The DOD Surplus Brass Controversy - Fact v. Rumor


PDA






Jeff White
March 16, 2009, 06:33 PM
This is the email that started it all:

Dear Valued Customer:

Please take a moment to note important changes set forth by the Defense Logistics Agency:

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.

Thank you,

DOD Surplus
15051 N Kierland Blvd # 300
Scottsdale, AZ 85254

This is what DOD manual says about Demil Code B:
http://www.dlis.dla.mil/demil/demil_codes.asp
DEMILITARIZATION CODES TO BE ASSIGNED TO FEDERAL SUPPLY ITEMS AND CODING GUIDANCE

DEMILITARIZATION CODES

CODE EXPLANATION

A Non-MLI/Non-CCLI -- Demilitarization not required.

B MLI (Non-SME) -- Demilitarization not required. Trade Security Controls required at disposition.

C MLI (SME) -- Remove and/or demilitarization installed key point(s), as prescribed in this manual, or lethal parts, components and accessories.

D MLI (SME) -- Total destruction of item and components so as to preclude restoration or repair to a usable condition by melting, cutting, tearing, scratching, crushing, breaking, punching, neutralizing, etc. (As an alternate, burial or deep water dumping may be used when approved by the DOD Demilitarization Program Office.)

E MLI -- Demilitarization instructions to be furnished by the DoD Demilitarization Program Office.

F MLI (SME) -- Demilitarization instructions to be furnished by the Item/Technical Manager/Equipment Specialist.

G MLI (SME) -- MLI Demilitarization Required -- AEDA. Demilitarization, and, if required, declassification and/or removal of sensitive marking or information, will be accomplished prior to physical transfer to a DRMO. This code will be used for all AEDA items including those which also require declassification and/or removal of sensitive markings or information.

P MLI (SME) -- MLI (Security Classified Item) -- Declassification, and any other required demilitarization, and removal of any sensitive markings or information will be accomplished prior to accountability or physical transfer to a DRMO. This code will not be assigned to ammunition, explosive and dangerous articles (AEDA) items.

Q CCLI -- Commerce Control List Item -- Demilitarization not required. CCLIs are dual use (military, commercial and other strategic uses) items under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, through the Export Administration Regulations. The types of items controlled under the CCL are commodities (i.e., equipment, materials, electronics, etc.), software and technology. The CCL does not include those items exclusively controlled by another department or agency of the U.S. government. (See DOD 4160.21-M-1, Chapter 3 and Appendix 5).

Basically if it's not for export, it's good to go.

Here is a link to a current auction of: LOT (3719)LBS APPROXIMATELY EXPENDED BRASS TO INCLUDE: 1958 LBS - 5. 56MM, 1007 LBS - 7. 65MM - WITH TWO BOXES BEING FIRED BLANKS (90 LBS), 709 LBS - 9MM, 45 LBS - SHOT GUN SHELLS, 3 PLTS, MUTILATION NOT REQUIRED.

http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2247011&convertTo=USD

I hope this ends all the controversy.

If you enjoyed reading about "The DOD Surplus Brass Controversy - Fact v. Rumor" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
NavyLCDR
March 16, 2009, 06:52 PM
I hope this ends all the controversy.

Good luck with that one!

MaterDei
March 16, 2009, 06:58 PM
That's good news, thanks Jeff. The last thing we need right now is a further restriction of supply.

Ben Shepherd
March 16, 2009, 07:37 PM
Is it possible to point all the threads about it to this and lock them down? That would help quite a bit.

Old Fuff
March 16, 2009, 07:58 PM
Jim Shepard addressed this situation this morning in the March 16th issue of "The Shooting wire."

His source of information was Georgia Arms, which is a well known, and highly respected maker of remanufactured ammunition. He also had received a similar (but not identical) e-mail notification. This is what Jim said:

The first word of this latest decision came over the weekend when Georgia Arms' Larry Haynie released a letter notifying him of the new requirement.

For a company with an order in for 30,000 pounds of expended military brass in .223, .308 and .50 BMG, that was not a pleasant notification.

The e-mail said:

"Effective immediately DOD Surplus, LLC, will be implementing new requirements for mutilation of fired shell casings. The new DRMS requirement calls for DOD Surplus personnel to witness the mutilation of the property and sign the Certificate of Destruction. Mutilation of the property can be done at the DRMO, if permitted by the Government, or it may be mutilated at a site chosen by the buyer. Mutilation means that the property will be destroyed to the extent prevents its reuse or reconstruction. DOD Surplus personnel will determine when property has been sufficiently mutilated to meet the requirements of the Government. "

Georgia Arms was remanufacturing more than one million rounds of .223 ammunition monthly; selling that ammo on the civilian market to resellers and to government agencies all over the country.

Tomorrow, Georgia Arms will start sending cancellation notices for .223 ammunition to law enforcement agencies across the United States. Haynie says he may have to layoff half of his sixty-person workforce.
A new welcome page posted on Georgia Arms' website (www.georgia-arms.com) says simply "Due to new government regulations concerning the purchase of surplus brass, we are removing sales of all 223 and all 308 until further notice."

I would note that while both e-mail messages came from different sources, both are official notices, and both call for "mutilation" of fired ammunition cases before sale.

I am not ready to believe that the e-mails don't mean exactly what they say until a reliable source, such as the NRA says so.

ACBMWM3
March 16, 2009, 08:02 PM
I'm a member of their site and just looked and they have a ton of brass for sale that doesn't require mutilation...

Heres a bunch of brass for sale.

http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2247011&convertTo=USD

http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2263402&convertTo=USD

http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2269024&convertTo=USD

http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2263403&convertTo=USD

All say NO MUTILATION REQUIRED!!

Old Fuff
March 16, 2009, 08:11 PM
Which site is that? I just rechecked Grorgia Arms (www, georgia-arms.com) and the notice is still posted.

Jeff White
March 16, 2009, 08:12 PM
I am not ready to believe that the e-mails don't mean exactly what they say until a reliable source, such as the NRA says so.

DOD isn't a reliable source? This link takes you to an auction for once fired brass that is currently running and it doesn't require mutilation. http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2247011&convertTo=USD It can't get any clearer then that. DOD wrote the regulations and DOD is selling the brass. I think we can take them at their word on the official DOD website that they are selling brass and it isn't required to be mutilated.

The NRA has nothing to do with this.

My guess and it's just that, a guess is that DOD Surplus sold some of that brass overseas without the proper state department permits and now they have to destroy it all. That is just a guess. But it's quite clear that DOD is selling brass and not requiring it to be demilled. I should add that DOD Surplus LLC is a private company and not the actual Department of Defense.

BHP FAN
March 16, 2009, 08:15 PM
That may be because it's already been smacked with a hammer by some unhappy recruit on punishment detail.

Jeff White
March 16, 2009, 08:21 PM
That may be because it's already been smacked with a hammer by some unhappy recruit on punishment detail.

Get real. Have you ever turned in brass and other residue to the ASP and then followed it through to DRMO? There isn't time for a recruit on punishment detail to pound it flat with a hammer.

I swear some of you guys wouldn't believe the sun rises in the East if you were standing there at dawn with a compass in your hand, and some conspiracy theorist told you it really was rising in the West :rolleyes:

ACBMWM3
March 16, 2009, 09:03 PM
I think this ones done.... We have all figured out that it doesn't have to be turned into scrap and these letters that got sent out are not totally clear on what they say.

Master Blaster
March 16, 2009, 09:13 PM
So Georgia Arms is lying in order to destroy their own business???

Or the DOD is requiring destruction as they have claimed?

Which is more likely?

Jeff White
March 16, 2009, 09:18 PM
So Georgia Arms is lying in order to destroy their own business???

I'm not going to speculate on their motives.

Or the DOD is requiring destruction as they have claimed?

No they are not.

LOT (3719)LBS APPROXIMATELY EXPENDED BRASS TO INCLUDE: 1958 LBS - 5. 56MM, 1007 LBS - 7. 65MM - WITH TWO BOXES BEING FIRED BLANKS (90 LBS), 709 LBS - 9MM, 45 LBS - SHOT GUN SHELLS, 3 PLTS, MUTILATION NOT REQUIRED.

What part of MUTILATION NOT REQUIRED is so hard to understand?

http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2247011&convertTo=USD
This link is from the official DOD Website TODAY MARCH 16, 2009 It is current information.

Here is another auction:

http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2263402&convertTo=USD

And another:
http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2263403&convertTo=USD

And another:
http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2235021&convertTo=USD

Bidding doesn't close on these auctions until April 3, 2009. It would seem that any qualified buy could bid on those lots. DOD is not requiring destruction of the brass. It says so right there on the DRMO website.

Lone_Gunman
March 16, 2009, 09:22 PM
What does "Trade Security Controls required at disposition" mean? It is from the definition of Demil code B.

It looks to me like governmentliquidation.com is a private business, not part of the DOD:

"Government Liquidation, LLC (GL), a Liquidity Services, Inc. marketplace is the exclusive contractor of the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service (DRMS) for the sale of surplus and scrap assets of the United States Department of Defense (DOD). "

If it is a private contractor, and a corporation, how is it part of the DOD?

Also, that does not look like the DOD website.

Shootist1
March 16, 2009, 09:23 PM
Apparently the Government Liquidators website has not been updated as this directive just came out late last week.

