Gunsmiths and regulations

[odugrad]

I was reading in the October issue of America's 1st Freedom that there is legislation in the works (or already passed) that would require gunsmiths to get a license to import/export military materials. It would cost lots in registration and fees.

Does anyone know 1) if this applies to people who are certified armorers? 2) if this bill has been passed? 3) any other pertinent information on the law?

Thanks for the information!

[Armorer-at-Law]

The law in question is ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulation). ITAR requires anyone who manufactures OR exports controlled items to register, follow a set of procedures to avoid improper export of things or information, and to pay an annual $2,250 fee.

The manufacture of some firearms does not require ITAR registration and compliance. For example, O/U shotguns suitable only for sport. Other things besides firearms are also covered by ITAR. For example, manufacture of certain firearm parts (which don't require the manufacturer to have a Federal Firearms License), military-grade scopes, or encryption software.

ITAR compliance is more than just paying a fee, it is complying with a set of procedures. For example, even it you don't send a covered item outside the USA, it is still an "export" under the law to give the item to an non-US citizen, even if they are here in the US. It is also an "export" of controlled technology to send outside the US or give a non-US citizen certain information (like manufacturing specs) about controlled products.

ITAR is enforced by the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC), an agency in the State Department. They have previously advised that certain activities that the ATF considers "manufacturing," and which require a manufacturing FFL, do not require ITAR registration. For example, assembly of complete firearms from parts made by others for commercial sale. ATF considers that "manufacturing" (and requires a Type 07 FFL), DDTC does not. There are other activities the ATF considers "gunsmithing" (and not manufacturing), like drilling a receiver to attach a scope mount or threading a barrel. A gunsmith requires a Type 01 FFL (dealer), not a manufacturing FFL. The DDTC, however, recently published an interpretation of ITAR that makes any modification that includes cutting or drilling to improve a firearm to be "manufacturing" under their definition--which means the gunsmith would have to register and pay the ITAR annual fee.

Many in the US House and Senate are fighting this interpretation.

[odugrad]

Would this have any effect on people who are certified AR-15 armorers, Glock armorers, etc?

[Armorer-at-Law]

Would this have any effect on people who are certified AR-15 armorers, Glock armorers, etc?

It's not what you are, but what you do. If the work you are doing includes cutting or drilling on covered firearms to improve them, it could include you.

Does "enhance capability" include returning it to its original working order? Probably not, but we don't know for sure.

Here is a link to the actual document published by the DDTC: http://pmddtc.state.gov/compliance/A...0(Publish).pdf

[odugrad]

I read the article and still am a little unsure of what I just read. Under section 1 (registration not required) seemed pretty self-explanatory. Here's where I get fuzzy: Under section 2 I read, a) Use of any special tooling or equipment upgrading in order to improve the capability of assembled or repaired firearms;

I ask because I'm interested in getting an AR-15 armorer certification and then maybe helping people modify, assemble, maintain their AR-15s on the side.

It would seem to me that an armorer would use a special tool to improve the capability.

Thoughts?

[Aguila Blanca]

Previous discussion here: http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=578381

[carguychris]

Originally Posted by odugrad

I read the article and still am a little unsure of what I just read.

The DoS letter is very ambiguous – I believe intentionally so. I don't think it's possible to fully and positively comprehend it.

The key is that it's "policy guidance" and not a regulation or an executive order. It's not legally binding, which means that it basically amounts to a strongly-worded threat, and one that's difficult to formally challenge.

Hopefully the mods will pardon the colorful metaphor, but if three burly wiseguys come into your small business and sternly tell you that you need to pay them for protection if you want to operate in their neighborhood, you're not supposed to question why you need "protection". The point is that you better pay up or you risk an ugly outcome.

Welcome to America in the 21st century.

[DaleA]

I am NOT a gunsmith BUT I consider my self one of the 'average' folk that figures if I live in this country I should really try to obey the laws.

That said:

I expect the folk making the laws to write them clear enough for me to understand them. That includes regulations and 'guidelines' too.

I don't like laws that can mean whatever someone wants them to mean.

[Old Bill Dibble]

Without the license gunsmith's can't do things that most competent gunsmith's were previously able to do like resize a barrel, ream out a chamber, thread a barrel etc.

I use to have three competent gunsmith's within easy driving distance of me now I only have one (the most expensive, but also the best) that can do relatively simple tasks that require machinery that I don't have.

The intent here from my perspective is to drive good people out of business. It's working.

[jimbob86]

I don't like laws that can mean whatever someone wants them to mean.

Those in power ceased to care what the people like, or even what the law is as written, a long time ago. It's all about what they can get away with.

[dajowi]

A relatively new gunsmith in town has closed shop due to bureaucratic red tape
and fees relating to the new law.

Likewise the aging owners of a local gun shop, could not sell their business because the new prospective owners couldn't get financial backing due to Operation Choke Point.