Hometeached1
Member
I think that Miley Cyrus is more stable and in touch with reason than the ATF...What!! I can't believe I just used her as an example for being levelheaded.:banghead:
California: Gun store owner stops ATF Raid
- Thread starter Midwest
- Start date
- Status
rcoolbaugh
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2013
- Messages
- 35
My understanding is that it isn't so much about 80% lowers as it is about one specific lower that they sell that the BATF claims is essentially a 100% lower that is injection filled with plastic to bring it back to 80%.
We have an active thread on our local board about this as well.
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/threads/243115-Ares-Armor-fends-off-the-BATFE-for-now
We have an active thread on our local board about this as well.
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/threads/243115-Ares-Armor-fends-off-the-BATFE-for-now
Quiet
Member
Supposedly...
EP Armory advertised/made/sold "90% receivers".
Which prompted BATFE to raid them.
BATFE is now trying to track down where all those "90% receivers" went.
EP Armory advertised/made/sold "90% receivers".
Which prompted BATFE to raid them.
BATFE is now trying to track down where all those "90% receivers" went.
Last edited:
tyeo098
Member
with fixed firing pins at least
An open bolt with a free floating pin/striker setup would easily pass the ATF test.
Bubbles
Member
Anybody know where I can find a copy of the search warrant and affidavit in support thereof?
Oohhh, mad government is REALLY MAD! LOL
Last time I checked, federal law enforcement agencies conducting major criminal invesitgations don't routinely agree to a "voluntary surrender" of evidence at a later date. They get a search warrant and seize the evidence. So are they lazy, or just stupid?
Now they're all "He pulled a RUSE!" and throwing their weight around. If I were the judge, I'd make BATFE prove in court that the "firearms" are in fact firearms. No proof? The TRO would be made permanent.
I certainly hope Ares wins this one!
I would suggest we all place some orders with Ares to help support them. I think I'm gonna get an 80% hunk O metal, an ambi safety and maybe a tshirt
Absolutely. I ordered a nickel boron BCG from them. I'll find something else to buy next week
PBR Streetgang
Member
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2011
- Messages
- 413
Open bolt weapons are still legal if they were purchased before ATF ruled.
There is still about 400 Interdynamic KG-9s ( of the 1200 built) floating around out there that were fixed firing pin ,open bolt. They were purchased legally before the ban............Most were legally converted in that slim window before the ban..........
There is still about 400 Interdynamic KG-9s ( of the 1200 built) floating around out there that were fixed firing pin ,open bolt. They were purchased legally before the ban............Most were legally converted in that slim window before the ban..........
barnbwt
member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 7,340
Just curious, tell me if something doesn't follow here:
1-ATF rules the lowers are firearms by sole virtue of their construction method
2-EP armory/Ares/Everyone On Internet/ATF Approval Letter indicate the ATF is mistaken and that the actual manufacture method produces no firearm
3-ATF seems irrationally fixated on halting business and seizing the lowers, with no indication so far that they have even attempted to inspect the production facilities to corroborate or contradict #2
Shouldn't the initial warrant have applied to the production facilities alone since that is the arbiter of illegality? Granted, that's what we gunies, who know what 80% lowers are and what they are not, know, and the ATF's warrant request to the judge was surely as declarative, vague, and insinuative as their follow up document (i.e. "these are illegal lowers," vs. "we suspect these are lowers") which probably convinced an ignorant judged there were piles of unregistered M16's being given out on the street corner.
The numbered paragraphs at the end tell a very interesting story of these agents' activities. The desire for the customer records seems to trump the desire to secure/disposition the alleged contraband. It appears they were convinced the receivers would ultimately be returned to Ares (or they would otherwise suffer no substantial loss if they'd cooperated), saying they'd work to expedite the review/reversal of the ruling, or seek the lowers' return as firearms properly documented. This agreement was based on an assumption AA would be highly cooperative based on their past ATF experiences (anyone toeing the 80% line kinda has to be on pins and needles). When the ATF was informed the customer records would not be forthcoming but the alleged contraband was offered for disposition, that's when they "explored options" (which could very well be a 'bad cop' threat of criminal prosecution as alleged by AA) and made a non-binding verbal agreement to hand over the records/lowers the next day. From there AA hires a new attorney and they sought court protection from the seizure the next day. The claim the restraining order stopped a "raid" is a bit yellow --it was to be a calm and voluntary surrender-- though it's damn sure a raid they're holding off, now.
