Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 75

Thread: Stag Arms Gets FFL Revoked

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    1,052
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Iraqgunz View Post
    [B]
    If they cannot account for those receivers they have big issues. In fact, most people will tell you that many dealers get shut down for sloppy record keeping and losing inventory which is why Red Jacket lost their FFL several years back. Vince and then later Joe and Charlie were the ones who were holding the FFL until everything imploded.

    We had that happen recently to a LGS, but this just wasn't a few guns it was like 2500 missing, some FA. ATF gave them plenty of chances to correct it but wasn't able to or didn't want to, not sure which.
    The price of liberty is, always has been, and always will be blood: The person who is not willing to die for his liberty has already lost it to the first scoundrel who is willing to risk dying to violate that person's liberty! Are you free?
    --- Andrew Ford

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    2,162
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Iraqgunz View Post
    Where does the Constitution state that a firearm doesn't need a serial number? It doesn't. Everything in the Constitution is subject to some regulation. A serial in no way takes away your right to own or possess a firearm.
    The Constitution doesn't state a lot of things. That doesn't mean they are authorized, particularly when dealing with the federal government vs that of the states'.

    Quote Originally Posted by JasonB1 View Post
    The Constitution specifically lists what government may do. Dabbling in the firearms business(other than barring states from setting up tariffs and so on which goes for any product) including demanding serial numbers or other manufacturing techniques isn't listed in their allowed functions at all.
    Exactly this.

    Quote Originally Posted by JulyAZ View Post
    No one forced Stag or any other manufacture to get into the business of manufacturing guns. By getting all the licenses through the ATF you're agreeing to play by their rules.

    I don't get why people want to argue the legality of it. They got machines shops that can easily converted to manufacture something that doesn't require ATF overhead and still be profitable. If they want to be a gun manufacturers then they've agree to play with the ATF.
    Sure, but your premise is that that they have the grounds to make these particular rules.
    No one forced the individual politicians and bureaucrats to become what they became. By getting into the business of government, they agreed to play by the rules - the Constitution.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cokie View Post
    People want to argue the legality of it because we should all be arguing against these politicians who make these laws and regs making it difficult to acquire or outright preventing citizens from having products specifically protected by the constitution. In the country as created by our founding fathers, serial numbers should not get stag in trouble and I think anyone who agrees with Connecticut encourages the nanny state.
    Well put. We are a nation of laws, not men, but those laws are not merely anything that a men write down. If they were, all tyranny would be justified, as it's justification would rest on pen and paper alone.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,303
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)

    Stag Arms Gets FFL Revoked

    Quote Originally Posted by Benito View Post
    Sure, but your premise is that that they have the grounds to make these particular rules.
    No one forced the individual politicians and bureaucrats to become what they became. By getting into the business of government, they agreed to play by the rules - the Constitution.

    I'm not stating that they have the authority to make these laws. They are law and are currently in place, so to hold a license to make or hold the firearms they must be followed or face federal charges. if they deem that is to big a risk then get out the game. They know this everyday, it is not a surprise.

    Until we can get these laws change if you could find good standing as why they are unconstitutional that will hold up all the way to SCOTUS, then these remain law.

    We are a community that IMO are better than the left as we comprehend and follow these laws more so than any other group of citizen that follow any other laws. We have too, or face federal charges on a daily basis. Until we can get unconstitutional laws off the books. I deem that the NFA is unconstitutional but as a act of rebellion I'm not gonna run out and make SBRs without a tax stamp.

    With what we all do, we have to be better and we have to be bigger than anyone who challenges us. Other wise we are the "radical gun owners", the "crazy conspiracy theorist" yet we always bring the facts. We can't afford to be wrong, in any situation.

    So sometimes that means compromise and play friendly with the ATF to get what we want, or until we cans get the laws changed.

    They could come around and say Heller protect it your right to own a gun, but doesn't protect the right to manufacture it. Then where do we go?
    Last edited by JulyAZ; 12-23-15 at 15:22.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    25,593
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Iraqgunz View Post
    A. Did anyone actually read the article and the original articles when it happened? Probably should get the info from elsewhere other than "Bearing Arms".

