Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: NEWS: Are you licensed to reload that ammo?

  1. #1
    Member TruBluTex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    226

    Exclamation NEWS: Are you licensed to reload that ammo?


    http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=95733

    WEAPONS OF CHOICE
    Are you licensed to reload that ammo?
    Alarm raised over treaty provision to ban activity

    Posted: April 21, 2009
    10:00 pm Eastern

    By Bob Unruh
    © 2009 WorldNetDaily

    President Obama, who supported the handgun ban in Washington, D.C., before it was tossed by the Supreme Court, since his election has watched various proposals to ban "assault" weapons, require handgun owners to submit to mental health evaluations, and sparked a rush on ammunition purchases that caused some retailers to name him their salesman of the year. Now he apparently is going after those to reload their ammunition.

    It was during an official visit earlier this month to Mexico that he affirmed his support for a proposed international treaty that addresses "firearms trafficking."

    According to a blogger who follows such issues, the treaty was adopted by President Clinton years ago, but never ratified by the U.S. Senate, a goal Obama now has adopted.

    The writer, B.A. Lawson, says, "If you reload your own ammo you may find yourself engaged in 'Illicit Manufacturing' of ammunition under an arms control treaty that President Obama started pushing last week in Mexico."

    "Virtually everyone who supports the 2nd Amendment or has an interest in firearms has heard the numerous recent reports of ammunition shortages. The shortages have extended to reloading supplies that many folks rely on to keep their shooting costs down or to assemble exotic or hard to find ammunition. Many shooters have considered reloading their own ammo as insurance against limited supplies should legislation be enacted that would make ammo more scarce or dramatically more expensive," the blogger continued.

    "Those thoughts may be in vain if the current administration is successful in getting the 'INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION AGAINST THE ILLICIT MANUFACTURING OF AND TRAFFICKING IN FIREARMS, AMMUNITION, EXPLOSIVES, AND OTHER RELATED MATERIALS' treaty passed."
    The treaty defines "Illicit manufacturing" as "the manufacture or assembly of firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials."
    It then gives authority for that activity only with "a license from a competent governmental authority of the State Party where the manufacture or assembly takes place."

    "The section … clearly identifies ammo reloaders that are not licensed by the government as 'Illicit Manufacturers' of ammunition. Now that we have reloaders properly labeled, lets move down to Article IV to see what we should do with them," the commentary said.

    He then quotes Article IV, which states, "State Parties that have not yet done so shall adopt the necessary legislative or other measures to establish as criminal offenses under their domestic law the illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives, and other related materials."

    "This is pretty straightforward. If you reload ammunition without a license after the treaty is signed you will be a criminal," Lawson wrote.
    The National Rifle Association said the treaty "does include language suggesting that it is not intended to restrict 'lawful ownership and use' of firearms. Despite those words, the NRA knows that anti-gun advocates will still try to use this treaty to attack gun ownership in the U.S."

    The treaty is available online.

    At the SnowflakesinHell blog, the writer said there's no mistaking the language.

    Even accessories "which can be attached to a firearm" are targeted.

    "It would presumably also ban home manufacture of these items without a government license. Do you own trigger jobs? Reload your own ammunition? Not any more, not without a government license!"
    The Examiner.com said such international gun restrictions are unacceptable.

    John Velleco, director of federal affairs for Gun Owners of America, notes the benefits for Obama of having such rules in treaties, not legislation.
    "If ratified and the U.S. is found not to be in compliance with any provisions of the treaty – such as a provision that would outlaw reloading ammunition without a government license – President Obama would be empowered to implement regulations without congressional approval," he wrote.

    "If the kind of 'change' that Obama wants is for the United States to take its marching orders from third world countries regarding our gun rights, we're in big trouble!"
    America...land of the free, home of the brave and infiltrated by the blind & naive.

    Psalms 109:8

  2. #2

    Default YEP

    It also gives affiliated governments the right to enforce this treaty on American soil; Using INTERPOL as the authorizing agency.
    " Americans will never need the 2nd Amendment, until the government tries to take it away."

    On the road of life..... Pot holes keep things interesting !

  3. #3
    Member TruBluTex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brav01 View Post
    It also gives affiliated governments the right to enforce this treaty on American soil; Using INTERPOL as the authorizing agency.
    Yup... All part of the grand vision of those who want a glorious "world order".

    I keep reflecting back to the movie "The Demolition Man" and the whacked out mentality portrayed by the people. I laughed at such a prospect but now...
    America...land of the free, home of the brave and infiltrated by the blind & naive.

