FN Herstal Firearms banner

Obama Administration Releases Latest Executive Gun Control

3K views 20 replies 15 participants last post by  nvillekat 
#1 ·
This time the bad news came via the U.S. State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC), which is primarily responsible for administering the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) and its implementing rules, the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). 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, “manufactures” are required to register with DDTC at significant expense or risk onerous criminal penalties.
On the other hand, DDTC contends that gunsmithing includes only very simple procedures, such as the one-for-one drop-in replacement of parts that do not require cutting, drilling, or machining for installation. But even then, if the parts “improve the accuracy, caliber, or other aspects of firearm operation,” “manufacturing” may occur. Finishing treatments for firearms generally are not considered manufacturing under the guidance, nor are cosmetic flourishes such as engraving. Meanwhile the mounting of a scope that involves the machining of new dovetails or the drilling and tapping of holes may or not be “manufacturing,” depending on whether the scope improves the accuracy of the firearm beyond its prior configuration.
https://www.nraila.org/articles/201...tration-releases-latest-executive-gun-control


WTF!
 
#2 ·
So if I read that correctly, does that definition umbrella the people that conduct these procedures at home in their garage?
 
#3 ·
Yeah. My take on it is that anyone IMPROVING the workings of a firearm will have to pay the $2250 per year fee and then you will be on their list. It also mentions changing springs and floor plates on magazines as "Manufacturing. ALSO anyone cutting, drilling, or machining on a firearm will be labeled a "Manufacturer. This will kill all 80% lowers. :???:
 
#7 ·
I'm not so sure. The document I read specifically mentioned "Commercial" and "Business". [In the copy below, the bold underlines are my editing...]

The AECA/ITAR require anybody who engages in the business of “manufacturing” a defense article to register with DDTC and pay a registration fee that for new applicants is currently $2,250 per year. These requirements apply, even if the business does not, and does not intend to, export any defense article. Moreover, under ITAR, “only one occasion of manufacturing … a defense article” is necessary for a commercial entity to be considered“engaged in the business” and therefore subject to the regime’s requirements.

That doesn't mean that in their hatred of all things related to firearms, they won't try and twist and stretch this to include you and me sitting at home.....


Also, stand by for lots more Ex Actions now that his evil apprentice has clinched the party nomination....
 
#8 ·
I work with ITAR regulations on a daily basis. I can tell you the penalties can be 1 million per violation plus prison time and other penalties. Based on previous enforcement cases I have reviewed I believe this new EO will only be used by a politician wanting to prove a point or set an agenda. Your average ITAR case deals with much higher level threats than Jimmy's gun shop mounting scopes. Not saying this doesn't pave the way as I think a determined politician will use anything they can but my experience is things like this get settled with a warning letter.

As much as I hate to say it I think we have to vote for Trump to have any chance at slowing the erosion of our liberty. I don't think he will stop the erosion I just think it will be slower than it would be under Hilary. Remember all laws that are enacted are a reduction in liberty. Sometimes that is good and needed for a civil society to exist but all law restricts liberty. Example the law against murder. That law restricts my liberty to kill innocent people. That's a good restriction of liberty. I submit that we have reach the limit of positive laws and in many cases need to roll them back. I am realistic enough to know that once lost liberty is rarely returned.

Of course as some of know from my past posts that based on the book I read it has to get a lot worse before it gets better. Although maybe we are closer than I think. 2 Timothy 3:1-7
 
#13 ·
Not all, only the lawful whose names are on lists because we dutifully submitted to background checks or registered our firearms when our government demanded it. For we are the only threat to the absolute power of the state.

They will not attempt to search for and seize the guns of criminals, partly because searches without probable cause are prohibited but more importantly because the criminal class doesn't threaten their power; criminals continue to pursue their enterprises regardless of the powers that be and interfere with government only to the extent necessary to protect their interests.

It is we, the lawfully armed citizens, who are the only obstacle in their path.
 
#11 ·
This needs challenged in court - talk about major executive branch over-reach.

I'm completely disgusted, not surprised mind you, but completely disgusted just the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 00stormbringer
#12 ·
This puts the one and two man operations making widgets for weapons on a machine on the same level as FNMI, regardless. If it "improves" or "enhances" the weapon, it falls under ITAR and improvement and enhancement are subjective terms but if it's marketed as such, plan on coughing up that $2250 per year.

For the consumer... we can all expect to pay more for the stuff we want, regardless of if it's a spring, screw, trigger, etc.

For those who think they can scoot under the radar and avoid the ITAR fee, it's only a matter of time.
 
#14 ·
Remember all laws that are enacted are a reduction in liberty. Sometimes that is good and needed for a civil society to exist but all law restricts liberty. Example the law against murder. That law restricts my liberty to kill innocent people. That's a good restriction of liberty. I submit that we have reach the limit of positive laws and in many cases need to roll them back. I am realistic enough to know that once lost liberty is rarely returned.
Wendell Holmes Jr said it well - "Your rights end where my nose begins." not all laws restrict freedom, good laws restrict people from oppressing other people's freedoms. But i agree with the general consensus of your comment.
In that same vein, i've been encouraging all those who dig in to the word to not forget that the prayers of a righteous man might be a lot more powerful than your vote or your voice. I've been trying to keep constant on this, and am working on even being decent.

On the other side of things, what does a $2250 license to manufacture weapons include? Were i to purchase such a license, would i be entitled to make weapons as I see fit?
 
#15 · (Edited)
Ok so forgive me. I think the biggest thought I have been thinking lately is that we should simply look at forming a militia and take our gun rights back. So i was looking for the legal definition of a militia, because the implications of this really ticked me off. What about assembling a rifle after purchasing a stripped lower? Is this considered manufacturing?
Anyway, so in looking up the legal definition of militia, I found this https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311

The biggest gun grabber argument is that the average person is not the militia. While I had heard and seen that in quotes from those who signed the Constitution that the average citizen is the militia, I had never seen it in legal code. Now I have.
 

Attachments

#18 ·
acquaticpig - Seems to me that unless there is code that supersedes the section you reference, if you're able-bodied and male, age 17-45, you're in the militia, like it or not. It's just a question of "organized" or "unorganized". So, no need to form anything if you're in that range.
On the other hand, us "old" folks (age 45+) don't need no stinkin' militia. We're just pissed off in general... :spank:
 
#19 ·
No specific superseding code. 10 U.S. Code § 311 (which Aquaticpig cites) is indeed the most recent Federal legal language on this.

The only changes I think are that anti gender and age discrimination legislation and litigation would probably mean that the male and under 45 parts could and would be successfully challenged in Federal court.

What this code means is that (essentially) all able bodied makes ages 17-45 are either in a formal militia or a "militia at large".

The anti-discrimination legislation and litigation that followed this (this particular law dates to the mid- to late-Fifties) means that they would have a hard time excluding a woman or a geezer from the militia at large.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top