    B. Obliterated serial numbers and losing track of 200 firearms is a pretty big deal. Add to this an anti-gun administration, being in an anti-gun state and the outcome isn't hard to predict.

    http://fox61.com/2015/12/22/stag-arm...-gun-business/
    If I remember correctly Fast and Furious lost track of more than that and one of those guns was used to murder a law enforcement officer. When does ATF get their license to operate revoked?
    It's hard to be a ACLU hating, philosophically Libertarian, socially liberal, fiscally conservative, scientifically grounded, agnostic, porn admiring gun owner who believes in self determination.

    Chuck, we miss ya man.

    كافر

  5. #35
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,114
    Feedback Score
    0
    Unfortunately, this can be the result from not following cGMP. Their regulatory and compliance department should have never allowed this.
    Any company that does not look into cGMP and comply with that is short sighted. Meeting compliance can make a harder case then when they look at cGMP that can exceed that for many purposes beyond this issue.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    674
    Feedback Score
    32 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cokie View Post
    This.
    I was gonna say where does the constitution say it can allow government to require businesses to serialize anything?
    Article I, Section 8, Clause 3. The commerce clause.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    546
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by TF82 View Post
    Article I, Section 8, Clause 3. The commerce clause.
    I was just about to post the same. I'm no constitutional scholar, but the government can do many things that are not specifically enumerated in the Constitution because of the interstate commerce clause.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    10,531
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    A Bit more on this from another article;
    Stag Arms Pleads Guilty To Violating Federal Firearms Laws; Owner Will Sell Company - Hartford Courant
    The government said about 200 firearms could not be accounted for at Stag's John Downey Drive facilities. "We don't know where they are, whether they were stolen, whether they're on the streets, or whether they're just in the wrong hands," Daly said.
    The company pleaded guilty to possession of 62 machine guns and machine gun receivers that were registered to another entity or not registered at all. ATF agents found the automatic rifles and receivers at the New Britain factory during an inspection July 15, 2014.
    Eleven machine guns were registered to an entity in the Philippines, one to a police department and 25 to another manufacturer. The remaining 25 machine gun receivers — the portion of the firearm that houses the operating parts and on which the serial number is engraved — did not have serial numbers, the government said.
    Malkowski told U.S. Magistrate Judge Donna F. Martinez during the company's plea hearing that the machine guns in question were to be sold, but the sales agreement fell through. Stag Arms kept the weapons and failed to update records, he told the judge.
    In 2007, ATF inspectors found instances of poor record-keeping, administrative violations and regulatory violations, but worked with Stag to bring it into compliance, said Nealy Earl, area head of industry operations for ATF.
    The problems found during the 2014 compliance review at Stag Arms were similar or worse than those found in 2007, prompting the recommendation for criminal action, Earl said. Assistant U.S. Attorney S. Dave Vatti described the new violations as "egregious and systemic."

    So having gone through this before, they got caught again and the violations this time were worse than in 2007.
    Yeah, they had it coming.

    If they care so little about their licence, business or going to jail, how do you think they feel about keeping their Quality Control and Customer Service in order?

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    N.E. OH
    Posts
    6,742
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by jackblack73 View Post
    I was just about to post the same. I'm no constitutional scholar, but the government can do many things that are not specifically enumerated in the Constitution because of the interstate commerce clause.
    No. Can because of ignorance maybe.

    Quote Originally Posted by TF82 View Post
    Article I, Section 8, Clause 3. The commerce clause.

    Regulate did not mean then, what it means today. Intetent is the key word, and it seems to have been lost lately in reference to the constitution.

    "Commerce clause" is typically up there with "separation of church and state"
    Last edited by MegademiC; 12-23-15 at 22:05.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    748
    Feedback Score
    4 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by JulyAZ View Post
    No one forced Stag or any other manufacture to get into the business of manufacturing guns. By getting all the licenses through the ATF you're agreeing to play by their rules.

    I don't get why people want to argue the legality of it. They got machines shops that can easily converted to manufacture something that doesn't require ATF overhead and still be profitable. If they want to be a gun manufacturers then they've agree to play with the ATF.
    No one forced the federal government to do something not specifically listed in it's allowed list of functions.

    Amendment X

    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

    Find where it is delegated to them. Otherwise we have the following:

    “Our government ... teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.” - JUSTICE LOUIS D. BRANDEIS

    Creating exemptions for itself does not make it all good either.

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •