View Full Version : Gun EO's passed in the night.
Mauser KAR98K
07-28-16, 23:21
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20160727/just-in-time-for-his-party-s-convention-obama-administration-releases-latest-executive-gun-control
As with prior executive actions on guns, the administration released its dictate suddenly and without advance warning to or prior input from affected businesses, completely bypassing the normal formalities associated with a significant rulemaking. The guidance is also likely to result in more confusion than clarity and may significantly chill heretofore legal conduct associated with gunsmithing.
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.
So that crap in MA is just the start of more "interpretations".
Coal Dragger
07-28-16, 23:36
Well good luck enforcing any of that shit domestically.
We'll thank you POTUS for keeping all of us safe...
Retarded as usual.
Well good luck enforcing any of that shit domestically.
Easily done as I found out when I wanted to change from an 01 to an 07 FFL. If you wish to have a 07 FFL, they want to see your ITAR compliance shit. By the way, even installing stocks and optics constitutes "manufacturing" today according to ATF.
So if I buy a gun, change the stocks and install optics and then offer it for sale with just a 01 FFL, I can be shut down and put out of business. I need an 07 in order to do that crap. Never mind that at no time did I actually manufacture a firearm, and of course it doesn't seem to matter that ordinary gun owners do it all the time.
Obama put a lot of 07s out to pasture in the last couple of years by changing what constitutes "manufacturing" and requiring ITAR compliance.
And once again we see that new ATF phrase "even a single instance" which they used to prosecute private sellers they deemed were "unlicensed firearm dealers." Hillary has some amazing tools in place just waiting on her.
Repeat after me, TRUMP 2016.
Outlander Systems
07-29-16, 04:28
From what hell-pit to they summon this subjective bullshit?
Glad we've got the .gov "keeping us safe" by regulating the accuracy of firearms.
We'll definitely all be safer when guns are less-accurate.
God. Help. All. Of. Us.
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.
Moose-Knuckle
07-29-16, 05:19
You eat an elephant one bite at a time . . . 7n6 here . . . Saiga/ Izhmash there . . .
"We are working on gun control, but under the radar" - Obama
Before you know it they won't allow places to sell AR parts because that would be allowing Joe Blow at home without an 07 to "manufacture a firearm". Better buy all the shit you want to have for the rest of your life.
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-29-16, 05:42
Before you know it they won't allow places to sell AR parts because that would be allowing Joe Blow at home without an 07 to "manufacture a firearm". Better buy all the shit you want to have for the rest of your life.
With the argument that you shouldn't be able to build a assault weapon at home. Once again not actually trying to solve the problem, but trying to turn the law-abiding citizens in the criminals for no criminal act.
The_War_Wagon
07-29-16, 06:06
With the argument that you shouldn't be able to build a assault weapon at home. Once again not actually trying to solve the problem, but trying to turn the law-abiding citizens in the criminals for no criminal act.
Well if you don't LOVE your democrap overlords, clearly you're ALREADY a "thought criminal!" :rolleyes:
BTW - as for your sig line;
"Islam spreads by the sword, is enforced by the sword, and can only be defeated by the sword NUMEROUS WELL-PLACED MX MISSILE STRIKES."
FIFY! :cool:
And this is just what their doing now... Imagine the flurry of EO's and "guidance" we will get if Trump manages a win in November. Remember, Obama has 72 days to really 'eff things up AFTER he knows what happens on the 8th of November.
So is this for businesses or any Joe Shmo who wants to change his stock or add an optic?
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
On a positive note, it has been determined that an 07 FFL/SOT does not need to pay ITAR so long as they are not cutting or milling anything. It used to be that regardless of what one did, all 07s had to pay ITAR.
http://pmddtc.state.gov/compliance/Applicability%20of%20the%20ITAR%20Registration%20Requirement%20to%20Firearms%20Manufacturers%20(Publish).pdf
I just want an 06 without having to pay ITAR.
Dist. Expert 26
07-29-16, 09:03
I have an idea. Let's all video ourselves changing out stocks, mounting optics etc and send them to the ATF with a letter that gives "guidance" on where they can stick their BS regulations.