Here is corroboration as posted on AR15.com.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=844248&page=1

If you want to see more, or link onto Tom Gresham's radio show with interviews with Larry Haynie of Georgia Arms, go to my blog:
www.theshootist.net

Waitone
March 16, 2009, 09:25 PM
Tom Gresham's GunTalk goes into some detail
http://guntalk.libsyn.com/
15-Mar-09 Show
Part II
Starts about 10 minutes into the segment

Old Fuff
March 16, 2009, 09:25 PM
"DOD isn't a reliable source?"

Sure it is.... That's part of what has me worried, because both e-mail messages seem to call for mutilation of fired brass. If that wasn't the intent I see no reasons for the messages at all. I would think if this only applied to sales made to buyers in foreign countries - or for material being resold to foreign buyers, that point would have been made clear.

I also believe that auctions are still ongoing, but it may be a case of new instruction still in progress. I will feel much better if they're still going on next week.

The point I'm trying to get across is I'm not going to rush to judgment - one way or the other.

Last but not least, I think the NRA has enough contacts within the DOD to get to the bottom of what's going on.

Shootist1
March 16, 2009, 09:29 PM
Here's further corroboration as posted by the JPFO...

http://www.jpfo.org/alerts03/alert20090313.htm

This apparently, for whatever reason, was forced last week. Larry Haynie said in the interview he has competitors who had received shipments of expended cartridges, and DOD called them and told them the delivered brass would have to be returned or rendered into scrap, and DOD representatives would have to witness the destruction.

Gordon Hutchinson

MountainBear
March 16, 2009, 09:32 PM
Some people just aren't happy unless its all a big conspiracy. There the same people who think that area 51 aliens are real and the lunar landing was fake.

Lone_Gunman
March 16, 2009, 09:35 PM
Some people just aren't happy unless its all a big conspiracy. There the same people who think that area 51 aliens are real and the lunar landing was fake.

What I know for sure is that, right now, you cannot buy brass from Jeff Bartlett of GIbrass.com, nor can you buy reloaded 308 and 223 ammo from Georgia Arms.

Both of these companies are losing sales right now, and I can't buy ammo. Whether or not Bigfoot is involved is hard to say.

Waitone
March 16, 2009, 09:36 PM
Shootist1,

Was that you on Gresham's Gun Talk Radio 15-Mar-09?

Jeff White
March 16, 2009, 09:36 PM
What part of Demil Code B does not require destruction is so hard to understand?
http://www.dlis.dla.mil/demil/demil_codes.asp
DEMILITARIZATION CODES TO BE ASSIGNED TO FEDERAL SUPPLY ITEMS AND CODING GUIDANCE

DEMILITARIZATION CODES

CODE EXPLANATION

A Non-MLI/Non-CCLI -- Demilitarization not required.

B MLI (Non-SME) -- Demilitarization not required. Trade Security Controls required at disposition.

That is from the official DOD website. It can't be any clearer. If the original email actually said DEMIL Code B, it specifically says it doesn't have to be destroyed. What could be clearer? Click on the link and look for yourself.

rbernie
March 16, 2009, 09:41 PM
So Georgia Arms is lying in order to destroy their own business???
I suspect that GA Arms is being told by their supplier (DOD Surplus) that the supplier cannot furnish the contracted items. Whether GA Arms is misunderstanding the communications or the supplier is deliberately confusing the situation to cover their own fanny is pure speculation.

But clearly, used brass is still being sold by the US Government (via their property disposal agent, Government Liquidation) to anyone that can legally bid on it.

"Government Liquidation, LLC (GL), a Liquidity Services, Inc. marketplace is the exclusive contractor of the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service (DRMS) for the sale of surplus and scrap assets of the United States Department of Defense (DOD). "

If it is a private contractor, and a corporation, how is it part of the DOD?
Because the DoD hired them under contract to handle the propery disposal for suplus and scrap assets?

Lone_Gunman
March 16, 2009, 09:46 PM
Because the DoD hired them under contract to handle the propery disposal for suplus and scrap assets?

Ok, so you are saying a contractor is part of the DOD? Maybe, but that is not how contractors work in the private sector. If my company hires an outside contractor, they are not part of my company. But that is not really the point of the discussion.

It was also contended that the website with the auction was part of the DOD website, but I am not sure that is true. The statement is:

http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auctio...&convertTo=USD
This link is from the official DOD Website TODAY MARCH 16, 2009 It is current information.

That is not DOD, is it?

Waitone
March 16, 2009, 09:48 PM
If you listen to Gresham's noted show you would hear two things: First, the new rule went out last Thursday (IIRC). Second, yes brass is being sold. What is also happening is company's who have TAKEN DELIVERY of surplus brass are being told it must be shredded in the presence of a DoD representative.

Lots of confusion out there but it will settle out.

Jeff White
March 16, 2009, 09:53 PM
It was also contended that the website with the auction was part of the DOD website, but I am not sure that is true.

It's true. Go to the official Defense Reutilization and and Marketing website:https://www.drms.dla.mil/ and click on the link to public sales and it takes you to the Government Liquidation.com website who are contracted to actually conduct the sales. It doesn't get any more official then that.

Shootist1
March 16, 2009, 09:54 PM
Waitone...

Yes...it was me on Tom's show. I interviewed Larry Haynie, got his story, and e-mailed Tom--who checked it out, and decided to have both of us on the show. Larry Haynie is a businessman. I do not think he would frivolously or maliciously lie about this. He will have to lay off 50% of his 60 employees within two months.

I can only state Mr. Haynie sent me the letters he received canceling his contract for 30,000 pounds of .223, 7.62, and .50 cal. He won the contract on Tuesday, sent an End-User Certificate on Wednesday, and Thursday evening received the e-mails cancelling his purchases, stating all further milsurp brass would have to be shredded.

I believe the liquidator website has not been updated yet. These directives were only delivered last Thursday. I checked the website and saw the same thing and had my questions. And they had not been changed as of last night.

But if the JPFO is upset about it, there is something there.

We can sit back and let the wool be pulled, or we can complain to our elected officials and force them to straighten it out--if they can.

Incidentally, Government Liquidators, llc is a private corporation that handles the auctioning of U.S. Government surplus.


Gordon Hutchinson
Author, The Great New Orleans Gun Grab

www.theshootist.net

everallm
March 16, 2009, 10:03 PM
Trade Disposition is where different requirements need to be met including mutilation IF and ONLY If the product is leaving CONUS.

Then it's all End-User certificate and other such fun

zxcvbob
March 16, 2009, 10:05 PM
But who is "DOD Surplus"? It's not the same thing as DRMS. Sounds like a private company that screwed up (even if they like sound all official and call their employees "personnel".) But they may have split up a huge batch of scrap brass that included 20mm cartridges for example, that was supposed to be demil'ed, and sold that problem down the line to other companies (like GA Arms, gibrass.com, etc)

Lone_Gunman
March 16, 2009, 10:06 PM
It's true. Go to the official Defense Reutilization and and Marketing website:https://www.drms.dla.mil/ and click on the link to public sales and it takes you to the Government Liquidation.com website who are contracted to actually conduct the sales. It doesn't get any more official then that.

If Governmentliquidation.com is a private contractorand is not an official part of DOD in the sense that you were implying.

If there is a link on the DOD website for governmentliquidation.com, doesn't that mean its a seperate website?

Shootist1
March 16, 2009, 10:07 PM
Follow this link for the answer:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=844248&page=1

The moderator of AR15.com (link above) contacted Government Liquidators and asked them if the directive applied to expended brass currently up for auction on their website. Their answer:
"The recently implemented mutilation requirement applies to all current and future auctions that contain fired shell casings."

Go to the link and read it for yourself.

Gordon Hutchinson
"The Great New Orleans Gun Grab"
www.theshootist.net

D. Manley
March 16, 2009, 10:07 PM
It's true. Go to the official Defense Reutilization and and Marketing website:https://www.drms.dla.mil/ and click on the link to public sales and it takes you to the Government Liquidation.com website who are contracted to actually conduct the sales. It doesn't get any more official then that.

Jeff, I hope you're right but I fear you're not. It seems your assumptions are based on pre-existing documents and the fact the auction site has not yet been updated. Assuming you are correct it means every supplier (and, not just Atlanta Arms) of military brass is wrong...along with, the NRA. On a positive note, I've found that suppliers have been authorized to sell their current inventory.

I've twice been in contact with NRA-ILA if if this is a faux problem, they certainly are not aware of it. There are hopes the new policy can be reversed and I only a few minutes ago got the following email:

Dear Mr. (Name Edited),

Thank you for your email.

We are aware of the de-mil brass issue and have been in contact with officials at DOD regarding this matter and are working to get it resolved.

Please check our website www.nraila.org or contact us directly via email or 800-392-8683 for future updates.

Sincerely,
Susan Christman
NRA-ILA Grassroots Division

Zoogster
March 16, 2009, 10:29 PM
What part of Demil Code B does not require destruction is so hard to understand?

If you look up the Demil Codes you will find they also include an Integrity Code or IC.

The IC can still cause things classified under a Demil code not normaly requiring destruction to require destruction or mutilation.

Many civilian legal vehicles once sold have also recently been being destroyed rather than sold as surplus. Hummers, logistics trucks etc.


