Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NEWS: Are you licensed to reload that ammo?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 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
    YEP

    It also gives affiliated governments the right to enforce this treaty on American soil; Using INTERPOL as the authorizing agency.

    Comment


    • #3
      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

      Comment


      • #4
        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

        Comment


        • #5
          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.

          Comment


          • #6
            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

            Comment


            • #7
              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, 04:51. Reason: .

              Comment


              • #8
                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

                Comment


                • #9
                  Ummmm

                  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.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    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

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      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

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        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.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          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.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            NO

                            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.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              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.

                              Comment

                              Footer Adsense

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X