|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
March 14, 2009, 09:55 AM | #26 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 21, 2008
Location: Buried under record fall of "climate change"
Posts: 346
|
I think we all have some legitimate concerns as well as some paranoia. But in this case, my personal opinion is that a little paranoia is good.
Keep a close eye on every move. Because they're not going to call up gun owners when they do sneak in some legislation to limit availability of ammo or add controls on firearms. Just like almost all unpopular legislation, it will worm it's way in. Keep a little paranoia high, stay on high alert, investigate every rumor and any success they have will be slowed.
__________________
Aspire to inspire before you expire - the poster formerly known as JP. |
March 14, 2009, 06:25 PM | #27 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 21, 2005
Posts: 1,111
|
Looks like you need an end use certificate to buy now... Meaning that you have to somehow show that you are using this domestically and not exporting it to places like Iran or Cuba.
I'd imagine that it will mean for a place that does reloading for a business that you will have to supply the license used to manufacturer ammo. I could be wrong but I think that live ammo has been this way for many many years. Looks like just another chunk of paper work (and a pain in the butt) |
March 14, 2009, 09:01 PM | #28 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,903
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
March 14, 2009, 09:50 PM | #29 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Thanks for that info, gc70.
Is this much ado about nothing, or is there actually more to this? Anyone? |
March 15, 2009, 10:51 PM | #30 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: December 16, 2004
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Posts: 5,333
|
Quote:
DEMILITARIZATION CODES Quote:
If the cases were covered under code A then there would probably be nothing to worry about, but since they are under code E we need to know what the current demil instructions are, as it is entirely possible that they HAVE been changed. So we don't have enough information to say it is happening, but we can't yet say that it isn't happening either.
__________________
I don't carry a gun to go looking for trouble, I carry a gun in case trouble finds me. |
||
March 16, 2009, 12:18 PM | #31 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 9, 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 163
|
I think this is something we should be worried about. This will take millions of brass casings out of the system, causing ammo to go up and up. There is not a ban. The DOD is just not going to sell their millions of rounds of once fired casings that exist after training. Apparantly the DOD pulls in some serious $$ from this, so it makes no sense. It has to be something created by Obama. Why would the DOD cut their own throats and funds? See link below
http://www.theshootist.net/2009/03/d...-military.html
__________________
Guitars and guns. The 2 things that keep me sane. |
March 16, 2009, 02:21 PM | #32 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 30, 2000
Location: Token Creek, WI
Posts: 4,067
|
Yeah, it's Demil Code B, but with Integrity Code 3 now added.
More here:
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.htm...=844248&page=1 Evidently, the DRMO/DRMS auctions that are currently active will require mutilation of said brass once the auction is complete, per the terms. The edict came down from DLA, ostensibly because of the recent F-14 Tomcat parts sale SNAFU. NRA-ILA has been notified, and they're hoping to get a D0D waiver in place for .50 caliber and smaller cartridge brass over the next few weeks. Operative word, of course, being hope. |
March 16, 2009, 05:38 PM | #33 |
Junior member
Join Date: January 25, 2006
Location: Oak Harbor, WA
Posts: 1,719
|
And the auctions are going again with brass NOT requiring mutilation:
http://www.govliquidation.com/list/e7121/lna/1.html I would say the issue is dead. |
March 16, 2009, 05:43 PM | #34 |
Member
Join Date: June 27, 2008
Location: Washington State
Posts: 84
|
Take the time to listen to this.
http://guntalk.libsyn.com/index.php?post_id=443576 What you'll want to listen to is about 12:30 minutes into the broadcast...if you want to fast forward to that point. Like I said in my earlier post, we can talk about this issue here...which is fine. But, everyone needs to contact their senators & representatives. Last edited by USASA; March 16, 2009 at 06:03 PM. |
March 16, 2009, 06:19 PM | #35 |
Member
Join Date: June 27, 2008
Location: Washington State
Posts: 84
|
|
March 16, 2009, 06:57 PM | #36 |
Junior Member
Join Date: March 4, 2009
Posts: 10
|
Is this on or off. The DRMO at my post says it's on. Some people are posting links to auctions that don't have the destruction notice. Who has the latest info? Are the auction links just not updated? Has the NRA said anything?
|
March 16, 2009, 07:30 PM | #37 |
Member
Join Date: October 1, 2006
Posts: 17
|
I took the time last Friday to write both Government Liquidations LLC and the DLA Public Affairs Office to see if this was for real or a hoax. I haven't heard back from the DLA but I did hear back from Government Liquidations. Here is what they said in response to my email:
Dear Mr. Rxxxxxx, Thank you for your e-mail. This is correct. Recently it has been determined that fired munitions of all calibers, shapes and sizes have been designated to be Demil code B. As a result and in conjunction with DLA's current Demil code B policy, this notice will serve as official notification which requires Scrap Venture (SV) to implement mutilation as a condition of sale for all sales of fired munitions effective immediately. This notice also requires SV to immediately cease delivery of any fired munitions that have been recently sold or on active term contracts, unless the material has been mutilated prior to sale or SV personnel can attest to the mutilation after delivery. A certificate of destruction is required in either case. Sincerely, Customer Service Management Government Liquidation, LLC DOD Surplus, LLC 15051 N. Kierland Blvd, Ste 300 Scottsdale, AZ 85254 Ph: 480.367.1300 Fax: 480.367.1450 Email: [email protected] Online Help:http://www.govliquidation.com/help/index.html -k- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: John Rxxxxx [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 2:20 PM To: GL Info Subject: Demil Code B policy for cartridge brass Dear Sirs, I received the following email purported to be from you that said all expended munition cartridge brass must be mutilated. See the email below. Is this correct or not? Does it extend to items like 9mm or 5.56x45 cartridge brass? John Rxxxxx |
March 16, 2009, 07:34 PM | #38 |
Junior Member
Join Date: March 4, 2009
Posts: 10
|
I guess things are going to get even more scarce and expensive.
