New Executive Order to Control Gunsmiths

[Armed Eye Doc]

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20160727/just-in-time-for-his-party-s-convention-obama-administration-releases-latest-executive-gun-control

On Friday, July 22, just as members of his party were gathering in Philadelphia to coronate Hillary Clinton as their presidential nominee, the Obama Administration once again released a sweeping gun control measure by executive fiat. 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, “manufacturers” are required to register with DDTC at significant expense or risk onerous criminal penalties. 

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.

By way of background, the AECA and ITAR concern rules by which military materiel is exported from, and imported to, the United States. The so-called “defense articles” governed by the AECA/ITAR are compiled in what is known as the U.S. Munitions List and include some, but not all, firearms and ammunition, as well as their parts and components. Thus, for purposes of the regime, a spring or floorplate from the magazine of a controlled firearm is subject to the same regulatory framework as the firearm itself.

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.

Adding to the confusion, the Gun Control Act of 1968 and its amendments (GCA) also regulate firearm manufacturing, importing, and exporting. Both of the laws also use the same or similar terms but apply them in different ways. Thus, what triggers the legal requirement for an entity to be registered as a “manufacturer” under the AECA/ITAR may or may not also bring that entity within the scope of the GCA, and vice versa. 

DDTC’s new “guidance” only makes this situation worse by coming up with a confusing and counterintuitive list of activities that it considers “gunsmithing” versus “manufacturing” (despite the fact that it insists it relies on the “ordinary, contemporary, common meaning” of those terms). 

For example, DDTC generally labels procedures that involve cutting, drilling, or machining of an existing firearm in order to improve its accuracy or operation or to change its caliber as “manufacturing,” even if they do not create a new and distinct firearm. This includes threading a muzzle for a muzzle brake or blueprinting that requires machining of a barrel.   

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. 

For those who are confused by the guidance, DDTC offers the option of requesting an advisory opinion through the agency. The regulation providing for such opinions, however, states they “are not binding on the Department of State, and may not be used in future matters before the Department.” Moreover, the request involves typical bureaucratic hoops to negotiate, including providing both an original and seven copies of the request and supporting information in hardcopy form. 

DDTC’s move appears aimed at expanding the regulatory sweep of the AECA/ITAR and culling many smaller commercial gunsmithing operations that do not have the means to pay the annual registration fee or the sophistication to negotiate DDTC’s confusing maze of bureaucracy. Like ATF’s early “guidance” this year on the GCA’s licensing requirement for firearm “dealers,” it is also likely to have a significant chilling effect on activity that would not even be considered regulated.   

The administration’s latest move serves as a timely reminder of how the politicized and arrogant abuse of executive power can be used to suppress Second Amendment rights and curtail lawful firearm-related commerce. That lesson should not be forgotten when voters go to the polls this November.  

[EngrBob]

And so it begins........... 

[Armed Eye Doc]

36 minutes ago, EngrBob said:

And so it continues........... 

FIFY

[survivalshop]

•   This will not hold up in court , just hope it goes through a 2nd amendment fed. judge .  The cocksucker has only a couple of months left & he will do a lot more , Im sure !

[EngrBob]

3 hours ago, survivalshop said:

•   This will not hold up in court , just hope it goes through a 2nd amendment fed. judge .  The cocksucker has only a couple of months left & he will do a lot more , Im sure !

I wish you were correct; however, I expect that even if a federal judge sets it aside, the government will appeal to a panel in the District of Columbia.  A panel or the full court will overturn the set aside.  If it is appealed to the SCOTUS it will be upheld if the court is the same as it is now since it will be a 4 - 4 vote.  Even if Trump is elected the commies will block any appointment until after the appeal is heard.  If Clinton is elected the game is over.  There are simply too many judges on the federal bench that don't really believe in the Constitution but instead believe that since they have had more history to observe than the Framers of the Constitution, are really more advanced and wise, and that they can make the Constitution better by a skilled interpretation.  I hope I am wrong, but I doubt it.

[DNP]

They must think they're closing the 80% builder down.....

[jtallen83]

Their only thought is to get and keep as many weapons out of our hands as they can. We need to fight back at every turn, just as the father of socialism promoted;

 

[survivalshop]

 Another aspect is another large Tax , not only for the Tax income , but another way to keep people from becoming or staying in business as a FFL in Gunsmithing , by having an outrages licensing fee. That in its self is a prospective lawsuit for discrimination , of some sort . 

  I remember after getting into boating , the State of Ohio came out with a fee to own a boat , it was regulated by length of the boat by foot , I think it was something like $ 10 per ft.. It was challenged & over turned in court & found it was discriminatory because it was directed solely against pleasure boaters .  

  My point is , making a Gunsmith a Manufacturer because they cut a dovetail into a pistol slide , when the legislated description of a Manufacturer contradicts this Exc. order , should be enough to get it stuck down .

[DNP]

Wait until this rolls into other markets. I wonder if I'll have to register as an automobile manufacturer when I put a trump sticker on the bumper?