If I were AA I'd be taking photos/video of my manufacturing equipment and processes and blowing it all over Youtube for people to dissect (provided of course, they really were made the way they claim). I have a feeling the ATF's claims can be refuted in about 2 minutes time, but they are relying on judges being too stupid or lazy to defer to anyone but the ATF's 'expertise' on such technical matters. Having read their followup request, I have no doubt they omitted/distorted all manner of information to obtain the latest EP lower ruling.
TCB
1-ATF rules the lowers are firearms by sole virtue of their construction method
2-EP armory/Ares/Everyone On Internet/ATF Approval Letter indicate the ATF is mistaken and that the actual manufacture method produces no firearm
3-ATF seems irrationally fixated on halting business and seizing the lowers, with no indication so far that they have even attempted to inspect the production facilities to corroborate or contradict #2
Shouldn't the initial warrant have applied to the production facilities alone since that is the arbiter of illegality? Granted, that's what we gunies, who know what 80% lowers are and what they are not, know, and the ATF's warrant request to the judge was surely as declarative, vague, and insinuative as their follow up document (i.e. "these are illegal lowers," vs. "we suspect these are lowers") which probably convinced an ignorant judged there were piles of unregistered M16's being given out on the street corner.
The numbered paragraphs at the end tell a very interesting story of these agents' activities. The desire for the customer records seems to trump the desire to secure/disposition the alleged contraband. It appears they were convinced the receivers would ultimately be returned to Ares (or they would otherwise suffer no substantial loss if they'd cooperated), saying they'd work to expedite the review/reversal of the ruling, or seek the lowers' return as firearms properly documented. This agreement was based on an assumption AA would be highly cooperative based on their past ATF experiences (anyone toeing the 80% line kinda has to be on pins and needles). When the ATF was informed the customer records would not be forthcoming but the alleged contraband was offered for disposition, that's when they "explored options" (which could very well be a 'bad cop' threat of criminal prosecution as alleged by AA) and made a non-binding verbal agreement to hand over the records/lowers the next day. From there AA hires a new attorney and they sought court protection from the seizure the next day. The claim the restraining order stopped a "raid" is a bit yellow --it was to be a calm and voluntary surrender-- though it's damn sure a raid they're holding off, now.
If I were AA I'd be taking photos/video of my manufacturing equipment and processes and blowing it all over Youtube for people to dissect (provided of course, they really were made the way they claim). I have a feeling the ATF's claims can be refuted in about 2 minutes time, but they are relying on judges being too stupid or lazy to defer to anyone but the ATF's 'expertise' on such technical matters. Having read their followup request, I have no doubt they omitted/distorted all manner of information to obtain the latest EP lower ruling.
TCB
barnbwt
member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 7,340
"An open bolt with a free floating pin/striker setup would easily pass the ATF test."
I'm afraid you are mistaken. Pretty much all locked-breech open bolt machine guns have floating pin/striker setups (usually the bolt carrier is the striking element) that function the same as a hammer/striker released by bolt carrier position (an auto sear). That is why they are verboten; remove the open-bolt sear and they will fire and reload until empty. If an open bolt design can be devised that cannot be converted to full auto, I suggest you patent it strongly and obtain ATF approval letters, since it will be a truly unique and innovative product that would be highly in demand from belt-fed shooters, specifically, and blowback smg shooters, secondarily. Honestly, I don't think even such a device would be approved since the ATF is so accustomed to all open-bolt designs being illegal; hence the single-shot open-bolt prohibition despite there being no way to fire multiple rounds in succession.
"Open bolt weapons are still legal if they were purchased before ATF ruled."
Not entirely true. Some of these were amnestied, but if they never took part (or ATF lost the record), the guns are very much contraband today.
TCB
I'm afraid you are mistaken. Pretty much all locked-breech open bolt machine guns have floating pin/striker setups (usually the bolt carrier is the striking element) that function the same as a hammer/striker released by bolt carrier position (an auto sear). That is why they are verboten; remove the open-bolt sear and they will fire and reload until empty. If an open bolt design can be devised that cannot be converted to full auto, I suggest you patent it strongly and obtain ATF approval letters, since it will be a truly unique and innovative product that would be highly in demand from belt-fed shooters, specifically, and blowback smg shooters, secondarily. Honestly, I don't think even such a device would be approved since the ATF is so accustomed to all open-bolt designs being illegal; hence the single-shot open-bolt prohibition despite there being no way to fire multiple rounds in succession.
"Open bolt weapons are still legal if they were purchased before ATF ruled."
Not entirely true. Some of these were amnestied, but if they never took part (or ATF lost the record), the guns are very much contraband today.
TCB
They may have seized a gun made with an 80% lower in a criminal case and are trying to trace the owner. Frankly, 5000 sales of 80% lowers (if that is the true situation) raises some questions in my mind.
It is also possible they are trying to build a case for ending the "80%" rule and requiring that anything that looks like a lower would have to be serial numbered and treated as a firearm, whether finished or not. Obama could probably make that change by EO, since it is a BATFE rule, not part of the law.
So, here we go again.
Jim
It is also possible they are trying to build a case for ending the "80%" rule and requiring that anything that looks like a lower would have to be serial numbered and treated as a firearm, whether finished or not. Obama could probably make that change by EO, since it is a BATFE rule, not part of the law.
So, here we go again.
Jim
barnbwt
member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 7,340
"Frankly, 5000 sales of 80% lowers (if that is the true situation) raises some questions in my mind."
During the Banic, lots of people were snapping up 80% lowers as a commodity (technically a crime as many undoubtedly intended to complete them and then sell at markup, but not a crime of EP Armory) because they were cheap, available in quantity, and cheap, and available in quantity. One forum I read on this issue had members rejoicing that an apparently castigated former member would likely show up as a prominent figure in the sales records (what slimeballs ) as he had apparently bought up much of the stock of lowers after Newtown and relisted them at huge markup soon thereafter (and allegedly some as complete guns w/ no FFL ). If the ATF would do its job, and prosecute people actually in possession of contraband, instead of attempting the lazy solution of drying up the river for all the fish, they'd have no need to go after EP. But, to continue the river analogy, they are convinced it's a hot spot for lunkers so they drop their lines.
"It is also possible they are trying to build a case for ending the "80%" rule and requiring that anything that looks like a lower would have to be serial numbered and treated as a firearm, whether finished or not. Obama could probably make that change by EO, since it is a BATFE rule, not part of the law."
No, no, no, no, no. Let's not go down that road (we're halfway there already). An Airsoft shell "looks like a lower." The plumbing section of Lowe's looks like a hundred STEN tubes.
"They may have seized a gun made with an 80% lower in a criminal case and are trying to trace the owner. Frankly, 5000 sales of 80% lowers (if that is the true situation) raises some questions in my mind."
I'm sure they did, or that the fear of such started this (the Santa Monica shooter used an 80% homebuilt AR and a black powder non-pistol, after all). But there is no statute against facilitating firearms production by a prohibited person. You can't punish one person for another's independently-acted misdeed. Legally, it's no different for a crook to build his AR from an 80% than it is from him to whittle one from a block of wood, and in neither case is it the supplier's problem if they are unknowing (note that the ATF is not pursuing "conspiracy to supply a firearm to a prohibited person" but rather the actual manufacture/sale of firearms themselves)
There is no such thing as an "80% Reciever," or "80% Rule." There is a manufactured product, which has (we have learned) been submitted to the ATF for their approval as an act of good faith, which they have held is not a firearm --that became colloquially known in gun-parlance as an 80% receiver. The ATF letter carries no legal weight, their approval carries no legal precedent for copy-cats or people offering similar products; it is merely a gentlemens' agreement that "we won't lock you up for making this right now."