|
March 16, 2009, 07:47 PM | #39 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 6, 2008
Posts: 1,777
|
This bs has me thinking... And yes I wrote my congressman... Could the reasoning for this follow two goals...
A. Take our brass away B. Possibly make more money selling it as scrap? To justify option B.. Has anyone seen what prices scrap brass is bringing in? I mean its so high here that people are stealing everything made with brass and copper... Even the nuts off the fire hydrants.. A local little league field had all of the copper wiring stolen recently... |
March 16, 2009, 08:02 PM | #40 |
Junior Member
Join Date: March 4, 2009
Posts: 10
|
There is no way that unworked scrap can fetch the same prices a the cases.
|
March 16, 2009, 08:12 PM | #41 |
Member
Join Date: November 1, 2008
Posts: 32
|
Scrap, mutilated brass goes for around $0.60 a pound (maybe less). Reloadable brass goes for around $2 a pound.
|
March 16, 2009, 08:21 PM | #42 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 14, 2007
Posts: 115
|
Why in the name of Sam Hill isn't there ANYTHING on the NRA or NRA-ILA's site about this? True or not, this is THE topic du jour on every gun board I follow and it's more than a little disconcerting to have a black hole of silence from the NRA. The least they could do is say it's not true, if it's not. Is JFPFO more on the ball than the NRA?
|
March 16, 2009, 08:33 PM | #43 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 19, 2000
Posts: 2,904
|
I suspect the NRA is putting together iron clad research to nail down exactly what is going on before it pontificates.
The NRA has a reputation to maintain. It will speak sooner or later.
__________________
"Given a choice between good intentions and human nature, I'll go with human nature every time."--Me, 2002. |
March 16, 2009, 09:27 PM | #44 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 3,112
|
Quote:
Good point. The NRA got bit hard when it jumped the gun on the proposed BATFE regulation that SAAMI and the Explosive Makers asked for. When the regulation came out for review SAAMI went berserk. Some inexperienced folks at the NRA-ILA took the word of SAAMI as gospel and cried "the sky is falling." The NRA found out that SAAMI did ask for the new BATFE regulation after all. The NRA-ILA came across as an amateur run outfit. |
|
March 17, 2009, 06:03 AM | #45 |
Member
Join Date: June 27, 2008
Location: Washington State
Posts: 84
|
Update
From a member of another forum:
"I called the NRA-ILA (INSTITUTE FOR LEGISLATIVE ACTION). I spoke with a guy named Eric and he put me on hold for a few minutes till he could get the latest info on this subject. After returning to the phone he gave me a bunch of info. The NRA is definitely aware of the problem and have heard from some reloaded ammo companies and individuals. Eric rattled off all the DOD agencies invlolved and apparently this may have been "somewhat of a mistake" The ranking DOD agency has heard our concerns and condsiders them VALID!! Right now, the word is from DOD to the NRA that they hope to have a WAIVER put into place within a two or three weeks which will CORRECT this situation and return once fired brass, .50 caliber and below to the sales policies previously used!!! Eric said it might be helpful to call our Congressmen just in case and make them aware of the impact on the DOD budget, police training, and inidividual rights." Last edited by USASA; March 17, 2009 at 06:13 AM. |
March 17, 2009, 10:28 AM | #46 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 7, 2001
Location: Washington State
Posts: 2,166
|
I hope that the above post shows what I think it does.
I tend to wax pessimistic; I believe that this was an end run by someone from our current administration in DC. Someone said, "Hey--if we start out with this, we can eliminate a large source of ammo--and we don't have to draw up a new law to do it. We'll show those dried up gun owners!" They then went and changed the demil code, rubbing their hands in glee and thinking that all was well. They did NOT expect to rouse the sleeping giant--the wrath of the American people. It would be like turning around and seeing (for instance) a HUGE eagle staring at you with the expression that says, "Bad move, fellas. REALLY bad move." The ones who changed the demil code are now probably pooping in their pants because of the uproar. Keep up the fire! |
March 17, 2009, 12:33 PM | #47 | |
Junior member
Join Date: January 25, 2006
Location: Oak Harbor, WA
Posts: 1,719
|
This was posted by an individual on at least two other gun forums:
Quote:
|
|
March 17, 2009, 10:01 PM | #48 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 23, 2007
Location: Apache Junction, Az
Posts: 308
|
The order was reversed.
Quote:
|
|
|
|