get some sort of sensible agreement, but no one seems to be listening. I'm not sure but SOMEONE a couple of years ago decided that ITAR applied to ALL gunsmithing, and since then ATF has mostly not been enforcing, but a couple of inspectors have been enforcing. Perhaps the Obama decree is just canonizing ATF's policy on ITAR; they will now enforce across the board.

It's a real mess that just turns into a bunch of useless paperwork for the small shop, and a $2,250.00 tax.

ITAR is very legitimate, and I like the concept of ITAR. But bureaucracy has taken over, and it's being applied in a very nonsensical manner now to gunsmiths who are doing things that really shouldn't concern ITAR at all.
GunGeek is offline  
Old 08-03-2016, 01:08 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Diamondback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Seattle area--Sodom & Gomorrah on Puget Sound
Posts: 2,051
Here's another one that's Totally Screwed Up on ITAR to chew on.

All my gal has to do is get a hunting license and her WA Alien Firearms License and she could have a fully loaded Tacticooled UberMallNinja AR with all the bells and whistles built for her to buy here... but she can't build the same rifle from parts because even a Magpul sling-swivel "increases the military usefulness of the gun" and ITAR has a "second strike" where export isn't only geography but can also be citizenship of the possessor. "Ewww, icky Canadian... no ACOG or EoTech for you!"

I also have a German friend who wants to build her own rifle that thinks her easiest option would be to buy the parts through Brownells Germany, bring them over with her when she comes to visit, buy a receiver to assemble them around and then just arrange to lease a spot in my safe for storage.

It's not the concept. so much as that the codification seems specifically designed to abuse that good idea and get some meddlesome pencil-pushing fart-humper at State Dept's slimy tentacles into anything human hands can produce. Oh, and one more way to loot our pockets and line their own... I mean, not wanting to transfer tech to hostile countries is one thing, but a lot of its use has been in screwing over our allies.

Last edited by Diamondback; 08-03-2016 at 01:11 PM.
Diamondback is offline  
Old 08-03-2016, 02:46 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Northern NV
Posts: 769
I don't think ITAR applies to an individual working on his own gun; I don't see how they could possibly regulate/enforce that. It's aimed at those who are in the business of weapons, or modifying weapons.
GunGeek is offline  
Old 08-03-2016, 03:01 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Diamondback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Seattle area--Sodom & Gomorrah on Puget Sound
Posts: 2,051
Kevin, they've pretty much said "anything machining = 'Manufacturing' for ITAR" on this new one.

07 FFL's have a pass under some conditions, others not.
The DDTC Potentially Opens Large "Loophole" for 07 FFLs - The Firearm Blog

Also, a local gunsmith details some of his dealings with the local BATF***ers on this one at https://www.northwestfirearms.com/th....224356/page-8 (skip pages 6 and 7, things get a little strange in the wee hours of the weekends)
Diamondback is offline  
Old 08-03-2016, 03:59 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,505
What this kind of sounds like to me is the O trying to enact the provisions of the UN arms trafficing treaty he signed but hasn't presented to the Senate for ratification.

Now then, some years back BATFE tried to expand the definition of "manufacturing" and got slapped down in Federal Court. Not being a lawyer or having reviewed the actual edict from the throne, I can't really evaluate how this might play out in the courts.
William R. Moore is offline  
Old 08-03-2016, 04:37 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Diamondback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Seattle area--Sodom & Gomorrah on Puget Sound
Posts: 2,051
Here's the DDTC "guidance letter":
http://pmddtc.state.gov/compliance/A...0(Publish).pdf

Lawyerly commentary: https://blog.princelaw.com/2016/07/2...-registration/
Diamondback is offline  
Old 08-03-2016, 06:38 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
WaltGraham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 3,896
We will not submit.
WaltGraham is offline  
Old 08-04-2016, 07:37 AM   #14
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: MA
Posts: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaltGraham View Post
We will not submit.
Some won't, but I fear most will roll over like a new puppy.

Especially when the government withholds Federal checks (SS, pension, etc.), and incentivize neighbors to rat out their neighbors.

The first step is to make as many gun owners as possible, criminals on the books.

Then they'll go after them at their own pace. Political opposition will be targeted first. The country club folks (Biden) shooting skeet at the club, will be last.
Phenix is offline  
Old 08-04-2016, 01:22 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,505
OK, read the DDTC link-thanks for posting-and I've got questions:
1. What does improve the performance beyond original capability mean? Theoretically, a bolt gun with a good barrel should put all the shots into the same hole. Or, does that mean that if you're replacing a shot out barrel does the replacement have to deliver similar lousy accuracy?

2. What does "machining" mean? Does finish reaming a chamber by hand qualify? OK, re-read the commentary and it appears it might.

3. Since the Senate never ratified the ITAR, why do we have to conform to it? Better question: can we be forced to conform to it? I would-Senate ratification lacking-think not.

Last edited by William R. Moore; 08-04-2016 at 01:25 PM.
William R. Moore is offline  
Old 08-04-2016, 01:40 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Diamondback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Seattle area--Sodom & Gomorrah on Puget Sound
Posts: 2,051
I believe the "act or treaty" this re-interprets is the Arms Exports Control Act of 1976. ITAR isn't so much used to refer specifically to any one treaty, but collectively "International Trafficking in Arms Restrictions/Export Arms Restrictions" (sometimes written "ITAR/EAR") as a whole category. You should see the crap my mother has to deal with on it on a contract where Boeing's providing support (not atliberty to discuss details) on the new Mitsubishi Regional Jet...

That's the trap, isn't it? Since it's so ambiguous, "improve" can mean anything--like since I can't hit s*** with a standard 13+" rifle stock, putting on a shorter one that better fits my 11"-LOP* arm would create an "improvement."
*Less, actually, when you take an unusually deep ribcage into account

The specific guy I'd recommend you check out in the NWFA link is "Velzey"--he's an 01 FFL smith who's in the middle of a fight to keep his business from being shuttered by this.

Last edited by Diamondback; 08-04-2016 at 01:45 PM.
Diamondback is offline  
Old 08-04-2016, 06:46 PM   #17
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: MA
Posts: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by William R. Moore View Post
OK, read the DDTC link-thanks for posting-and I've got questions:
1. What does improve the performance beyond original capability mean? Theoretically, a bolt gun with a good barrel should put all the shots into the same hole. Or, does that mean that if you're replacing a shot out barrel does the replacement have to deliver similar lousy accuracy?

2. What does "machining" mean? Does finish reaming a chamber by hand qualify? OK, re-read the commentary and it appears it might.

3. Since the Senate never ratified the ITAR, why do we have to conform to it? Better question: can we be forced to conform to it? I would-Senate ratification lacking-think not.
I assume the answer is YES - you can be forced. Even if only when you come afoul of some other violation and are bagged for this.

The goal is criminalizing as many Americans as possible for use when needed.
Phenix is offline  
Old 08-04-2016, 11:59 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Diamondback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Seattle area--Sodom & Gomorrah on Puget Sound
Posts: 2,051
For the Law Wonks among us, the relevant entries are 22 CFR 120 to 130 inclusive.
Diamondback is offline  
Reply

  Gun Hub > Gun Hub Forum > Gun Rights


Search tags for this page

content

Click on a term to search for related topics.

Thread Tools
Display Modes





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2002 - 2020 Gun Hub. All rights reserved.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.