And this is just what their doing now... Imagine the flurry of EO's and "guidance" we will get if Trump manages a win in November. Remember, Obama has 72 days to really 'eff things up AFTER he knows what happens on the 8th of November.
I'm pretty sure the Obaminator and his puppeteers already know exactly what is going to happen on Nov. 8th. Its possible they are still making adjustments to their script, but I'm sure they've already decided the outcome of our "election".
Outlander Systems
07-29-16, 11:14
We can always vote at them!
I'm pretty sure the Obaminator and his puppeteers already know exactly what is going to happen on Nov. 8th. Its possible they are still making adjustments to their script, but I'm sure they've already decided the outcome of our "election".
We can always vote at them!
Yeah! That'll learn 'em!
So is this for businesses or any Joe Shmo who wants to change his stock or add an optic?
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Right now only applies to FFLs.
Outlander Systems
07-29-16, 14:14
Emphasis on the, "Right now..."
Right now only applies to FFLs.
Just so we're clear....
If Joe Gunbunny at Awesome Radical Firearms and Ninja Supplies decides to try to move a Leaper Red Dot that's been taking up space by plopping it on a DPMS Sportical...
He's "manufactured" something and needs a radically different license or he gets nailed by the ATF?
Yet I can buy a nice AR and toss a Schmidt and Bender on it like, all day, and that's not even a thing?
That's really grasping at straws.
And to quote 70s punk band The Avengers
"Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your county's been doing to you"
Just so we're clear....
If Joe Gunbunny at Awesome Radical Firearms and Ninja Supplies decides to try to move a Leaper Red Dot that's been taking up space by plopping it on a DPMS Sportical...
He's "manufactured" something and needs a radically different license or he gets nailed by the ATF?
Yet I can buy a nice AR and toss a Schmidt and Bender on it like, all day, and that's not even a thing?
That's really grasping at straws.
According to an ATF newsletter I received, yes. Even more if a customer brings his rifle to me, I can install optics, change furniture, etc. and be fine. Still considered just gunsmithing.
But if I buy a stock 6920 and swap out furniture for Magpul stuff and drop a red dot on it, I need to be a manufacturer rather than just a gunsmith and that requires an 07 and at the time I looked into doing just that, 07s required ITAR compliance.
Outlander Systems
07-29-16, 14:25
"Shall not be infringed," homie.
:lol:
Boy, do I love living in a free country.
Holy hogshit, if I were any freer......
I might have too much money and be too freaking happy
ATF is taking a very broad view of what constitutes a manufacturer, one that I don't think would stand up in court. Only problem is the people they're going after are too little to fight that battle.
So instead of selling a 6920 with a magpul stock installed by you, can you sell a 6920 and include a free magpul stock and a coupon to install the stock after purchase for $0.01?
Dist. Expert 26
07-29-16, 17:18
New question- where are all these "gun rights" organizations that so many of us here donate money to? Why isn't there an army of lawyers beating down the door at the ATF?
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-29-16, 17:24
ATF is taking a very broad view of what constitutes a manufacturer, one that I don't think would stand up in court. Only problem is the people they're going after are too little to fight that battle.
Especially when you could set up a 'factory' in courtroom.
What does this mean for people that make Doo-dads for guns? Air soft intended stuff that could go on an AR?
So instead of selling a 6920 with a magpul stock installed by you, can you sell a 6920 and include a free magpul stock and a coupon to install the stock after purchase for $0.01?
Probably yes, but I'm sure ATF would consider that a technical and willful violation of their determinations which are very discretionary. But more importantly, why should one have to? If what makes you stand out in your marketplace is custom configured firearms setup in a way that positively promotes your business why should anyone have to do the "hokey pokey" to make it happen? And given ATF's "even a single instance" position on enforcement, why bother.
People want to sell guns from their private collections and ATF warns them to get the proper licensing to avoid prosecution, and then they discover they don't qualify for that licensing because they don't intend to actual run a firearms business.
Dealers are advised that is they want to change furniture, add optics, etc. that they must become a "manufacturer" to avoid prosecution, and then they discover that going from a 01 to an 07 is cost prohibitive and comes with a bunch of regulation.
Why bother?