The initial cause of change would appear to be some F-14 parts (a discontinued US air superiority fighter, the one of Top Gun fame) were still finding thier way to Iran.
The United States organized a military coup to overthrow the democracy of Iran and put the Shah in power (operation Ajax). The full title of the Shah meaning King of Kings.
This was nothing new, the British had done the same previously in the 1920s to overthrow an Iran democracy to install a Tyrant after Iran nationalized oil.

This was once again over oil, Iran being a major source of oil during cold war tensions when most of the world was either joined with the US or joined with the Soviet Union.

Part of helping the Shah included giving him powerful military capability. So the only other nation on earth to aquire the F-14 was Iran. This would enable Iran to dominate in the air for decades as can be seen in the Iran Iraq war when Iraqi instructions essentialy told enemy fighter pilots to flee at the first sign of the F-14.
The F-14 can engage and destroy enemy fighters from over 115 miles away with the AIM-54 missle. Further than the officialy used AIM 120 variants still used by the US military today.

That is to say the F-14 is still today a major air threat.

The Shah helped modernize tha nation, but was still a foriegn installed tyrant resented by the population, and who used severe oppression to crush any objection.
The people of Iran rose up and overthrew the Tyrant. Installing in his place an Islamic Republic.
The nation went from being ruled by a Tyrant with close ties to the USA (put in power by the USA) to an enemy of the United States with very short notice.
Now those weapons once given to an ally pose a serious risk to both the USA and others in the region if they find themselves engaged in a war with Iran.

The people of Iran still resent the overthrow of thier democracies, as does the government and that makes them an even greater danger to the United States. Justified or not, they are as a result even more likely to use major force against outsiders in any future tensions. That is one of the big reasons nobody wants them to aquire a nuclear weapon.

Iran however has trouble keeping the F-14 running, it is a very exepnsive aircraft requiring extensive maintenance.
So no parts from the manufacturer (in the US) leaves them struggling to keep them flying.
The US wishes for it stay that way.


Anyways on to how that effected brass.

So in light of some surplus parts making thier way to Iran policy changes were rapidly put into effect to change how surplus is dealt with.
During that rapid rush to change some people with thier own motives may have seen an opportunity in regards to brass.
So even though fired small arms brass has nothing to do with the concern, overall change in policies see change for everything.

By changing the IC code even if it remains Demil B it can require destruction.
A lot of people will realize small arms have nothing to do with the initial official concerns and changes which started prior to Obama.
With enough immediate pressure it can assure things are clarified now, and what could have become a major issue for shooters and ammo supplies becomes a non issue.
It takes phone calls and a show of concern.


It is important that people show a strong concern through phone calls and letters. That lets everyone know the American people are paying attention and will not tolerate anti 2nd Amendment sentiment or policies. That helps on many fronts, not just the immediate one because it reduces confidence in those with an anti agenda.
If some lower in the chain of command interpreted things in a certain way, such a show of concern can cause immedate change, and what was a real problem can appear to have never been a problem at all. Changed so fast people are unsure if it really was a problem.

Jeff White
March 16, 2009, 10:30 PM
If there is a link on the DOD website for governmentliquidation.com, doesn't that mean its a seperate website?

It's still the official DOD information. They are the DOD contractor.

Jeff, I hope you're right but I fear you're not. It seems your assumptions are based on pre-existing documents and the fact the auction site has not yet been updated.

What does DEMIL Code B say? It says that it doesn't have to be destroyed. Someone is putting out bad information and it's most likely DODLiquidators and all the people pushing panic buttons. Anyone who can read at the 9th grade level can read the definitions of the DEMIL Codes and see that DEMIL Code B does not require destruction. If the email said DEMIL Code D it would have some credibility. But it says B. So either the email is wrong or the whole thing is some kind of misunderstanding.

I've got an email out to the Defense Logistic Agency Customer Service Center. Hopefully I'll have the correct information soon. These policy changes are not verbal. There is always a written message. It seems kind of funny that no one not even Defense Liquidators can supply a copy of the message changing the policy.

In 28 years and 11 months in the Army I never once saw anything like this happen without a written message that you could access and read for yourself.

Something smells to high heaven about this whole situation. If the policy changed, it's not anywhere on the DLA website. They would post changes like that immediately because in many cases that's where the end users go for the info.

Librarian
March 16, 2009, 11:51 PM
I sent an email to DLA Public Affairs and asked. Maybe they'll answer.

Schleprok62
March 16, 2009, 11:51 PM
This is one of the links posted earlier in this thread... it's says clearly that this stuff must be destroyed...

From this auction (http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2263402&convertTo=USD)

"LOT (4, 043LBS) APPROXIMATE OF FIRED BRASS TO INLCUDE: (2, 908LBS) APPROX OF 5. 56; (50LBS) APPROX OF 7. 62 LINKS; (66LBS) APPROX OF 5. 56 LINKS; (368LBS) APPROX OF 7. 62; (651LBS) APPROX OF 9MM. PROPERTY IS STORED IN CARDBOARD BOXES AND ON (9) PALLETS WHICH ARE INCLUDED IN WEIGHT AND SALE. NO PREVIEW FOR THIS SALE. THIS IS A UNMANNED SITE, LOAD OUTS BY APPOINTMENT ONLY. BASE SCALES AVAILABLE FOR WEIGHING OF CONVEYANCE. ALL SCRAP UNDER THIS CONTRACT REQUIRES MUTILATION BY THE BUYER PRIOR TO REMOVAL IF ALLOWED BY THE INSTALLATION OR MUTILATION MUST BE WITNESSED AND CERTIFIED BY DOD SURPLUS PERSONNEL AT ANOTHER FACILITY. TITLE TO THE MATERIAL DOES NOT PASS TO THE BUYER UNTIL THE SCRAP HAS BEEN MUTILATED. BUYER AGREES TO ALLOW USG PERSONNEL TO WITNESS DESTRUCTION."

akodo
March 17, 2009, 12:10 AM
Jeff White writes
Basically if it's not for export, it's good to go.

That may be the kicker. In a world of 'global economy' the DOD may be making a move to 'standardize' where they simply are going to mutiliate it ALL simply because SOME may be purchased by a foreign body for export.

Mutilate it all and you don't have to worry.

Okee
March 17, 2009, 12:22 AM
http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auctio...&convertTo=USD
This link is from the official DOD Website TODAY MARCH 16, 2009 It is current information.

Here is another auction:

http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auctio...&convertTo=USD

And another:
http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auctio...&convertTo=USD

And another:
http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auctio...&convertTo=USD

They removed these auctions and I cant find anymore spent brass on the site. The second one is there but now says that it must be destroyed.:banghead:

ACBMWM3
March 17, 2009, 12:26 AM
Yepp all the auctions that an hour ago said no mutilation required now says it has to be...

D. Manley
March 17, 2009, 12:33 AM
What does DEMIL Code B say? It says that it doesn't have to be destroyed. Someone is putting out bad information and it's most likely DODLiquidators and all the people pushing panic buttons. Anyone who can read at the 9th grade level can read the definitions of the DEMIL Codes and see that DEMIL Code B does not require destruction. If the email said DEMIL Code D it would have some credibility. But it says B. So either the email is wrong or the whole thing is some kind of misunderstanding.

I've got an email out to the Defense Logistic Agency Customer Service Center. Hopefully I'll have the correct information soon. These policy changes are not verbal. There is always a written message. It seems kind of funny that no one not even Defense Liquidators can supply a copy of the message changing the policy.

In 28 years and 11 months in the Army I never once saw anything like this happen without a written message that you could access and read for yourself.

Something smells to high heaven about this whole situation. If the policy changed, it's not anywhere on the DLA website. They would post changes like that immediately because in many cases that's where the end users go for the info.

Jeff, if you'll check the AUCTION LINK (http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2247011&convertTo=USD) in your original post you'll find it has been pulled. THIS (http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2272021&convertTo=USD) is what you'll now see required by Government Liquidations.

Lone_Gunman
March 17, 2009, 12:48 AM
OK so it looks like this may be for real.

Who was in charge of making this decision? Was it a nameless bureaucrat, or would this have been an official decision handed down from the Office of the President or what?

RX-178
March 17, 2009, 12:55 AM
If the letter was sent by the DLA, then Government Liquidations received it too, and will comply with it.

That does not mean that it was not a clerical error. Spent ammo casings have ALWAYS been Demil Code B, and the letter CITES Demil Code B very clearly.

People have written the NRA, and received a response that they have been working with the DoD on this issue for a several days, and believe a clerical error has taken place.

BUT, that doesn't change the situation. The DLA has signed off on a policy that requires mutilation of spent brass, even though the policy is based on an incorrect code.

Until this is corrected, the order to mutilate spent brass is the current policy.

(edited to add) And Government Liquidations is not part of the DoD in any way shape or form. They sell surplus equipment from ANY branch of the government. They would have no knowledge of the circumstances behind the DLA letter other than receiving it, and complying with it as it was written.

Gewehr98
March 17, 2009, 01:18 AM
However, as a retired military type myself, I think he should dig a little further into the regs.

They've added an additional Integrity Code 3 as a suffix to the Code B brass.

I hate tinfoil hattery as much as the next guy, but this actually looks like it's been written in concrete, folks may not get intact cartridge brass anymore, even if they're a domestic customer. Why?