In the case of most AR 80%'s, the features they lack that the ATF has decided repeatedly ad nauseum (not that that matters), are the FCG pocket, magwell, and trigger/selector holes. What Obama or the ATF people could do, is decide that that is not enough, that the buffer tower must be undrilled, or that any machining of a raw forging constitutes a functional firearm. This would allow the ATF to bring charges, and if the courts go along with their "expert opinion" as they have been too lazy to question in the past, convictions.
I think that even EP stands a very good chance of winning in front of a judge (even better a jury) when they bring out a multi-colored lump of plastic and a finished AR lower as Exhibit A and Exhibit B, then proceed to have an expert witness (one "J. B. Bubba") manufacture the completed lower for the courtroom with a Dremel, then introduce an assembled/functional AR15 as Exhibit C and place it alongside A and B. Bonus points for having Bubba race a CNC mill that starts from an indisputably non-firearm billet. Our jobs is to help these guys out and make sure they have the resources to ensure this actually makes it to trial before they go bankrupt due to mob threats.
TCB
During the Banic, lots of people were snapping up 80% lowers as a commodity (technically a crime as many undoubtedly intended to complete them and then sell at markup, but not a crime of EP Armory) because they were cheap, available in quantity, and cheap, and available in quantity
. One forum I read on this issue had members rejoicing that an apparently castigated former member would likely show up as a prominent figure in the sales records (what slimeballs ) as he had apparently bought up much of the stock of lowers after Newtown and relisted them at huge markup soon thereafter (and allegedly some as complete guns w/ no FFL ). If the ATF would do its job, and prosecute people actually in possession of contraband, instead of attempting the lazy solution of drying up the river for all the fish, they'd have no need to go after EP. But, to continue the river analogy, they are convinced it's a hot spot for lunkers so they drop their lines."It is also possible they are trying to build a case for ending the "80%" rule and requiring that anything that looks like a lower would have to be serial numbered and treated as a firearm, whether finished or not. Obama could probably make that change by EO, since it is a BATFE rule, not part of the law."
No, no, no, no, no. Let's not go down that road (we're halfway there already). An Airsoft shell "looks like a lower." The plumbing section of Lowe's looks like a hundred STEN tubes.
"They may have seized a gun made with an 80% lower in a criminal case and are trying to trace the owner. Frankly, 5000 sales of 80% lowers (if that is the true situation) raises some questions in my mind."
I'm sure they did, or that the fear of such started this (the Santa Monica shooter used an 80% homebuilt AR and a black powder non-pistol, after all). But there is no statute against facilitating firearms production by a prohibited person. You can't punish one person for another's independently-acted misdeed. Legally, it's no different for a crook to build his AR from an 80% than it is from him to whittle one from a block of wood, and in neither case is it the supplier's problem if they are unknowing (note that the ATF is not pursuing "conspiracy to supply a firearm to a prohibited person" but rather the actual manufacture/sale of firearms themselves)
There is no such thing as an "80% Reciever," or "80% Rule." There is a manufactured product, which has (we have learned) been submitted to the ATF for their approval as an act of good faith, which they have held is not a firearm --that became colloquially known in gun-parlance as an 80% receiver. The ATF letter carries no legal weight, their approval carries no legal precedent for copy-cats or people offering similar products; it is merely a gentlemens' agreement that "we won't lock you up for making this right now."
In the case of most AR 80%'s, the features they lack that the ATF has decided repeatedly ad nauseum (not that that matters), are the FCG pocket, magwell, and trigger/selector holes. What Obama or the ATF people could do, is decide that that is not enough, that the buffer tower must be undrilled, or that any machining of a raw forging constitutes a functional firearm. This would allow the ATF to bring charges, and if the courts go along with their "expert opinion" as they have been too lazy to question in the past, convictions.
I think that even EP stands a very good chance of winning in front of a judge (even better a jury) when they bring out a multi-colored lump of plastic and a finished AR lower as Exhibit A and Exhibit B, then proceed to have an expert witness (one "J. B. Bubba") manufacture the completed lower for the courtroom with a Dremel, then introduce an assembled/functional AR15 as Exhibit C and place it alongside A and B. Bonus points for having Bubba race a CNC mill that starts from an indisputably non-firearm billet. Our jobs is to help these guys out and make sure they have the resources to ensure this actually makes it to trial before they go bankrupt due to mob threats.
TCB
Last edited:
kilibreaux
member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2014
- Messages
- 115
I see some very ON-POINT posts in this thread.
I suspect the EP Armory raid and attempted Ares Armor raid were follow-ons to the idiots they caught manufacturing illegal firearms in Sacramento...and those clowns ARE idiots for having a highly visible storefront, openly advertising, and doing the actual work to complete an 80% lower themselves...actually, they were TRYING to be good "Capitalists" but they got caught because they were stoopid!
I suspect the goings on in Sacramento alerted the ATF to just how VAST has become the 80% AR-15 market and now they're trying to find a way to close the barn door after the barn has been burned to the ground.
Apparently they confiscated all of EP Armory's polymer lowers pending a determination as to whether EP was manufacturing them inside-out or outside in. However, the ONLY "lowers" the ATF can act upon are those found on the premises of EP Armory, because those sent out MAY or MAY NOT have been manufactured in a manner that resulted in an unregistered firearm....the ATF can allege but they cannot prove.
The SMART buyer will move to IMMEDIATELY grind away all the "white" interior plastic so as to remove any and all "evidence" that the buyer was in possession of what the ATF "might" deem to be an unregistered firearm. Once that poly plug is gone the "evidence" is also gone...because they can't "know" nor "prove" that during the period of time the receivers found in consumer hands were being sent out, EP Armory was incorrectly manufacturing (which by the way EP wasn't doing).
Even if I were one of those "geniuses" who bought an EP lower and never milled it out...IF I received a demand letter from the ATF I'd MILL IT OUT IMMEDIATELY! BECAUSE once the interior is removed the ATF cannot PROVE diddly-squat-$h1t! However, if someone sends in an EP lower with the interior material still there (assuming ATF actually determines EP was making them in the wrong sequence), then THAT PERSON has just mailed an unregistered firearm to the ATF! Even if that person slices the receiver in half the ATF can EASILY SEE it meets the qualifiers to be considered an illegal firearm upon receipt by the customer!
SO...everyone who is in possession of an EP lower should IMMEDIATELY machine out the poly-plug portion...once that's gone there is ZERO PROOF you were ever in possession of an "illegal lower!"
However, the fact that they didn't arrest and jail the owner of EP Armory speaks VOLUMES about what the ATF REALLY HAS and what they are REALLY LIKELY TO DO! If the dude making the things wasn't even arrested then the people who bought them are in no greater danger.
I suspect the EP Armory raid and attempted Ares Armor raid were follow-ons to the idiots they caught manufacturing illegal firearms in Sacramento...and those clowns ARE idiots for having a highly visible storefront, openly advertising, and doing the actual work to complete an 80% lower themselves...actually, they were TRYING to be good "Capitalists" but they got caught because they were stoopid!
I suspect the goings on in Sacramento alerted the ATF to just how VAST has become the 80% AR-15 market and now they're trying to find a way to close the barn door after the barn has been burned to the ground.
Apparently they confiscated all of EP Armory's polymer lowers pending a determination as to whether EP was manufacturing them inside-out or outside in. However, the ONLY "lowers" the ATF can act upon are those found on the premises of EP Armory, because those sent out MAY or MAY NOT have been manufactured in a manner that resulted in an unregistered firearm....the ATF can allege but they cannot prove.
The SMART buyer will move to IMMEDIATELY grind away all the "white" interior plastic so as to remove any and all "evidence" that the buyer was in possession of what the ATF "might" deem to be an unregistered firearm. Once that poly plug is gone the "evidence" is also gone...because they can't "know" nor "prove" that during the period of time the receivers found in consumer hands were being sent out, EP Armory was incorrectly manufacturing (which by the way EP wasn't doing).
Even if I were one of those "geniuses" who bought an EP lower and never milled it out...IF I received a demand letter from the ATF I'd MILL IT OUT IMMEDIATELY! BECAUSE once the interior is removed the ATF cannot PROVE diddly-squat-$h1t! However, if someone sends in an EP lower with the interior material still there (assuming ATF actually determines EP was making them in the wrong sequence), then THAT PERSON has just mailed an unregistered firearm to the ATF! Even if that person slices the receiver in half the ATF can EASILY SEE it meets the qualifiers to be considered an illegal firearm upon receipt by the customer!