It's all bullshit designed to jam you up. If you start with a functioning firearm and end up with a functioning firearm, you haven't manufactured anything. So what happens to the gunsmith who is replacing a worn broken scope mount or cracked furniture? If he replaces old, out of production stuff with a new mount and rings and magpul furniture did he do a repair or manufacture a new firearm in ATFs eyes? There are no specific guidelines, it's discretionary. It's what they "think" you did, or more importantly, what they want others to "believe" you did.
Given that a significant number of gun people don't understand this stuff and know "jack and shit" when it comes to technical details of some firearms, it's not going to be hard to get 12 oprah viewers on a jury to believe you engaged in illegal manufacturing because you replaced an old broken B Sqaure mount and installed new furniture.
And of course we've had 10 years of conditioning where people worried about their possibly illegal bayonet mount or flash hider and even today somebody will call another gun owner out on 922r violations because he forgot to change the floorplates on one of the magazines in the picture.
According to an ATF newsletter I received, yes. Even more if a customer brings his rifle to me, I can install optics, change furniture, etc. and be fine. Still considered just gunsmithing.
But if I buy a stock 6920 and swap out furniture for Magpul stuff and drop a red dot on it, I need to be a manufacturer rather than just a gunsmith and that requires an 07 and at the time I looked into doing just that, 07s required ITAR compliance.
So if I buy your 6920 that you have for sale and then I buy the Magpul handguard that you have for sale.....I fill out the paperwork and hand you the money. It is now mine...correct? So now I can ask you to install the handguard?
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
I personally feel that you should only be considered "Manufacturing" a firearm(s) when it requires a A&D book change. Example changing from a receiver to a rifle, changing calibers, etc. Of course we all know that logic and the Gov do not always get along...
Averageman
07-29-16, 17:55
None of these things happen in a vacuum, each piece of legislation leads to another, then becomes a footnote on the bottom of something even more obscure. Until we understand that there is no negotiating with these guys, no part of a Executive Order that is legal against the second that would be illegal against any other such as the first can be tolerated.
In a time when we see the FBI and the Department of Justice give a "Free Pass" on National Security issues when it come to e-mail violations, how can we take an executive order restricting the Second Amendment seriously?
The big picture is these incremental restrictions, equal destruction and these are allowed only because of the tiny steps they make forward in the cause. You don't have to pass sweeping legislation, only take a tiny bit at a time and compound the effect.
Coal Dragger
07-29-16, 17:59
Well it is time to start writing to your congress critters about this. Get enough of them mad and State Department and BATF might back off of this bullshit.
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.
http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/pissed-off-tobey-maguire-meme.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-G51RxP2ewmg/T9Oqm1xdF7I/AAAAAAAAC9o/T5W6HYRBAh4/s1600/baww_how_to_not_****_up_everything.jpg
That is literally the stupidest ****ing thing I have read on the internet all WEEK.
If the the DDTC, or ATF is to stupid to call this EO out on its own bullshit, then why the hell are they allowed to even come within ten feet of any "defense article"?
My god. The stupid. It sinks to new levels of incomprehendability every day.
Sounds like 'Bama and his horde of flying monkeys have been watching fox news "experts"....
http://weknowmemes.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/pissed-off-tobey-maguire-meme.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-G51RxP2ewmg/T9Oqm1xdF7I/AAAAAAAAC9o/T5W6HYRBAh4/s1600/baww_how_to_not_****_up_everything.jpg
That is literally the stupidest ****ing thing I have read on the internet all WEEK.
If the the DDTC, or ATF is to stupid to call this EO out on its own bullshit, then why the hell are they allowed to even come within ten feet of any "defense article"?
My god. The stupid. It sinks to new levels of incomprehendability every day.
Sounds like 'Bama and his horde of flying monkeys have been watching fox news "experts"....
Those pics are F!@#ing clasic!!! Nice...... That sums up the entire Obummer administration.... ;)
BoringGuy45
07-29-16, 21:55
New question- where are all these "gun rights" organizations that so many of us here donate money to? Why isn't there an army of lawyers beating down the door at the ATF?
Doing what they always do: Sending us all emails telling us that they think this is bullshit but that they're too busy to do anything about it because they're busy with more important things, like getting an already pro-gun state to extend hunting time another hour longer on Sundays.