I dunno, and it's going to have to come out in the wash soon enough. Supposedly, the NRA-ILA is trying to get a waiver through the DoD to exempt .50 caliber and smaller cartridge brass from the new Demil Code B Integrity Code 3 rule as promulgated late last week by the DLA to their underlings.

I figure it's the Navy vice admiral in charge of DLA, covering his sore posterior after the F-14 Tomcat parts SNAFU. That, or it's one of his staff, playing a little fast and loose with the rules.

As for the auctions that still show that the stuff doesn't have to be mutilated, it's because they haven't been updated yet. Remember, the edict came out late last week. One of the folks who won a 45,000 lb. cartridge brass auction earlier last week called to confirm the rumor before he drove to pick up the stuff, and was told he would either have to demil the brass he won, or he could get a refund on his auction price. IOW, it's ex-post facto. His story is quoted below, exactly as I found it in the parallel discussion now being held at ARFCOM.

Not good, and if you think about folks like Georgia Arms, GIBrass, Black Hills, and all the other businesses and home reloaders who use Lake City brass, it does make me wonder just what in the hell they were thinking...

More here:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=844248

This is the sad part. The poor guy thought he was good to go:

1776Privateer 1776Privateer is offline
Man On The Street

Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1
Default
To all non believers;

I have just joined your forum in order to set it straight.
I am a small business owner involved in reprocessing military brass. I recently purchased approximately 45,000lbs of small caliber brass from Government Liquidation on 02/10/09, and on Tuesday, 3/10/09, I received my clearance to remove the brass. This brass was described as “MUTILATION IS NOT REQUIRED” and still reads the same.

Link to auction site: http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2159994&convertTo=USD

On Thursday, 3/12/09, I received the following email from Government Liquidation:
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––-

March 12, 2009


Springville, CA 93265

Re: Event 7039-5925:

Dear ...,

Effective immediately DOD Surplus, LLC, will be implementing new requirements for mutilation of fired shell casings. The new DRMS requirement calls for DOD Surplus personnel to witness the mutilation of the property and sign the Certificate of Destruction. Mutilation of the property can be done at the DRMO, if permitted by the Government, or it may be mutilated at a site chosen by the buyer. Mutilation means that the property will be destroyed to the extent prevents its reuse or reconstruction. DOD Surplus personnel will determine when property has been sufficiently mutilated to meet the requirements of the Government.

If you do not agree with the new conditions of your spot sale, please sign the appropriate box provided below stating that you do not agree to the new terms and would like to cancel your purchase effective immediately. If you do agree to the new terms please sign in the appropriate box provided below to acknowledge your understanding and agreement with the new requirements relating to your purchase. Fax the signed document back to (480) 367-1450, emailed responses are not acceptable.

Please respond to this request no later than close of business Monday, March 16th, 2009.

Sincerely,

Government Liquidation.
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

I responded with;
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

March 13, 2009

Manager
Government Liquidation, LLC
DOD Surplus, LLC

Dear ...,

I spoke with ... the assistant manager of your customer relations department earlier today and he said that this affects my purchase. Please clarify / explain weather this only applies to someone who wishes to export these casings, or is this for all present and future purchases of fired shell casings intended for domestic reloading. The description for event 7039-5925, and other current listings for fired shell casings on the Government Liquidation web site still shows “MUTILATION NOT REQUIRED”.

I received an email on Tuesday, 3/10/09 that my EUC had cleared and that I must remove the items within 14 days. I immediately started making arrangements for the prompt removal of the property, …

The determination of this matter will affect the continuation of my business, my family’s livelihood, and the livelihood of my employees.

Please advise immediately, I am scheduled to fly out to Indiana on Sunday night to ready the casings for shipping.

Thank you
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Their response was the following email;
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

Thank you for your email. The recently implemented mutilation requirement applies to your auction and all other current and future auctions that contain fired shell casings. If you do not agree with the new conditions of your spot sale, please sign the appropriate box provided in the letter that you received on March 12, 2009, stating that you do not agree to the new terms and would like to cancel your purchase effective immediately. If you do agree to the new terms please sign in the appropriate box provided in the letter that you received on March 12, 2009, to acknowledge your understanding and agreement with the new requirements relating to your purchase. Fax the signed document back to (480) 367-1450, emailed responses are not acceptable.

Should you choose not to agree with the new conditions of your spot sale, you will be limited in remedy to a refund of the purchase price and cancellation of the sale, according to Section 4-K of the Terms and Conditions. Section 4-K of the Terms and Conditions is posted below for your reference and understanding.
Section 4-K. In the event that DRMS changes a Demil Code or determines that an item offered for sale by GL may not be sold, or must be sold with restrictions, GL may withdraw the item from sale or place additional restrictions on the sale at any time prior to the removal of the item by the Buyer. The Buyer will be limited in remedy to a refund of the purchase price and cancellation of the sale.

We appreciate your cooperation and understanding in this matter.

Sincerely,

Customer Service Management
Government Liquidation, LLC
DOD Surplus, LLC
15051 N. Kierland Blvd, Ste 300
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
I responded with;
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

March 13, 2009

Manager
Government Liquidation, LLC
DOD Surplus, LLC

Dear ...,

Please provide the documents requiring the mutilation of all fired shell casings and source of these documents.

Thank you
––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––


As of 11:30am PDT, 3/16/09, I have not received a response. I am continuing with contacting anyone and everyone who will listen; My Congressman, Devin Nunes, 21st district; The DRMS; The NRA; The CRPA; …

If anyone can help, please post it here or contact those that can

I would LOVE for this to be a rumor, or a hoax, honestly. Maybe somebody at DLA will just get smacked upside the head, and things will return to normal...

ants
March 17, 2009, 01:47 AM
Reading through all the online sources related to this event, I see three possible origins of the decision:

A complete screw up, which may or may not be corrected.
A 'backdoor' attack on the shooting public by the new Obama administration.
A response to the domestic purchase and subsequent export of US military surplus (not just brass, but other goods) to global regions where the material may be used against us.
There may be other possibilities, of course. It will be interesting to find out.
Meanwhile, I'm contacting the liaison staff at the offices of my representatives in Congress. What are you doing about it?
Don't just sit there, we must respond quickly and loudly so they don't think we'll take all future blows laying down.

FromMyColdDeadHand
March 17, 2009, 02:54 AM
I'm looking at it from another prespective. Let's say the ammo was recent (last few years production). They bought the metal, made the rounds and are now basicly returning it to metal. Well, copper and zinc are about 25% of the price they were over the past few years. So not only did they buy high and sell low, they ran thru money forming the cases, and I guess shredding them too.

That is destroying money at a level that would make the AIG guys blush.

What percentage of .223/5.56 ammo made each year for the civilian market are reprocessed MIL cases?

hso
March 17, 2009, 03:07 AM
One issue may be that not all the expended brass was bought for remanufacture/reloading. If remanufacture/reloading is a small fraction of what is bought every year the issue of export control becomes much more prominent.

Evenflo76
March 17, 2009, 08:49 AM
A 'backdoor' attack on the shooting public by the new Obama administration.

I'll go with Bullet #2 for $500 Alex. This has executive branch written all over it. No bill, no order. Just a rule change.

The "F-14" example is much different and way out of context. The United States Federal Government has supplied more munitions to people around the world than anyone. Ours, our enemy's, whoever.

And now all of the sudden they are worried about the Taliban getting spent 5.56 brass? So they can reload in their caves!?

I don't think so!

Meanwhile, I'm contacting the liaison staff at the offices of my representatives in Congress. What are you doing about it?
Don't just sit there, we must respond quickly and loudly so they don't think we'll take all future blows laying down.

ants, you have it right. Let our Reps know that "somehow" an industry is being affected by this and common folk are having to pay more.

Letter sent today. Tin Foil Rant: OFF

salthouse
March 17, 2009, 08:59 AM
Check the links that were posted yesterday as "not requiring mutilation". They seem to have either been change to require mutilation or they have been "Lot pulled by the Sales Admin Team". My guess is that the website did not have the most current information.
(I know, hard to believe there could be a mistake on the internet)

ch1966
March 17, 2009, 09:27 AM
Government Liquidations is not A contractor handling the brass.
Government Liquidations is THE contractor handling the brass.
Our government has cut off the brass.
No explanation given.
Tinfoil or not, that is your reality check.
Naysayers, please pull your heads out of the sand.


"In 28 years and 11 months in the Army I never once saw anything like this happen without a written message that you could access and read for yourself.

Something smells to high heaven about this whole situation. If the policy changed, it's not anywhere on the DLA website. They would post changes like that immediately because in many cases that's where the end users go for the info."

I understand you hesitancy, but our country is under new management comrade.

CONTACT YOUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES TODAY!!!

lord1234
March 17, 2009, 10:59 AM
an update: This morning I spoke in a live chat session to a GovLiquidations.com representative. Below is a transcript. They seemed to genuinely understand our predicament. Please remember, its not GovLiq's fault. Contact your rep/senator ASAP.


Chat InformationPlease wait for a site operator to respond.

Chat InformationYou are now chatting with 'Heidi'

Heidi: Welcome to our live chat service! How may I assist you?

lord1234: hello, can you tell me about the recent rules regarding mutilation of spent brass casings?

lord1234: Do spent brass casings of 5.56, 7.62 and other small arms calibers now have to be mutilated?