[survivalshop]

2 hours ago, DNP said:

Wait until this rolls into other markets. I wonder if I'll have to register as an automobile manufacturer when I put a trump sticker on the bumper?

 No , you will be a registered Terrorist  

[Armed Eye Doc]

5 hours ago, DNP said:

They must think they're closing the 80% builder down.....

It currently seems to be aimed at "commercial" gunsmiths.  80% lowers are designed to be completed by an individual and not for profit.  That doesn't sound included if I read the story correctly. 

[shepp]

53 minutes ago, Armed Eye Doc said:

It currently seems to be aimed at "commercial" gunsmiths.  80% lowers are designed to be completed by an individual and not for profit.  That doesn't sound included if I read the story correctly. 

I think what he meant was the idiots in office thought it would target the 80% ers but they're to stupid to realize that it won't stop it like every other stupid rule they invent 

[survivalshop]

22 hours ago, Armed Eye Doc said:

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.

  This is what should bother anyone thinking of converting an 80% lower into a working one .It would make you a manufacturer & don't think the BATFE will not use it as a charge if they want , if you don't think so , you don't know the BATFE. 

 Since you are not an FFL & do not have the new Manufacturers license, you can throw out you being an individual making a personal firearm. his new Executive order bypasses the CCA of 68 completely , so why would in not apply an individual . This new BS also puts any regular FFL to the same restrictions , because how many out there that do not designate they are a Gunsmith only on their FFL & do many services that do not need a competent Gunsmith .

Edited July 30, 2016 by survivalshop

[EngrBob]

1 minute ago, survivalshop said:

  This is what should bother anyone thinking of converting an 80% lower into a working one .It would make you a manufacturer & don't think the BATFE will not use it as a charge if they want , if you don't think so , you don't know the BATFE. 

 Since you are not an FFL & do not have the new Manufacturers license, you can trow out you being an individual making a personal firearm. his new Executive order bypasses the CCA of 68 completely , so why would in not apply an individual . This new BS also puts any regular FFL to the same restrictions , because how many out there that do not designate they are a Gunsmith only on their FFL & do many services that do not need a competent Gunsmith .

Exactly.  That is why I believe they will do everything they can to allow this to stand.  The only possibility is for Trump to be elected.  Since it is an Executive Order it can be disolved by the next President.  Think Hillary will?

[Armed Eye Doc]

Assuming an unbiased court, (OK, I'll stop laughing now) the word commercial  implies that something is for sale.  Therefore, a personal use 80% lower should be legal under this new commandment.  That said, I would be willing to bet that they intend to close that avenue as well.

[EngrBob]

2 hours ago, Armed Eye Doc said:

Assuming an unbiased court, (OK, I'll stop laughing now) the word commercial  implies that something is for sale.  Therefore, a personal use 80% lower should be legal under this new commandment.  That said, I would be willing to bet that they intend to close that avenue as well.

I believe that is the primary objective. The single use statement seems to give away their intent.

[GRA]

I have to agree with Bob; the intent of this was to no doubt shut off the 80% option.  I also agree with Doc in that the language of it, although entirely confusing, lends a good argument in favor of the personal use remaining.  No doubt; if the Wicked Spin-Headed Witch gets in office it will have to go to court, which she will most likely pack with communists and there the argument will be lost.

[GRA]

On July 29, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Armed Eye Doc said:

For those who are confused by the guidance, DDTC offers the option of requesting an advisory opinion through the agency. The regulation providing for such opinions, ... ”

For crying out loud ... give me a F@#$%&G break !!!

[GRA]

On July 29, 2016 at 4:11 PM, Armed Eye Doc said:

For those who are confused by the guidance, DDTC offers the option of requesting an advisory opinion through the agency. The regulation providing for such opinions, ... ”

For crying out loud ... give me a F@#$%&G break !!!     

[GRA]

I hope somewhere in there they can't later pull a rabbit out of the hat regarding night vision and infrared scopes.  If so, then this is possibly indicative of their future intentions ... THEY FEAR US and this is proof.

This is a further display by these clown of the basic identifiable communist traits; fear and paranoia, corruption, domination, and control.

Edited August 10, 2016 by GRA

[MLC]

I don't know how many of you are familiar with The Gun Collective channel on Youtube, but there's a pretty good video on there about this very topic.

 

 

[GRA]

FWIW ... Just got back from a gun show here today.  There was HUGE estate sale and everything was being sold as a private sale.  No NIICS checks were required/conducted at purchase.  I guess the preceding Exec order was flushed, or at least it's being ignored.

[bubbas4570]

There was a "gun gripes" video put out by Iraqveteran1888's youtube channel about this very subject, explaining it as much as can be in layman's terms. He even linked to the above-mentioned gun collective video for further assistance in figuring this one out.....

[survivalshop]

  Its still fuking confusing & thats probably the way they want it !  Sounds like entrapment to me .

[sketch]

Im with stupid and didnt finish the fine print..