On a positive note, it has been determined that an 07 FFL/SOT does not need to pay ITAR so long as they are not cutting or milling anything. It used to be that regardless of what one did, all 07s had to pay ITAR.
http://pmddtc.state.gov/compliance/Applicability%20of%20the%20ITAR%20Registration%20Requirement%20to%20Firearms%20Manufacturers%20(Publish).pdf
That link doesn't work on Firefox, and the pdf won't come up with chrome.
Are there any other links?
I had not heard of any way out of itar with an 07.
Sent from my SGP612 using Tapatalk
That link doesn't work on Firefox, and the pdf won't come up with chrome.
Are there any other links?
I had not heard of any way out of itar with an 07.
Sent from my SGP612 using Tapatalk
Try this..
https://www.pmddtc.state.gov/compliance/documents/ITARRegReqFirearmsManufacturers.pdf
So if I buy your 6920 that you have for sale and then I buy the Magpul handguard that you have for sale.....I fill out the paperwork and hand you the money. It is now mine...correct? So now I can ask you to install the handguard?
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Yep. That is fine. But if "I" do it and offer it for sale, I'm considered a manufacturer. But I can change crap on your rifle all day long. Hell I can even rebarrel it and change the length. I can install a 9mm conversion kit including a new upper so long as it is your rifle and it's just gunsmithing.
But if I order a Remington 700 and drop it in a McMillan stock, and offer it for sale, I'm manufacturing.
Moose-Knuckle
07-30-16, 04:24
And of course we've had 10 years of conditioning where people worried about their possibly illegal bayonet mount or flash hider and even today somebody will call another gun owner out on 922r violations because he forgot to change the floorplates on one of the magazines in the picture.
This is what this latest EO reminds me of.
Has anyone ever been prosecuted for 922r violations? I understand that is supposed to deal with manufactures but come on, there are so many frankenbuilds out there with mis matched parts no way in hell anyone could argue a case in court.
Was anyone prosecuted from '94-'04 for a violating the BS evil feature count?
They're making red tape to gum up the works and hem law abiding citizens up. It's their long game . . .
Eurodriver
07-30-16, 04:45
They're making red tape to gum up the works and hem law abiding citizens up. It's their long game . . .
http://i.imgur.com/edBQBeJ.gif
Averageman
07-30-16, 07:46
I keep waiting for a background check to be initiated for magazines, ammo and optics.
I'm guessing that's going to be next.
They're making red tape to gum up the works and hem law abiding citizens up. It's their long game . . .
That's the plan. Eating the elephant one bite at a time. Can't manage to make buying lowers and building from them illegal? Just go ahead and require everyone "assembling a firearm" to register as a manufacturer with an 07 FFL. Fees, licensing, compliance docs, etc... Suddenly building out a $100 lower becomes an insanely onerous project if you were only planning on doing one.
That's the plan. Eating the elephant one bite at a time. Can't manage to make buying lowers and building from them illegal? Just go ahead and require everyone "assembling a firearm" to register as a manufacturer with an 07 FFL. Fees, licensing, compliance docs, etc... Suddenly building out a $100 lower becomes an insanely onerous project if you were only planning on doing one.
ATF letter I linked specifically exempts those that are assembling firearms from parts kits. ITAR required only if cutting/milling. But the whole thing is BS. If you don't export, you shouldn't have to pay ITAR.
Outlander Systems
07-30-16, 09:11
If a Gunsmith is milling slides for RMRs, is THAT a violation?
Averageman
07-30-16, 09:12
If a Gunsmith is milling slides for RMRs, is THAT a violation?
It would certainly seem to be.
ATF letter I linked specifically exempts those that are assembling firearms from parts kits. ITAR required only if cutting/milling. But the whole thing is BS. If you don't export, you shouldn't have to pay ITAR.
exactly. I never have been able to ascertain why the law that created ITAR includes manufacturers. the goal was to prevent transfer of weapons and tech to unfriendly countries, if you're purely a domestic operation there's no transfer going on. you're only an exporter once you plan to do business internationally
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
If a Gunsmith is milling slides for RMRs, is THAT a violation?
big issue is that so much stuff is considered "defense related" that nearly any manufacturer can be found in violation of ITAR
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
ATF letter I linked specifically exempts those that are assembling firearms from parts kits. ITAR required only if cutting/milling.
What about an engraver?
Outlander Systems
07-30-16, 09:37
The whole thing is absolutely retarded.
Try this..
https://www.pmddtc.state.gov/compliance/documents/ITARRegReqFirearmsManufacturers.pdf
Thank you sir, that worked fine.
Sent from my SGP612 using Tapatalk
This is what this latest EO reminds me of.
Has anyone ever been prosecuted for 922r violations? I understand that is supposed to deal with manufactures but come on, there are so many frankenbuilds out there with mis matched parts no way in hell anyone could argue a case in court.
Was anyone prosecuted from '94-'04 for a violating the BS evil feature count?
They're making red tape to gum up the works and hem law abiding citizens up. It's their long game . . .
I used to talk fairly regularly with an atf investigator, and we discussed 922r once, among many other things. He and several other agents were discussing it at some point, and none of them had been able to find an actual punishment for it. One may have been added since, I do not know.
Also, it should be noted that 922r covers the assembly of a banned firearm. It says nothing about possession, buying/selling, etc.
If you didn't build it, it doesn't matter.
They don't hunt for 922r violations, at least currently. They got bigger fish to fry. It's a stack on charge, mostly.
Sent from my SGP612 using Tapatalk
I just read the letter that JoshNC posted above and I can't see where a regular FFL can't simply continue to do what they. Also it specifically notes engravers to not be manufacturers.
There is an engraver here that had an in person 4 hour ATF visit was claiming them to be a manufacturer for engraving lowers. Finally when the guy got back to his office he called and said, ok, you are not a manufacturer. They have since acquired an FFL anyway, but that document is pretty clear in stating that "manufacturing" means pretty much what one would expect. Day to day mods are by the same reasoning, not manufacturing.
There is a lot of very clear language there...
ETA:... but I do realize the ATF considers almost everything to be manufacturing. IOW, ITAR is based on common sense and ATF is based on nonsense. It seems like that is what the letter is trying to say. that they realize the ATF has screwed up by it's definitions but they ( ITAR ) are working under normal every day reasoning.
So it seems like to an 07FFL could ATF-Manufacture a rifle ( change a stock ) while not falling under ITAR-Manufacture common sense rules.
IOW, manufacture by ATF standards is far more strict and lacks common sense so ITAR does not use that definition.
Eventually, cerakoting/painting will be "manufacturing", .22's will be assassin's weapons, bolt actions will be assault super sniper rifles of war, 4 wheel drives will be "tanks", and air guns will be super scary replica guns that are just as evil as the real thing.
I wonder if my Mexican drug cartel compadres' ATF handlers will be exempt from these EO's. I need my belt feds, meng.
I just read the letter that JoshNC posted above and I can't see where a regular FFL can't simply continue to do what they. Also it specifically notes engravers to not be manufacturers.
There is an engraver here that had an in person 4 hour ATF visit was claiming them to be a manufacturer for engraving lowers. Finally when the guy got back to his office he called and said, ok, you are not a manufacturer. They have since acquired an FFL anyway, but that document is pretty clear in stating that "manufacturing" means pretty much what one would expect. Day to day mods are by the same reasoning, not manufacturing.
There is a lot of very clear language there...
ETA:... but I do realize the ATF considers almost everything to be manufacturing. IOW, ITAR is based on common sense and ATF is based on nonsense. It seems like that is what the letter is trying to say. that they realize the ATF has screwed up by it's definitions but they ( ITAR ) are working under normal every day reasoning.
So it seems like to an 07FFL could ATF-Manufacture a rifle ( change a stock ) while not falling under ITAR-Manufacture common sense rules.
IOW, manufacture by ATF standards is far more strict and lacks common sense so ITAR does not use that definition.
There was also a LOT of clear language in the newsletter I got from ATF originally on the issue regarding what constitutes "manufacturing."
So now we, once again, have two official positions. A reasonable person would assume the more recent position takes precedence over the original position, but how many times has ATF flipped / flopped between two existing determinations on a whim?
And if you are being investigated and prosecuted, you get arrested FIRST, possibly even raided with inventory seized and THEN everyone argues about if you violated any ATF regulations. When ATF is putting cuffs on you and grabbing everything, it's not like you can go to the computer and pull up a PDF and go "see you guys are all wrong" and expect them to just pack up, apologize and leave.
So, does this mean an FFL would have to have be an ITAR-paying 07 to reprofile and thread an AK barrel for me? I'm a little unclear on whether this is only concerning an FFL modifying something in their inventory and then offering it for sale or if it applies to modifying a customer's weapon as well.
So, does this mean an FFL would have to have be an ITAR-paying 07 to reprofile and thread an AK barrel for me? I'm a little unclear on whether this is only concerning an FFL modifying something in their inventory and then offering it for sale or if it applies to modifying a customer's weapon as well.
No, they would not need to be. Since the firearm is NOT in their inventory, no manufacturing is being done.
There was also a LOT of clear language in the newsletter I got from ATF originally on the issue regarding what constitutes "manufacturing."
So now we, once again, have two official positions. A reasonable person would assume the more recent position takes precedence over the original position, but how many times has ATF flipped / flopped between two existing determinations on a whim?
Agreed, that's why I added the comments. I've read the ATF version of manufacture via 07FFL.... Per them, if you wave a wand over an AR and say "abracadabra you are a different AR", then you have manufactured something.
What they are doing is basic government incompetence. I do think the ITAR regs, as I read them anyway, are tying to be reasonable about the matter. ATF is outdated and obtuse in their conclusions. If they want to have all these various licenses they should say 01 is for sales only. 07 should be worded as non-ITAR gun smithing to include modifications and reconfiguration.
That, to me anyway, appears to be the intent of ITAR and the dated no longer relevant wording present in the 07 license descriptions.
It's very easy to also include wording that indicates a smith might drill, thread, etc. on a casual basis no more than X times a year. As opposed to a shop that has a guy that's chopping, threading, drilling barrels all day long every day.
The shop that installs new shocks on your car or welds in a new muffler is not a manufacturer. Nor would any sane person reason them to be. The ATF is in serious over reach mode. I would expect Obama wants their tentacles as widely spread and attached to as many things as possible before he hits the links.
I suppose the NRA will tell us all about how we got screwed after it comes to be.
another aspect to it is its a division of the state department that actually enforces ITAR provisions other than stuff physically crossing the border.
if atf brought an itar case of a gunsmith to them there's a good chance they'd tell atf to buzz off due to the different definitions of manufacturer they use, to make no mention of the fact State has far bigger fish to fry. they're way more concerned with people transferring missile tech and components useful in wmd programs.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
FromMyColdDeadHand
07-31-16, 00:33
Try this..
https://www.pmddtc.state.gov/compliance/documents/ITARRegReqFirearmsManufacturers.pdf
I'm not seeing the devil in the details here. SPecifically says things like normal gunsmithing, mounting scopes and assembling parts to a current firearm are not covered.
I am a bit thrown off with the 'cutting' and accurizing language though. Recrowning a muzzle count for a twofer. You can work on a gun as long as it doesn't make it more accurate? That's a pretty basic gunsmithing function.
You can work on a gun as long as it doesn't make it more accurate? That's a pretty basic gunsmithing function.
That's how I read it too. You have to throw in a hand full of basic government ignorance as well for it to make sense. While they may have been thinking decreasing target size from 100 yards to 1 foot. The ATF is thinking someone building arms for a gang.
All the while the law abiding citizen gets screwed.
A grade school class of average kids could write better regulations.
platoonDaddy
07-31-16, 04:44
Unlicensed drug dealers get multiple chances, a slap on the wrist, and citizenship.
.... and record contracts.
Unlicensed drug dealers get multiple chances, a slap on the wrist, and citizenship.
Yeah, but guns are dangerous....
:rolleyes:
I've read it a couple times now, and most machining functions are requiring registration with itar. I did not see any discrimination between the firearm belonging to the business or a customer.
Threading barrels was specifically mentioned.
Drilling/tapping holes for scopes/sights seemed to be mentioned as both requiring registration, and not requiring registration.