Heidi: Unfortunately, the only information I have is that all munitions, regardless of shape or caliber, need to be mutilated.

lord1234: i thought that small arms brass not for export was classified as "class b"?

lord1234: "B MLI (Non-SME) -- Demilitarization not required. Trade Security Controls required at disposition."

lord1234: as I am sure you can understand, there is quite a lot of rumors going around right now about what the correct answer is(though of course govliquidations is the last word)

Heidi: That was correct. But now the DLA (Defense Logistics Agency) is requiring all munitions to be mutilated.

lord1234: was there any reasoning given for that(though i am sure not)

Heidi: Unfortunately, no.

Heidi: More information will be made available as soon as it can and as soon as we know we will inform you as well.

lord1234: thanks

lord1234: I appreciate your help!

Heidi: My pleasure.

FromMyColdDeadHand
March 17, 2009, 11:26 AM
Can anyone quantify the loss to the government? I think that if not presented right, people will think that it is a bunch of militia guys complaining that the military doesn't give them ammo anymore.

The shell casings sell for what?
The mutilted scrap sells for what?
How much do they sell in a year?
How much money is the Govt throwing away?

There is the loss of that revenue, then on the other side there are the PD/LEO organizations that will have to pay more for ammo, what do they have to cut?

Turn the dollars lost by the federal government and convert that into a tangible equivilent and then put that with the loss by the LEOs.

I don't want to make it totally about the LEOs, since I don't want restrictions on the casings, but they make a great focal point.

ch1966
March 17, 2009, 12:07 PM
Fact: The government has cutoff the unmutilated brass with no explanation
Fact: By ordering the mutilation of all brass, the government is devaluing the surplus and losing revenue. Figures vary on the losses, but the point is indisputable.
Fact: This action will create a loss of jobs in the ammunition industry.
Fact: This action will negatively affect the supply of ammo to the citizens. AMMUNITION CONTROL = GUN CONTROL = THIS IS AN ASSAULT ON YOUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS

While it remains unclear whether this is an intentional act on behalf of our government, or a mistake, the above facts are indisputable.
The brass was bought and paid for by the taxpayer. It belongs to you and me.
CONTACT YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS!!!

Lightninstrike
March 17, 2009, 12:11 PM
Emailed state and US senators and State rep this morning. US rep is useless. I know, bad attitude on my part.

Gewehr98
March 17, 2009, 12:26 PM
And I excluded people from buying reloadable cartridge brass by demil/shredding/crushing/mutilating/popping action, what would I stand to gain?

IOW, who's going to bid on all that brass once it's rendered unusable by a reloader?

The Chinese? Maybe. They've been buying up a lot of our scrap metals, but are they hungry for cartridge brass alloy?

What about commercial ammunition manufacturers? Would Olin-Winchester/Remington/Federal/Speer/Hornady/Nosler want ready-made cartridge brass to smelt down and form into cartridge buttons for drawing into new rounds? They'd get it for pennies on the dollar compared to sourcing the raw materials, namely copper and zinc, needed to make new brass.

I'm not saying there's collusion going on here, but it could be a sweetheart deal for ammo manufacturers, who could even sell rounds made from that scrapped brass back to the government.

I'd still have to wonder if economically, the DLA didn't shoot themselves in the foot. :confused:

rickomatic
March 17, 2009, 12:31 PM
Alright guys. It seems as if after all has been hashed out, this ruling is in fact real. First order of business of course is to contact our representatives. At the same time, I think, in order to more directly focus our displeasure, and dispell all the tin foil hat murmer, we need to find out exactly where this directive originated. We all have our suspicions, I'm sure, but the truth will be a powerful tool for us. That being said, is anyone here familiar with how to do a freedom of information act request? I'm thinking that this may be a way for us to get to the bottom of this.
I'm hoping the NRA or GOA are working on this angle. Any members here (Dave Workman, or others) know how to go about this? Let's use all the tools in our arsenal.

hso
March 17, 2009, 12:48 PM
Here's the thread in Activism (http://thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=436018) if you want to do something.

Remember Activism is not a discussion forum. It is for executing a plan of action. Right now the plan is to contact your elected congresscritters as well as your state elected officials. We have a couple of example letters you can modify. If you have another example of a letter please post it. If you want to carp and complain, don't bother to post in Activism. We try to keep the workspace clean there and junk gets thrown out.

NavyLCDR
March 17, 2009, 12:55 PM
That being said, is anyone here familiar with how to do a freedom of information act request?

http://www.dla.mil/public_info/efoia/FOIAServCntr9a.html#POC

ch1966
March 17, 2009, 01:17 PM
Possible breaking news:

You might want to consider this as breaking news...

I don't post a lot around here and most of you have no idea who I am. Fact is, I'm an IT guy. A regular, run-of-the-mill computer jockey. But I happen to work for DOD Surplus/Government Liquidation. I've been told by my CEO that as of this morning the requirement to mutilate expended brass has been lift by virtue of a reclassification from Demil B to Demil Q. This applies to all calibers .50 and under. I'm still trying to get confirmation that .50 cal is included in the "safe to sell" list, or whether mutilation is still required.

I'm busy at work right now, but I will try to post back with more detail and updates when I get the chance.

Ed

posted today 12:12 Central time

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=844248&page=11

hso
March 17, 2009, 01:21 PM
I certainly hope that this gets lifted, but I wouldn't let up the pressure on our elected officials until the sales at the DoD surplussing contractors websites are changed back to "mutilation not required".

NavyLCDR
March 17, 2009, 01:25 PM
Like this one:

http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2259942&convertTo=USD

Old Fuff
March 17, 2009, 01:31 PM
I agree with HSO.

There have been earlier reports that NRA prople were having discussions with individuals in the Defense Department concerning this issue. Maybe they got somewhere - at least I hope so.

That said, I would still like to know where this order originated, and why.

ch1966
March 17, 2009, 01:32 PM
It's been shown that DOD Surplus/ Goverment liquidations are not updated "up to the minute". Continually linking to individual lots up for auction has muddied the waters through out this ordeal.
I am awaiting confirmation from the industry that the "unmutilated" brass is flowing again, before declaring "all is well".

ShadyScott999
March 17, 2009, 01:34 PM
I recieved this e-mail from Georgia Arms today. Sorry if someone has already posted.

To our Valued Customers,

Effective 3/12/09 DOD Surplus, LLC is requiring the mutilation of all spent shell casings. This, of course is designed to prevent the recycling of these cases. This creates a situation that would appear to be the opposite of what our national focus is reported to be. As we are asked to recycle and move to GREEN products on one hand, we are being instructed to destroy this brass rather than recycle it on the other. First, this decreases the value of this surplus product to the government by about 80%, wasting revenue that we desperately need in these economically stressed times. Second, destroying this brass creates a huge expenditure of energy to resmelt, realloy, restamp and redraw this now unusable product to make it usable again. How is that going green and how does that benefit anyone? Third, it puts unnecessary economic stress on our job market. There is no question that this new policy will result in layoffs to some of our employees. I believe our goal should be to create more jobs, not more unemployment. This is not to mention the obvious We all need to contact our represenatives and let them know how destructive this new directive is to our economy.

We are evaluating our present inventory of 223, 308 brass to determine how best to supply these ammunitions to orders on hand as far back as 10/08. We will advise you, our customer, this week on website & through email our decisions on future sale, shipments.

Thanks
Georgia Arms

Below are two emails that we received from DOD (Department of Defense):

Dear Valued Customer:
Please take a moment to note important changes set forth by the Defense Logistics Agency:
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.
Thank you,
DOD Surplus
15051 N Kierland Blvd # 300
Scottsdale, AZ 85254

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

March 12, 2009

Georgia Arms
PO Box 238
Villa Rica, GA 30180

Re: Event 7084-6200:

Dear Larry Haynie,

Effective immediately DOD Surplus, LLC, will be implementing new requirements for mutilation of fired shell casings. The new DRMS requirement calls for DOD Surplus personnel to witness the mutilation of the property and sign the Certificate of Destruction. Mutilation of the property can be done at the DRMO, if permitted by the Government, or it may be mutilated at a site chosen by the buyer. Mutilation means that the property will be destroyed to the extent prevents its reuse or reconstruction. DOD Surplus personnel will determine when property has been sufficiently mutilated to meet the requirements of the Government.

If you do not agree with the new conditions of your spot sale, please sign the appropriate box provided below stating that you do not agree to the new terms and would like to cancel your purchase effective immediately. If you do agree to the new terms please sign in the appropriate box provided below to acknowledge your understanding and agreement with the new requirements relating to your purchase. Fax the signed document back to (480) 367-1450, emailed responses are not acceptable.

Please respond to this request no later than close of business Monday, March 16th, 2009.

Sincerely,

Government Liquidation.

Okee
March 17, 2009, 01:47 PM
Quote: NavyLT

" Like this one:
http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auctio...&convertTo=USD "


This and all other lots I found still say needed to be mutilated for sale.

http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2272021&convertTo=USD

D. Manley
March 17, 2009, 01:47 PM
You might want to consider this as breaking news...

I don't post a lot around here and most of you have no idea who I am. Fact is, I'm an IT guy. A regular, run-of-the-mill computer jockey. But I happen to work for DOD Surplus/Government Liquidation. I've been told by my CEO that as of this morning the requirement to mutilate expended brass has been lift by virtue of a reclassification from Demil B to Demil Q. This applies to all calibers .50 and under. I'm still trying to get confirmation that .50 cal is included in the "safe to sell" list, or whether mutilation is still required.