SO...everyone who is in possession of an EP lower should IMMEDIATELY machine out the poly-plug portion...once that's gone there is ZERO PROOF you were ever in possession of an "illegal lower!"
However, the fact that they didn't arrest and jail the owner of EP Armory speaks VOLUMES about what the ATF REALLY HAS and what they are REALLY LIKELY TO DO! If the dude making the things wasn't even arrested then the people who bought them are in no greater danger.
AlexanderA
Member
How many times do we have to say it? There is no "80%" rule! That terminology is just made up for marketing purposes. There's no bright line that says that something is not a gun one minute, and is a gun the next. The degree of completion that makes something a gun depends on all the facts and circumstances, and the ATF has always been deliberately vague on this. If you stop to think about it, considering all the myriad possible gun designs, how can it be otherwise?
If you push the envelope too far, and it gets noticed (through volume of sales or otherwise), you can expect the ATF to crack down on you.
If you push the envelope too far, and it gets noticed (through volume of sales or otherwise), you can expect the ATF to crack down on you.
dogtown tom
Member
Don't let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy thread.
True, there's no 80% rule, but the ATF isn't vague at all. They have held for years that, for an AR-15 design, Drilling the hammer or trigger pin hole, drilling the selector hole, milling the fire control pocket, or milling a slot for the trigger will "manufacture" a firearm. There's plenty of letters to plenty of manufacturers on that.
Even in this case, the ATF hasn't suddenly changed anything. They are asserting that during the manufacture of these lowers EP had an open fire control pocket for a time. If so, they manufactured firearms by the rules that have been around for years. (They say they didn't)
nevadajim775
Member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2009
- Messages
- 3
We all need to support this gun shop owner against the ATF and his city council (National City). He has done nothing illegal. The City council person complaining has no grounds and wants the store owner to remove the sign on his roof. ATF is just doing their usual and over stepping their authority. I don't know whether or not if the store owner has been recording his customers names of non-firearm purchases. Either way I do not believe that the Feds (ATF) has the authority to seize those records. At the end of the day I believe that the Feds are just concerned (worried) about us law abiding citizens having firearms equal to or better than the government agencies. I am from a law enforcement background of 30 plus years and have worked with/assisted ATF agents numerous times during my career, but that was over 25 years ago under an entirely different administration both in the White House and the agency. We must stand up and fight for our freedoms and rights.
The guy who runs the business said that the BATFE has stated that there are 5 operations that must remain to be performed on a lower to complete it, if it is to be considered an 80% complete.
This would be written guidance that is the basis for the legality of all 80% receivers, not just the polymer ones.
What is sticking in the BATFE's craw is the fact that someone figured a way to eliminate the need for a fixture to hog out the mag well.
They surmised that the receiver is injection molded with an open mag well and then the mag well is filled with the light colored material.
But they got it backwards, the folks that thought this through know they must create the mag well filler first, lest they be accused of: exactly what they are being accused of!
If they want to stop this method of manufacture of 80% lowers, they will have to redefine the point where a block of material becomes a firearm, and I suspect that if they do that, it will upset a lot of people, even those that buy forgings and actually turn them into serialized receivers.
They just underestimated the ingenuity of these smart folks in alternate ways to provide a product that is in demand.
This would be written guidance that is the basis for the legality of all 80% receivers, not just the polymer ones.
What is sticking in the BATFE's craw is the fact that someone figured a way to eliminate the need for a fixture to hog out the mag well.
They surmised that the receiver is injection molded with an open mag well and then the mag well is filled with the light colored material.
But they got it backwards, the folks that thought this through know they must create the mag well filler first, lest they be accused of: exactly what they are being accused of!
If they want to stop this method of manufacture of 80% lowers, they will have to redefine the point where a block of material becomes a firearm, and I suspect that if they do that, it will upset a lot of people, even those that buy forgings and actually turn them into serialized receivers.
They just underestimated the ingenuity of these smart folks in alternate ways to provide a product that is in demand.
- Status