    Psalms 109:8

  4. #4
    Sponsor ADfields's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Missing Palmer AK in Phonix AZ.
    Posts
    6,416

    Default

    GOA sent an action alert to me last night about this, you guys are 100% right.
    Andy
    On the web= C-lazy-F.co
    Email= Andy@C-lazy-F.co
    Call/Text 602-315-2406
    Phoenix Arizona

  5. #5

    Default I have to chuckle

    I was given a lot of flak recently because, among other things on a post I wrote I said we were losing our rights. Gee, you think? We have to keep writing and E-mailing and protesting. never give up the fight for the right.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Knik-Fairview, Alaska
    Posts
    927

    Default

    All I can say is, thank God for Mike Kelly! The Feds are already protesting such legislation saying that it is invalid. But hey, it's Alaskan law. They better have a warrant from a STATE authority before they go past MY No Trespassing signs...


    Posted: April 16, 2009
    Contact: Derek Miller, 465-6879, Legislative Aide


    (Juneau) - The Alaska State House today passed House Bill (HB) 186, or the Alaska Firearms Freedom Act. Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Fairbanks, sponsored the bill, which exempts firearms, firearm accessories and ammunition manufactured and retained in Alaska from restrictive federal firearm control laws.


    House Bill 186 frees the State of Alaska from restrictive federal firearm regulation and allows us to take responsible regulation into our own hands.
    ~ Rep. Mike Kelly

    HB 186 passed the House floor by a vote of 32 to 7.


    Brian

  7. #7
    Member Darreld Walton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Arco, Idaho
    Posts
    782

    Default Adding Gas to the Fire...

    Two separate orders of gunpowder from Natchez Shooters' Supplies in the last week to my home have been delayed in Chattanooga for "ADDITIONAL inspection by UNIDENTIFIED Governmental Agency beyond the control of UPS".
    So, what, am I on yet another list ahead of any legislation?
    Last edited by Darreld Walton; 04-22-2009 at 05:51. Reason: .

  8. #8
    Member TruBluTex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    226

    Default

    That's not good. I ordered 7K of .223 bullets & brass to reload between myself and two other friends from Georgia Arms. Hope it didn't run into any issues.
    America...land of the free, home of the brave and infiltrated by the blind & naive.

    Psalms 109:8

  9. #9

    Default Ummmm

    Quote Originally Posted by tananaBrian View Post
    All I can say is, thank God for Mike Kelly! The Feds are already protesting such legislation saying that it is invalid. But hey, it's Alaskan law. They better have a warrant from a STATE authority before they go past MY No Trespassing signs...


    Posted: April 16, 2009
    Contact: Derek Miller, 465-6879, Legislative Aide


    (Juneau) - The Alaska State House today passed House Bill (HB) 186, or the Alaska Firearms Freedom Act. Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Fairbanks, sponsored the bill, which exempts firearms, firearm accessories and ammunition manufactured and retained in Alaska from restrictive federal firearm control laws.


    House Bill 186 frees the State of Alaska from restrictive federal firearm regulation and allows us to take responsible regulation into our own hands.
    ~ Rep. Mike Kelly

    HB 186 passed the House floor by a vote of 32 to 7.


    Brian
    Even the NEW legislation proposed by Mr. Kelly won't get you around this legislation and enforcement. Combine this treaty with the Patriot Act and the Law Enforcement agency doesn't have to get a judge to sign the warranty; AND the people who come kicking in your door MIGHT NOT even be american law enforcement officers.
    " Americans will never need the 2nd Amendment, until the government tries to take it away."

    On the road of life..... Pot holes keep things interesting !

  10. #10

    Default

    How do I find out who voted for this bill and against? I want to make sure my representative voted in favor for this bill. Thanks

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Posts
    1,462

    Default

    I find this site helpful Hewey.

    http://w3.legis.state.ak.us/index.php

    We all need to keep letting our elected officials know of our concerns. I beleive that it does help.

    Doc

  12. #12

    Default What happened to HB 186?

    OK, HB 186 passed the House. What happened in the Senate? Was it passed there too? Hopefully the Guv is onboard with it.

    Forestar
    In God We Trust.

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tananaBrian View Post
    All I can say is, thank God for Mike Kelly! The Feds are already protesting such legislation saying that it is invalid. But hey, it's Alaskan law. They better have a warrant from a STATE authority before they go past MY No Trespassing signs...


    (Juneau) - The Alaska State House today passed House Bill (HB) 186, or the Alaska Firearms Freedom Act. Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Fairbanks, sponsored the bill, which exempts firearms, firearm accessories and ammunition manufactured and retained in Alaska from restrictive federal firearm control laws.