I'm busy at work right now, but I will try to post back with more detail and updates when I get the chance.

Ed

That would indeed be good news, let's hope it's accurate. This entire affair feels like the Government Surplus ship is lacking a decision maker and is a bit adrift.

ch1966
March 17, 2009, 01:50 PM
D Manley- if you follow the link to the arfcom thread you'll read that the DLA was acting over the protests of the CEO of DoD S/ GL....

Of course this is all unsubstantiated as of now.....

Posted at 12:31 Central:

The DLA was not going to listen to the CEO of our company, alone, as the only voice of protest.

I'm not at liberty to post anything official –– I'm not that important and I'm not at that pay grade. There will be another follow up email (likely today) to all subscribers of the newsletter from our website that started this whole ordeal.

Ed
User Info


http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=844248&page=11

Dokkalfar
March 17, 2009, 03:11 PM
hmm... well looking it up on the DoD website, i cant really fin anything. but the fact that several dealers have that notice up is in and of itself a rather big sign that somethings up.

ch1966
March 17, 2009, 04:00 PM
More possible good news:

Posted today 2:56 pm Central:

We won!

Here is the poop I just got from Gov Liquidation.

This is the transcript of the live chat I just had.


Please wait for a site operator to respond.

You are now chatting with 'Heidi'

Heidi: Welcome to our live chat service! How may I assist you?

Todd: Hello Heidi

Heidi: Hi!~

Todd: I have been told that all spent brass cases are to be destroyed as part of the EUC.

Todd: I have also heard that this NEW policy is being reversed.

Heidi: That is partially correct.

Todd: What is the truth?

Heidi: That is also partially correct.

Todd: Can you clearify as to what is happening?

Heidi: We received a slight change in the mutilation requirements for expended cartridges. Effective immediately any expended mention 50 caliber(12.7mm) or smaller can be released without mutilation. This includes expended cartridges and links. All other expended munitions larger than 50 cal including grenade fuses and flare canisters etc must still be mutilated.

Todd: So this is fact as of right now?

Todd: Can you tell me the source of who made the chage of the EUC you mentioned??

Heidi: This is for all munitions, not just ones that require an EUC.

Todd: Great! who is the governing body that made the change back to allowing sales of 50 caliber and below without mutilation?

Heidi: This came from the Defense Logistics Agency.

Heidi: If you have any more questions or concerns, please email management.

Todd: Thank you for your time.


http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=844248&page=12

Hungry Seagull
March 17, 2009, 04:05 PM
Here is the Demil codes that I pulled off the net recently.

DEMILITARIZATION CODES TO BE ASSIGNED TO FEDERAL SUPPLY ITEMS AND CODING GUIDANCE

DEMILITARIZATION CODES

CODE EXPLANATION

A Non-MLI/Non-CCLI -- Demilitarization not required.

B MLI (Non-SME) -- Demilitarization not required. Trade Security Controls required at disposition.

C MLI (SME) -- Remove and/or demilitarization installed key point(s), as prescribed in this manual, or lethal parts, components and accessories.

D MLI (SME) -- Total destruction of item and components so as to preclude restoration or repair to a usable condition by melting, cutting, tearing, scratching, crushing, breaking, punching, neutralizing, etc. (As an alternate, burial or deep water dumping may be used when approved by the DOD Demilitarization Program Office.)

E MLI -- Demilitarization instructions to be furnished by the DoD Demilitarization Program Office.


F MLI (SME) -- Demilitarization instructions to be furnished by the Item/Technical Manager/Equipment Specialist.

G MLI (SME) -- MLI Demilitarization Required -- AEDA. Demilitarization, and, if required, declassification and/or removal of sensitive marking or information, will be accomplished prior to physical transfer to a DRMO. This code will be used for all AEDA items including those which also require declassification and/or removal of sensitive markings or information.

P MLI (SME) -- MLI (Security Classified Item) -- Declassification, and any other required demilitarization, and removal of any sensitive markings or information will be accomplished prior to accountability or physical transfer to a DRMO. This code will not be assigned to ammunition, explosive and dangerous articles (AEDA) items.

Q CCLI -- Commerce Control List Item -- Demilitarization not required. CCLIs are dual use (military, commercial and other strategic uses) items under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, through the Export Administration Regulations. The types of items controlled under the CCL are commodities (i.e., equipment, materials, electronics, etc.), software and technology. The CCL does not include those items exclusively controlled by another department or agency of the U.S. government. (See DOD 4160.21-M-1, Chapter 3 and Appendix 5).


Link below is trade.

http://www.army.mil/usapa/epubs/pdf/r700_144.pdf

Jeff White
March 17, 2009, 04:08 PM
At no time during this controversy has anyone mentioned any written guidance that prompted this policy. Last night I missed most of the Cardinals/Tigers rebroadcast on Foxsports Midwest while I looked through every DLA message and DOD guidance I could access with my AKO (Army Knowledge Online) account for any written change. Today I called a friend who works at DRMO and he was unaware of this change.

My best guess that this whole tempest in a teapot was the result of a misunderstood phone conversation between someone at DOD Liquidators and someone at DLA.

Hungry Seagull
March 17, 2009, 04:09 PM
And that teacup spilled all over Georgia Arms?

Surely that means it's true.

Jeff White
March 17, 2009, 04:17 PM
What's true? That this was a backdoor attempt by the Obama Administration at gun control? Or that someone at Gov Liquidators misunderstood something that was said by DLA and implemented a policy that didn't need to be implemented?

Given the total lack of any written guidance on this policy change, I am inclined to believe the latter. Not that I don't think we can trust the administration, but that something as trivial as DEMIL guidance for spent brass isn't important enough to reach the White House.

ch1966
March 17, 2009, 04:34 PM
Again from arfcom. This is the only place I can find information coming out. I cannot vouch for it's authenticity but it corroborates previously posted information:

1:27 central

Originally Posted By SandHillsHillbilly:
This supposedly came from Senator Lindsey Graham's office today:

Below is what Senator Graham's office has found.

They are monitoring the waiver request closely and should know something in the next 2-3 weeks.

As you know, this would be a big problem for law enforcement agencies with
low budgets (most of them) and recreational shooters who depend on expended
military brass for reloading if the waiver is not granted. There is no
"security risk" for selling used brass in bulk. It was probably just a
short-sighted bureaucratic move that did not foresee the unintended
consequences.

Military property is subject to certain coding, according to its type and
use, whether it can be sold commercially and, if so, under what
restrictions.

According to the sales division of the Defense Reutilization and Marketing
Service (DRMS), fired small arms cartridge cases, until recently, were DEMIL
(demilitarization) Code E, meaning that they could not be sold unless
destroyed. However, a waiver to the destruction requirement allowed the
cases to be sold intact, within the United States, but not for export.

Property given DEMIL Code B could be sold as well, under some restrictions.
However, in the last days of the Bush Administration, Under-Secretary Bell
issued a policy letter prohibiting the sale of Code B property. A waiver
could be obtained, to allow the sale of Code B property if destroyed in a
prescribed manner. At the time, this was irrelevant to the question of small
arms cartridge cases, because they were still Code E.

Recently, however, the Demilitarization Coding Management Office within the
DRMS recommended that small arms cartridge cases be given Code B. This
recommendation was accepted. Therefore, currently, fired military small arms
cartridge cases are Code B property that may be sold only if destroyed.

However, the sales division of DRMS, recognizing the impact that this new
policy will have on small businesses who sell loaded ammunition utilizing
these fired cases, and upon gun owners who purchase such ammunition at
considerable cost savings, has suspended the collection of fired cartridge
cases from military bases, to prevent their destruction. And, they will be
petitioning for a waiver, to allow the sale of intact cartridge cases .50
caliber and below. They are not asking for a waiver for larger cases, which
are purchased as souvenir type items artillery shells, for example. They
anticipate that within the next 2-3 weeks, the waiver will be approved.

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=844248&page=11

If this is correct than someone within DCMO requested reclassification of small arms cartridge cases specifically.
While some may consider this a "tempest in a teapot" or a "non-issue", the fact of the matter is that this brass supply has been cutoff to the ammunition industry for 5 days.
Whether it was intentional or accidental the situation is serious to those in the industry. "Pooh Poohing" the facts does not make them go away.

ilbob
March 17, 2009, 04:40 PM
What's true? That this was a backdoor attempt by the Obama Administration at gun control? Or that someone at Gov Liquidators misunderstood something that was said by DLA and implemented a policy that didn't need to be implemented?

Given the total lack of any written guidance on this policy change, I am inclined to believe the latter. Not that I don't think we can trust the administration, but that something as trivial as DEMIL guidance for spent brass isn't important enough to reach the White House.
Jeff - my guess is someone from on top decided this was a good idea and some flunky implemented it. The flunky will get blamed.

This kind of thing is exactly the kind of thing Obama et al would do. They can't hit us directly right this second, so they tried a sneak attack. I don't think they realized how much reloaded ammo there is, or maybe they did and thought this was a way to reduce the availability of ammo without having to actually legislate anything.

