Rumor on executive orders and imports

[Spats McGee]

As I understand it, we're just not doing links to online petitions and polls. Whether a particular one is "reasonably plausible" is a matter of speculation.

[Ruthless4christ]

this supposedly is something the DOJ and BATFE put together. Not sure how bad this is for us. alot of legaleze.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013...2013-09392.pdf

[Willie Sutton]

^^^ This is not germane to the importation of small arms of ammunition for them. It's about defining who is responsible for the list of items prohibited for export from the USA.



Willie


.

[Come and take it.]

Let me attempt to work on this topic from another angle

What power does the ATF have to regulate imported ammunition?

What is the flexibility in their determination in what surplus ammunition can be defined as not being intended for sporting purposes?

Explain the intricacies in their incorporated judicial body? What powers it has in interpreting ATF guidelines?

Is newly made commercial ammunition subject to restriction if it could be determined under ATF rules to not being intended for sporting use?

Hopefully this will help to explain what my concerns are. The power of the ATF has already been granted before Obama ever took office, Even some new rules can be instituted under the framework without overstepping the bounds.

From my understanding the ATF has its own executive, legislative and judicial bodies that can operate under the power that is given to them.

[Spats McGee]

Originally Posted by Come and take it.

From my understanding the ATF has its own executive, legislative and judicial bodies that can operate under the power that is given to them.

BATFE is a piece of the Department of Justice, which sits within the executive branch of the federal government. It has some regulatory authority, but that is not a "legislative body" in the traditional sense of having a bicameral legislature. What sort of "judicial body" do you understand ATF to have? I've never heard any such thing.

[csmsss]

Come and Take it - BATFE has no "legislative" or "judicial authority" - it does have limited authority within certain U.S. laws to write and enact regulatory statutes which are intended to add flesh to the bones, so to speak, of legislation passed by Congress but which has inadequate specificity to enforce. Typically such bills are written with language instructing BATFE or whatever the appropriate executive agency might be to write enacting statutes providing more specificity and detail as to how the law can be complied with and how it is to be enforced.

[JimDandy]

Probably one of the most common we run into would be the "Sporting Exception" They get to decide what that means.

[KyJim]

Come and Take it - BATFE has no "legislative" or "judicial authority" - it does have limited authority within certain U.S. laws to write and enact regulatory statutes which are intended to add flesh to the bones, so to speak, of legislation passed by Congress but which has inadequate specificity to enforce. Typically such bills are written with language instructing BATFE or whatever the appropriate executive agency might be to write enacting statutes providing more specificity and detail as to how the law can be complied with and how it is to be enforced.

I don't know how the ATF is structured but I assume it is like every other agency of which I am aware and has "legislative" authority by passing administrative regulations. While tolerated as part of the Executive Branch's authority to implement legislation, only the most naive would believe there is no legislating through adoption of administrative regulations.

Likewise, administrative agencies often have a judicial function. Dispute a social security disability, for example, and your first step is a hearing in front of a hearing officer employed by the Social Security Administration. I assume the ATF or the DOJ employs hearing officers. While parts of decisions can be reviewed by the courts, the courts generally defer to the agency's factual findings and, to a degree, the agency's interpretation of the statutes which it administers. This latter point was an issue in a recent SCOTUS opinion where the minority thought the courts should not defer whatsoever to an agency's legal interpretation. Don't remember the case.

[Come and take it.]

To be more specific how extreme can the sporting interpretation be exercised in the restrictive sense?

[KyJim]

To be more specific how extreme can the sporting interpretation be exercised in the restrictive sense?

I would think it could be used to to keep out most firearms except maybe over/under shotguns and maybe single shot target guns.

This restriction is what keeps out a bunch of M1 Garands sitting in South Korea. The Garands primarily serve two functions today -- collector pieces and match shoots, a sporting purpose. Yet, they're out.

[thallub]

Chinese made rifle and pistol ammunition were banned from import in about 1994 when China received most favored nation trade status.

Three US administrations have banned the importation of long guns citing the "sporting purposes" clause of the GCA 1968. In 1984 the Striker-12 semi-auto shotgun was banned from import: This was the first long gun banned from import.

The 1984 ban of the Striker-12 set a precedence for future bans. In 1986 another shot gun was banned from import. In 1989 over 40 milsurp rifles were banned from import. In 1998 certain "assault weapons" were banned from import.

[Come and take it.]

Than we move on to Eastern European, African, Spanish, Isreali, Russian, Indian etc. etc. surplus military ammunition.

Specifically... can they ban the importation of ordinary full metal jacket military surplus ammunition from these sources?

Can they ban the importation of newly manufactured full metal jacket ammunition (labeled for commercial sale) from Russia?

under the existing authority of the BATF.

[Tom Servo]

To be more specific how extreme can the sporting interpretation be exercised in the restrictive sense?

We may soon see. I expect some sort of import controls to be proposed soon.

Apparently, Century International (the guys who import most of the SKS/AK-47/Mosin stuff) agree. They have raised their prices roughly 60% across the board. If you want a Romanian WASR/10, it's going to run at least $800 at retail from here out.

[Fishing_Cabin]

Originally Posted by thallob

Chinese made rifle and pistol ammunition were banned from import in about 1994 when China received most favored nation trade status.

Originally Posted by wikipedia

In 1993, the import of most Norinco firearms and ammunition into the United States were blocked under new trade rules when China's Most Favored Nation status was renewed. The prohibition did not apply to sporting shotguns or shotgun ammunition however. The year subsequent to that, U.S. Customs agents conducted a sting against Atlanta based importers of Norinco firearms. According to an affidavit signed by two of the undercover agents involved in the investigation dubbed "Operation Dragon Fire", representatives from Norinco offered to sell urban gangs shoulder-held missile launchers capable of downing a large commercial airliner.[2]

Also I seem to remember that Norinco was caught trying to sell type 56 rifles (AK-47 select fire) to gangs as well, something around 2000 unlicensed imports. Hence the ban on everything but smoothbore guns and ammo for same.

[Alabama Shooter]

^^^ This is not germane to the importation of small arms of ammunition for them. It's about defining who is responsible for the list of items prohibited for export from the USA.



Willie

I read it and am not so sure.

II. Final Rule
Because the Department of Justice
regulations at 27 CFR part 447 listing
the defense articles and defense services
controlled by the Attorney General for
purposes of permanent import currently
adopt, with some exceptions, the list of
defense articles and defense services
controlled by the Secretary of State, and
because certain defense articles and
defense services on the Department of
State export control list that appears in
the ITAR, 22 CFR 121.1, will, in the
future, be removed from that list and
controlled for export and temporary
import by the Secretary of Commerce,
the Department of Justice is clarifying
its regulations by amending 27 CFR
447.21, to do the following:
(i) Remove the language adopting the
State Department export control list
maintained in the ITAR;
(ii) Clarify that the Attorney General
exercises delegated authority to
designate defense articles and defense
services for inclusion on the USML for
purposes of permanent import controls,
regardless of whether such items are
controlled by the Secretary of State for
purposes of export or temporary import;
and
(iii) Clarify that the defense articles
and defense services regulated for
purposes of permanent import pursuant
to the AECA authority delegated to the
Attorney General appear in the
permanent import control list labeled
the USMIL, set out at 27 CFR Part 447,
and that the USMIL is a subset of the
USML pursuant to the AECA.

[ltc444]

Obama has not used Executive Orders to implement his policies. Most of his policies have been implemented through arcane rule making by various agencies.

Not all executive orders are published. They may be issued and through a Presidential Finding not be published.

Given this administration's fixation on veterans as being potential terrorist, (DHS latest threat assessment) and a belief that all veterans have PTSD (Senator Feinstein) and should not be allowed to own firearms. The President could issue an unpublished EO banning the ownership by veterans by issuing a presidential finding on National Security Grounds.

This same logic could be used against many other groups and or objects.

[Alabama Shooter]

The President could issue an unpublished EO banning the ownership by veterans by issuing a presidential finding on National Security Grounds.

Whelp, there goes the half police in the country. Somebody better start rounding them up. Won't be the government workers though because about half of those guys are vets too.

[ltc444]

Alabama shooter and Come and take it. You make my point. A simple change buried in the Federal Register or through a National Security finding can have impact far beyond what it appears on the surface.

One only need to look at the problems caused by the Domestic Violence law which, at the time it was enacted, was applauded as a reasonable measure.

As one Legislator once said, the devil is in the details. Many Public Safety Measures/ National Security measures can be enacted without the normal 90 day public comment period. The damage can be done before we even are of aware it has been promulgated and way before we can take action in court.

We have all read the horror stories of recovering our guns from local law enforcement. Can you imagine the problems of recovering our AR-15s from the BATF if you were to win a court case against them for illegal seizure after a regulation was overturned by a court.