However, "improving" a firearms capability leaves a lot open to interpretation. Making parts is mentioned, of which we do somewhat regularly, as being a rural shop means getting in firearms for which many or most parts are no longer available. In no way should making a part for a nearly 100yr old Stevens crack shot single shot 22 constitute manufacturing.
Atf came out and re-interpreted "manufacturing" a couple years ago, requiring an 07 for a lot of things not previously listed.
Some years before that, atf came out and said things like the then more common saiga conversion was manufacturing, but then later dropped it.
Atf has always held that assembling an AR from parts and then selling it was manufacturing, as opposed to assembling an AR brought in by a customer, which was gunsmithing. Same for "sporterizing" a Mauser.
The difference I see is that some common gunsmithing jobs are now manufacturing.
The only way to regulate this is to limit parts sales to ffl 07 holders, and to go and check ffl 01/02 for jobs that require an 07.
Sent from my SGP612 using Tapatalk
So, the only people who can thread barrels, or do pretty much anything more than basic Fudd clean-my-rifle-for-me-because-I'm-too-stupid-to-do-it stuff, now have to pay a $2000+ a year ITAR tax??
Outlander Systems
08-01-16, 18:57
The entire thing is absolutely ****ing retarded.
Fun Fact: Amateur Radio Satellites are considered "munitions" under ITAR.
:rolleyes:
So, even if I were to use/provide open-source information regarding a home-brew radio bird, my ass could get smoked for an ITAR violation.
So, the only people who can thread barrels, or do pretty much anything more than basic Fudd clean-my-rifle-for-me-because-I'm-too-stupid-to-do-it stuff, now have to pay a $2000+ a year ITAR tax??
To be ITAR or EAR compliant, a manufacturer or exporter whose articles or services appear on the USML or CCL lists must register with the U.S. State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC).
The ATF will say if you thread a barrel you should be an 07FFL, but not necessarily an ITAR situation. Depends on the barrel.
The ATF will say if you thread a barrel you should be an 07FFL, but not necessarily an ITAR situation. Depends on the barrel.
Threading BBLs owned by customers is gunsmithing, and is type 01. Threading BBLs for resale is MFG, and is type 07.
FromMyColdDeadHand
08-01-16, 20:48
Threading BBLs owned by customers is gunsmithing, and is type 01. Threading BBLs for resale is MFG, and is type 07.
Is it as simple as having two POs?
Is it as simple as having two POs?
LOL. You'd need to start with TWO FFLs each one with approved code and zoning, occupational licenses, etc. It would be easier and cheaper to simply upgrade a current 01 FFL to a 07 FFL. I looked into doing this last year but that was when ITAR compliance was required so I just discontinued a lot of things I used to offer in terms of custom setups.
Not sure what the current status is regarding ITAR and being an 07. I know some guys who are still paying that shit and they do zero exports.
snowdog650
08-01-16, 22:47
Hmmm.
It's really beginning to look a lot like California around here ...
If you are an 07, you are supposed to pay ITAR, whether or not you export.
The NSSF is supposedly trying to fight that now, but I have no idea where it's going.
I went and re-read a lot of it. Pretty much most machining operations, and part making, or anything that improves the mechanical accuracy of the firearm requires ITAR registration, even as an 01 or 02 FFL.
Mounting an optic does not count, but drilling and tapping to mount an optic does. Threading barrels does. Making parts does, so fixing an old firearm that parts are no longer available for is now manufacturing.
Sent from my SGP612 using Tapatalk
There's a petition seeking to undo the recent actions imposing ITAR regulations on gunsmiths. Let's all sign it and get it over turned!
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pet...nsmithing-itar
Link doesn't work, can you update?
I found it by looking through the list of petitions.
I just signed it this evening... here
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/remove-gunsmithing-itar
Why would this be important? Do gunsmiths not exist in other countries?
There's a petition seeking to undo the recent actions imposing ITAR regulations on gunsmiths. Let's all sign it and get it over turned!
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pet...nsmithing-itar
No offense but you'd have a better chance of getting a response regarding a US project to build a Death Star than you would getting a reply about anything like this even if you got a million signatures.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.