    House Bill 186 frees the State of Alaska from restrictive federal firearm regulation and allows us to take responsible regulation into our own hands.
    ~ Rep. Mike Kelly

    HB 186 passed the House floor by a vote of 32 to 7.


    Brian
    So extrapolating from here and assuming this were law the following would be true. Since the receiver or frame is defined by federal law as the firearm all the other parts are not relevant. So someone setting up a machine shop in AK producing only receivers or frames and marking them "Made in Alaska" would be 100% in compliance. Adding parts after the fact not made in Alaska would not violate federal law since they are not firearms by definition. Of course, someone has to be the first to try it and deal with all the charges the feds put on them and spend the next 10 years and millions of dollars defending this position. All the while hoping they don't end up in jail. So at the end of the day it's all meaningless.

  14. #14

    Default NO

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack49 View Post
    So extrapolating from here and assuming this were law the following would be true. Since the receiver or frame is defined by federal law as the firearm all the other parts are not relevant. So someone setting up a machine shop in AK producing only receivers or frames and marking them "Made in Alaska" would be 100% in compliance. Adding parts after the fact not made in Alaska would not violate federal law since they are not firearms by definition. Of course, someone has to be the first to try it and deal with all the charges the feds put on them and spend the next 10 years and millions of dollars defending this position. All the while hoping they don't end up in jail. So at the end of the day it's all meaningless.
    The only firearm parts that DO NOT have to be manufactured in Alaska and assembled into a firearm to be "Made in Alaska" legal are; springs pins, bolts and nuts and the original raw materials to machine the parts from. That's the way I read this new law.
    The ONLY question becomes to what extent is the Attorney General willing to deffend the States and Citizens rights that comply to this legislation; AS Required by the legislation. IT may be much harder to deffend if the deffendant is extradited to DC since this would be a Federal Matter and the State Federal court would be considered partial.
    " Americans will never need the 2nd Amendment, until the government tries to take it away."

    On the road of life..... Pot holes keep things interesting !

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brav01 View Post
    The only firearm parts that DO NOT have to be manufactured in Alaska and assembled into a firearm to be "Made in Alaska" legal are; springs pins, bolts and nuts and the original raw materials to machine the parts from. That's the way I read this new law.
    The ONLY question becomes to what extent is the Attorney General willing to deffend the States and Citizens rights that comply to this legislation; AS Required by the legislation. IT may be much harder to deffend if the deffendant is extradited to DC since this would be a Federal Matter and the State Federal court would be considered partial.
    You are missing the point. A firearm is defined by federal law as the frame or receiver that has the serial number on it. An Alaska manufacturer could for example manufacture 1911 frames and sell them as is. These are legally defined as firearms. This manufacture meets the definition in the proposed state law and it meets the definition of a firearm by federal law. The rest of the parts are as irrelevant as a scope mounted on a rifle. They are not regulated in any way and can be put on by the end user. From a legal perspective a slide, barrel etc is no different than a scope or a new grip. It's an unregulated part. By law the frame is the gun and it has no springs or other parts attached to it. Which is why the Feds will use every tool in their reach to prosecute the first person that tries it and put them in jail. Which is why the proposed law is meaningless.

    Based on your previous posts I think we both see this as an exercise in futility. I was just pointing out that the true context of what this law means is that Alaskans could produce almost any firearm in existence by just machining frames and receivers. Which is why this law will be so hotly opposed by the Feds. If it could ever really happen it would take all the teeth out of Federal Gun laws in AK. And therefore it's not going to be allowed to happen.

  16. #16
    Sponsor ADfields's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Missing Palmer AK in Phonix AZ.
    Posts
    6,416

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack49 View Post
    You are missing the point. A firearm is defined by federal law as the frame or receiver that has the serial number on it. An Alaska manufacturer could for example manufacture 1911 frames and sell them as is. These are legally defined as firearms. This manufacture meets the definition in the proposed state law and it meets the definition of a firearm by federal law. The rest of the parts are as irrelevant as a scope mounted on a rifle. They are not regulated in any way and can be put on by the end user. From a legal perspective a slide, barrel etc is no different than a scope or a new grip. It's an unregulated part. By law the frame is the gun and it has no springs or other parts attached to it. Which is why the Feds will use every tool in their reach to prosecute the first person that tries it and put them in jail. Which is why the proposed law is meaningless.