Jeff White
March 17, 2009, 04:44 PM
While some may consider this a "tempest in a teapot" or a "non-issue", the fact of the matter is that this brass supply has been cutoff to the ammunition industry for 5 days.

The only issue that is on topic at THR is if this is a deliberate attempt to restrict the availability of ammunition. It's looking more and more like it isn't. Every industry has to deal with supply chain problems. The supply chain problems of any industry are not on topic at THR.

Whether it was intentional or accidental the situation is serious to those in the industry. "Pooh Poohing" the facts does not make them go away.

When you have a fact post it. Right now everyone is going absolutely crazy over rumors.

The community needs to put it's big boy pants on and stop going crazy over every unsubstantiated rumor.

The only way this is a big deal is if it was actually a back door attempt at gun control. Other then that it's just someone's supply chain problem and not anyone's concern.

Gewehr98
March 17, 2009, 04:53 PM
I know that deflates a balloon or three, but here's more from one of the employees at Government Liquidations:

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=844248&page=12

The facts as I know them, which come directly from candid discussions with my CEO, indicate the following:

- Prior to 11/2008, Demil B items required no mutilation for sale to the public. That policy changed in November, but several exceptions were granted. Expended munitions brass was one of those given a waiver.
- Enter the new administration. Since Demil B category items had been given a broad, general label as "national security sensitive" someone above the DRMS (likely in the DLA) reviewed the policy and immediately went with a CYA policy and yanked all exemptions. No thoughts or considerations were given to the implications of this policy change, but this directive was issued to DOD Surplus effective immediately last week.
- S&$! storm blows up as a result. In particular, the letters, phone calls, and emails to our legislators, the media, and anyone else who would listen caused this policy to be review post haste.
- As of this morning our company was informed that expended munitions brass will now be reclassified as Demil Q which requires no mutilation unless sold to a foreign country.


There you have it. The policy change was simply the result of some n00b administrator attempting to close a perceived "national security" loophole and brass got caught up in the snare. There was no political motivation behind the policy change, but it is good that people like us were suspicious, got involved, and helped bring about a resolution.

ch1966
March 17, 2009, 04:57 PM
I would argue that a supply chain problem caused by the government is every shooter's concern, with the implications it has on the ammuntion industry.
And your concern is last night's ball game?
Good day to you sir.
I'm done.

ETA ".....In particular, the letters, phone calls, and emails to our legislators, the media, and anyone else who would listen caused this policy to be review post haste.
- As of this morning our company was informed that expended munitions brass will now be reclassified as Demil Q which requires no mutilation unless sold to a foreign country.


There you have it. The policy change was simply the result of some n00b administrator attempting to close a perceived "national security" loophole and brass got caught up in the snare. There was no political motivation behind the policy change, but it is good that people like us were suspicious, got involved, and helped bring about a resolution."

Big thank you to those concerned enough to react to this problem!

Hungry Seagull
March 17, 2009, 05:43 PM
Certainly smells like Victory.

Is there any definate word or possibility that Georgia Arms can continue thier work and all other people to calm down and savor this victory?

I think we should stay true to all things related to the 2A that matters, even the most boring supply issues.

Jeff White
March 17, 2009, 05:57 PM
I think we should stay true to all things related to the 2A that matters, even the most boring supply issues.

It's always better to know the facts before you jump in and make accusations. There still aren't many facts available to us.

DHJenkins
March 17, 2009, 05:59 PM
I wouldn't go so far as to call it a victory. It was a wronged turned right, certainly, but there wasn't much of a struggle.

Someone new in a position of power made a poor (snap) decision which was corrected - it happens all too often.

Hungry Seagull
March 17, 2009, 06:03 PM
Why would I think something that is fixed to be a accusation. If I think that something is fixed due to the attention these last few days onto this situation, why yes it's a good outcome and one to be desired.

I never will know ALL the facts, I doubt that anyone will either except those who specifically work on that problem.

If I, as a US Citizen understand that there will be no problems with supply of Brass and can rely on a good amount of ammuntion for the near future of some years, why yes that is a wonderful thing.

No accusations anywhere.

MaterDei
March 17, 2009, 06:10 PM
Jeff White said

I hope this ends all the controversy.


NavyLT said

Good luck with that one!

I give NavyLT the prediction of the year award! Are you always so prescient?

Hungry Seagull
March 17, 2009, 06:12 PM
I hope that Georgia Arms will be able to call everyone back to work soon and get back to running out the orders that are pending.

JWJacobVT
March 17, 2009, 06:19 PM
I hate to say but I will.

I will believe it when I can start getting brass again.

Animal Mother
March 17, 2009, 06:35 PM
I wouldn't go so far as to call it a victory. It was a wronged turned right, certainly, but there wasn't much of a struggle.

Someone new in a position of power made a poor (snap) decision which was corrected - it happens all too often.

I think it is definitely a victory. It is all too often that a poor snap decision is made and it wasn't corrected. I remember all the surplus guns the DOD destroyed during Clinton:

SMALL ARMS DESTROYED AS OF MARCH 15, 1994

M1911A1 Pistols--110,000 M14 Rifles Cal. 7.62 NATO--50,000 M1 Carbines--45,000 M1903A3 Drill Rifles--40,000 M1 Garands--30,000 M3.45 Cal. Submachine Guns--20,000 M1903-A3 Rifles--6,000 M12 (H&R 5200) Cal. .22 Rifles--6,000 Total destroyed--307,000 Total cost--$1,079,873

Source: Defense Logistics Agency, Defense Distribution Region East


Let's be glad we turned this one around and right quick.

ACBMWM3
March 17, 2009, 07:05 PM
Just received this email from Gov. Liquidation about the expended casings!

Directive was rescinded at 4:30 this afternoon, thanks to everyone







am sorry you hadn’t been informed –



Word came down that all shells 50 caliber or smaller CAN still be purchased without the mutilation requirement as long as kept in the US.



(As it was in limbo, I did not sent your EUC to Battle Creek until today, also why I have not contacted you for payment until today.)



Thanks!



Arana K. Wolin

Document Verification Supervisor

Government Liquidation, LLC

DOD Surplus, LLC

15051 N Kierland Blvd. #300

Scottsdale, AZ 85254

(480) 609-3306 direct telephone

(480) 596-4480 fax

awolin@govliquidation.com






YAY FOR US!!

Hungry Seagull
March 17, 2009, 07:25 PM
+1 yay!

Zoogster
March 17, 2009, 07:28 PM
Aniumal Mother:SMALL ARMS DESTROYED AS OF MARCH 15, 1994

That is nothing, Clinton would destroy or force the sale to foriegn nations over 750,000 m14 rifles alone.
He did the same with most remianing garands in the armories.
He wanted to keep them from ever being sold to civilians through what is today the CMP. Just like garands have been for decades since WW2.

The M-14 or the civilian M1A is a fine rifle. The military reciever is even better than most, being made from a forged reciever.
It could easily be made semi auto only.
At the same time to support Clinton the ATF came along and made thier policy of once a machinegun always a machinegun just to quiet those who might argue.
He also kept the massive stockpile, literaly thousands upon thousands of 1911 pistols from ever going to civilians destroying most.


The great irony is that today the military is unable to get enough m14 rifles. Finding a great need for such rifles in Iraq and especialy Afghanistan.
They are purchasing any they can find from any foriegn location that was sold some previously. Unfortunately Clinton destroyed most of them and they cannot fill the need.
They military has been scrambling to purchase all things M14.
http://world.guns.ru/assault/m14_dmr.jpg
Thanks alot Clinton.



Back on topic, it is great to see things accomplished. A slight change in policy can easily become permanent if time is allowed to elapse and the new policy becomes "normal".

ConstitutionCowboy
March 17, 2009, 07:39 PM
Not to sound like the eternal pessimist, but this could have just been a trial balloon. Regardless, it's good to see it deflated.

Woody

NavyLCDR
March 17, 2009, 07:46 PM
Directive was rescinded at 4:30 this afternoon

Told you so! :neener:

Jasper86
March 17, 2009, 08:28 PM
woohoo!

only downside is all the brass auctions i was watching on GovtLiquidation are now gone...including a VERY doable one for me (less than 50 miles from home, and was a small enough quantity that it would've easily fit in my truck+small trailer).

:(

ShadyScott999
March 17, 2009, 09:26 PM
Jeff,

I only posted as fact the fact that I received that e-mail from Georgia Arms.
Lindsey Graham is my rep. I will try to contact his office tomorrow and see if I can get anymore facts.

Scott

ConstitutionCowboy
March 17, 2009, 09:38 PM
Side note: All those tinfoil hats were deerstalkers after all is said and done. How 'bout that!

Woody

Lone_Gunman
March 17, 2009, 09:43 PM
Not to sound like the eternal pessimist, but this could have just been a trial balloon. Regardless, it's good to see it deflated.

That is true, it might have been a test to see what reaction would be.

And thanks to the internet, the problem quickly became known, and was apparently fixed.

The internet is a very powerful tool to keep our 2nd Amendment (and other) rights safe. It is interesting to wonder whether or not the AWB would have been passed in 1994 if the internet had been as widespread then as it is now.

D. Manley
March 17, 2009, 10:29 PM
GEORGIA ARMS (http://georgia-arms.com/)

"Dear Loyal Customers,

Thanks to your voice, DOD has rescinded the order to mutilate all spent cases as of 4:30 pm on 3/17/09. We appreciate the time and effort that you expended, together we all made a difference. We will be posting the email we received from DOD as well as any additional information within the next 12-16 hours. Thanks so much and lets get to work!!! Georgia Arms"

1858
March 17, 2009, 11:43 PM
I'm confused .... both of these auctions still require "mutilation" ...

http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2263402&convertTo=USD

http://cgi.govliquidation.com/auction/view?id=2272021&convertTo=USD


:confused:

Gewehr98
March 17, 2009, 11:50 PM
They've just not been updated yet.

It took them 3 days to get the auctions changed to reflect the mutilation requirement.

Give them 15 minutes or so to switch the online auction verbage back. The reversal supposedly happened at 4:30 PM Government Liquidations, LLC time today... ;)

noskilz
March 18, 2009, 12:14 AM
I hope that Georgia Arms will be able to call everyone back to work soon and get back to running out the orders that are pending.

On GunTalk on Sunday (eons ago in this saga), Larry Hainey of Georgia Arms said he had enough stock on hand to keep his people busy for 2 -3 months, then layoffs would have to start. No one was laid off due to this . . . this time. :scrutiny:

P.S. Kudos to The Shootist. Nice job Gordon.

Southern Rebel
March 18, 2009, 12:35 AM
It's always better to know the facts before you jump in and make accusations

I would have to say that, in this case, the Moderator needs to practice what he preaches. In this thread, it appears that the OP was right in what he was saying - no matter how many times the argument was made that the sky was not falling!

While I would be the first to agree that gun owners as a group tend to be VERY paranoid about the current government, I would also contend that the current government has earned most of their reputation from past actions. It would be foolish on our part to classify EVERY rumor to totally without merit without having all the facts. (Now where did I put all of that surplus tin-foil I have been stockpiling for falling-sky occasions?)

noskilz
March 18, 2009, 01:50 AM
I would have to say that, in this case, the Moderator needs to practice what he preaches.

Indeed. But even worse was the Moderator's attempt, once the reality of the problem had become the 600 pound gorilla in the bedroom, to mitigate his bad call by calling it "a supply chain problem."

Every industry has to deal with supply chain problems. The supply chain problems of any industry are not on topic at THR.

Sorry, but a supply chain problem is when someone you have a contract with unexpectedly can't fulfill the order, or perhaps there's a hurricane interrupting deliveries temporarily. It is not when the government changes the rules and prohibits the purchase of brass, all brass, for reselling. This was a 4-day full-out assault on the supply of remanufactured ammo. It apparently took some significant intervention by gun nuts (like us) and politicians to get it reversed, no matter what the original source of the problem was. This could have had significant effects on the cost and availability of all ammo, not just .223.

I understand not wanting to declare the sky is always falling. But in this case, the Pied Piper had the children halfway out of the town. :eek:

Jeff White
March 18, 2009, 03:41 AM
Indeed. But even worse was the Moderator's attempt, once the reality of the problem had become the 600 pound gorilla in the bedroom, to mitigate his bad call by calling it "a supply chain problem."

This was exactly that, a supply chain problem. You people can be all sanctimonious and pat yourselves on the back all day long. But you had no, none, nada, zero effect on the outcome.

A congressional inquiry was filed last Thursday by Georgia Arms. DOD responded in four working days. If you believe that all the wasted bandwidth on the internet had anything at all to do with this, you haven't got a clue about how the system works.

You might note that no mainstream RKBA organization picked up on this. Why do you think that was? It was because no one knew what really happened. As of this writing no one has been able to produce a written memorandum or message of any type requiring the change and the change back. Doesn't anyone think that is rather odd? Things like changes to Demil codes aren't done verbally.

Everyone with sense, the NRA, GOA, CCRKBA all waited to find out what really happened before they jumped in. Why because they didn't want to look like fools and expend political capitol over what was most likely a bureaucratic foul up.

All of your calls and emails and whining, wailing and gnashing of teeth on the internet accomplished nothing more then Georgia Arms first inquiry would have. By the time everyone got going, the issue was well on it's way to being resolved.

It's now 5 days since the original issue surfaced. Most of the inquiries you all demanded from your representatives are just now making their way into legislative liaison offices at DOD. If you think that your representative picks up the phone and calls some general at the Pentagon and chews butt, you're wrong. A nice letter is composed by a staffer, it's approved by the representative, then it's mailed to the appropriate legislative liaison office, where it goes through channels to the agency that can answer the congressional inquiry. Then the agency looks into it, figures out what happened and either acts to correct the problem, so it can tell the representative what happened and that it's been corrected, or draft a reply explaining what was done and why they will continue to do it that way.

It's always real smart to jump to conclusions and raise all kinds of hell before you even know what is really happening.....:rolleyes:

It's always the best policy to find out what really happened before you jump in with both feet and make a fool of yourself. I guess that's a minority view around here.

Lone_Gunman
March 18, 2009, 08:19 AM
Jeff, I would respectfully but completely disagree with everything you said. I think you have been wrong about most of what you have said in this thread.

I see no reason why you would disrespect those who have written their representatives and Senators regarding this mess. That is exactly what citizens are supposed to do. I think the government got the message loud and clear that they are being watched carefully for bureaucratic "accidents" that affect the RKBA. Perhaps as a result they will be more careful next time.

It's always real smart to jump to conclusions and raise all kinds of hell before you even know what is really happening

Aren't you the pot calling the kettle black on this one? Weren't you incorrect about what was happening?

I am not trying to disrespect you in anyway, but I don't understand the motives for your attitude on this one.

JWF III
March 18, 2009, 08:38 AM
It seems to me that some people still have a lot of faith that our new gov't wouldn't do anything to harm us.

I for one believe differently. I saw the hatred in his eyes during his acceptance speech.

Expect more of these "miscommunications" to come.

No I don't wear tinfoil hats, I just see the facts as they are.

Wyman

Jeremy2171
March 18, 2009, 09:36 AM
This is good news but there are quite a few 20mm vulcan shooters out there that are going to be in trouble in a few years when their supply of brass runs out.....

there is no reason why "all" casing couldn't be released "as-is".

ConstitutionCowboy
March 18, 2009, 10:41 AM
This was exactly that, a supply chain problem. You people can be all sanctimonious and pat yourselves on the back all day long. But you had no, none, nada, zero effect on the outcome.

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. And, as you stated previously in reference to "having the facts", what facts do you have that we had no, none, nada, zero effect on the outcome? It works both ways, Jeff.

Now I'll go out on a limb myself and posit that phone calls were made and "discussions" were held that resulted in this nearly disastrous change-in-policy's reversal. I'll speculate that some time in the not-to-distant future we'll know who the bottom dwellers of this are/were.

Don't for one second believe that things happen in this government of the Union don't happen by fiat. Hell, most in that government can't or won't abide the Constitution. What makes you think they'll write letters and put in writing for all to discover what they truly are up to? Nothing gets put on paper until it's all been "decided" and ready for a "vote" or dictated as an EO.

We no longer live in a constitutional democratic republic. We live in a dictatorial oligarchy.

Woody

Be careful who you choose to stand behind and support. If you are unwilling to take care of yourself, you must take whatever care that comes along. I've yet to see a flock of sheep, no matter how well cared for and tended, that doesn't get fleeced from time to time and eventually end up on the dinner table. Not many sheep die a natural death. B.E. Wood

noskilz
March 18, 2009, 10:42 AM
The Mod doth protest too much, methinks.

Hungry Seagull
March 18, 2009, 11:01 AM
I for one dont see our Current Administration as one that will swear to uphold, defend and protect the Consitution. It's just another sound byte to them.

So we are here on the net watching for signs of trouble with gun related issues. I was about to place a order from Georgia Arms for 45 ammo out of desperation that no one else will have the stuff.

And to learn that Geo. Arms buckled under the Government Brass problem was just not acceptable to me. Our Southern Neighbors are doing thier best to keep things going and that is Ammuntion.

Thought about it, then got angry when it became apparent that the Brass might be sold to China, someone who will most certainly stamp ammo out of it for HER Military in a heartbeat.

WHen I get mad, I dont sit home doing nothing, I start digging. If it is all a big nothing, everyone laughs me out of the saloon and well deserved. But when other badgers start digging and we collectively talk using this here internet thing to get to the bottom of things....

Things happen for a reason. Bad things happen to slothful people who fold hands to sleep a little because these government issues are way above thier humble abode.

No sir. The Government is hired by the US People and we are the Boss. No matter which pretty-boy might be sitting in the seats of power. The Masses still call the shots.

If Ammo brass did go away, I would have thought about getting into the foundry business to start gathering Zinc, copper and Bronze plus whatever else it takes to make good brass alloys to sell to ammuntion makers.

Would have been good too. One can dream.

The Mods may be a little worn out and tired. As far as Im concerned they did a decent job keeping the stampeding herd as we are known rolling more or less in one direction.

Thanks, it was appreciated. And we learn a thing or two along the way.

Art Eatman
March 18, 2009, 11:47 AM
The latest word I've heard is that the brass need not be mutilated. That ends it for now.

If you enjoyed reading about "The DOD Surplus Brass Controversy - Fact v. Rumor" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!