    Based on your previous posts I think we both see this as an exercise in futility. I was just pointing out that the true context of what this law means is that Alaskans could produce almost any firearm in existence by just machining frames and receivers. Which is why this law will be so hotly opposed by the Feds. If it could ever really happen it would take all the teeth out of Federal Gun laws in AK. And therefore it's not going to be allowed to happen.
    It's the definition of a firearm in the state law that matters not what the Fed's say it is. That’s what brav01 was saying, he read the wording of the State bill and it defines what it covers.

    As for the fed not letting it fly I am not so sure what they will do about it. The only way they are able to get their hooks into what happen in a state is if something crosses from one state to another. That said I don’t think it will trump the firearms acts that ban things like new machineguns from entering circulation. I do think it would make it leagle to build and sell all the guns you want in Alaska, but when someone you sold to takes one to another State you’re sunk if you have no FFL!! We could all build our own and be fine, but under the current law we can build 1 per year anyway. It will be fun to see how this shot across the bow plays out don’t ya think?
    Andy
    On the web= C-lazy-F.co
    Email= Andy@C-lazy-F.co
    Call/Text 602-315-2406
    Phoenix Arizona

  17. #17
    Member frankd4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Miami, Florida
    Posts
    52

    Default Wwbfd

    Congress must ratify the treaty and many in the House and Senate view it as a direct violation of the bill of rights the United States has singed many treaties pending ratification by congress most never see the light of day Obama is a politician as such he signed knowing full well that congress will not, If it did pass then we all have some thinking and hard choices to make; better to fight together then hang alone.
    Ted Kennedy’s car has killed more people than my gun!

  18. #18

    Default HB 186 also includes ammunition

    OK, if the receiver is the "regulated" part of the firearm that would have to be made in Alaska in order to qualify for exemption, what about the reloading components (HB 186 also exempts ammunition). Reloading components are not currently regulated (serialized, registered, permitted, etc.), so what are the implications? Would cases, primers, powders, bullets have to be Made in Alaska, or could ammunition be manufactured (i.e., assembled) from components originating outside the State, and still be exempt?

    Interesting.

    Forestar
    In God We Trust.

  19. #19
    Sponsor ADfields's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Missing Palmer AK in Phonix AZ.
    Posts
    6,416

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by frankd4 View Post
    Congress must ratify the treaty and many in the House and Senate view it as a direct violation of the bill of rights the United States has singed many treaties pending ratification by congress most never see the light of day Obama is a politician as such he signed knowing full well that congress will not, If it did pass then we all have some thinking and hard choices to make; better to fight together then hang alone.
    Yup, very good take on it. Also better to fight together with words now and hope we don't need to fight with arms later. I am in all the way, been very active with the words so if the arms do come out I likely will be in the other side’s crosshairs from the get go!! You only live once I guess.
    Andy
    On the web= C-lazy-F.co
    Email= Andy@C-lazy-F.co
    Call/Text 602-315-2406
    Phoenix Arizona

  20. #20
    Sponsor ADfields's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Missing Palmer AK in Phonix AZ.
    Posts
    6,416

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Forestar View Post
    OK, if the receiver is the "regulated" part of the firearm that would have to be made in Alaska in order to qualify for exemption, what about the reloading components (HB 186 also exempts ammunition). Reloading components are not currently regulated (serialized, registered, permitted, etc.), so what are the implications? Would cases, primers, powders, bullets have to be Made in Alaska, or could ammunition be manufactured (i.e., assembled) from components originating outside the State, and still be exempt?

    Interesting.

    Forestar
    All this stuff depends on the wording of the state law and then how the state court system interprets that wording over time with case law. To illiterate what I mean I will tell a story of a nightmare the wife and I went through.

    My wife ripped the cartilage out of her knee at work and needed a total replacement so we got an education in wording and case law the hard way. When Frank was Governor he changed the wording of the workers comp law by one little word. It used to read that the work accident had to be “A” major cause of the injury and Frank changed that to “The” major cause of the injury. Sounds simple enough but this in effect tossed out all the case law so no one knows what constitutes “The major cause of the injury.” So the insurance company said should have refused to do the duty that caused the injury and her agreeing to do it was “The major cause of her injury” and refused to pay a dime! Took us 3 years with the help in many hearings of 3 great doctors who came to our aid and a very good attorney to make them settle for less than she was due, but she got her knee fixed after over 3 years. The insurance company wanted to go all the way and set the case law with my wife.
    Andy
    On the web= C-lazy-F.co
    Email= Andy@C-lazy-F.co
    Call/Text 602-315-2406
    Phoenix Arizona

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •