ATF ignores restraining order against business and raids Ares Armor

Just to point out...

for those not well versed in it...

The 80% finished (anything) receiver is not a firearm under the law. Its a chunk of metal or plastic. Period.

A company can sell one of them to anyone at all. Because its nothing more than a chunk of whatever.

A company can even include all the detailed instructions on how to turn that chunk of whatever into a working firearm receiver. That information can be sold to anyone at all.

It is the responsibility of the person who actually finishes the receiver to register it and comply with all laws.

You (or someone else) might consider it bad form, or even immoral to sell an unfinished part with instructions, but its not illegal. Only the person who finishes the part can make it legal, or not, by their actions.
 
You (or someone else) might consider it bad form, or even immoral to sell an unfinished part with instructions, but its not illegal. Only the person who finishes the part can make it legal, or not, by their actions.
Click to expand...

At issue here is if the recv in question was finished and then the FCG area filled in for the end used to mill out OR if the FCG plug was formed first and the rest of the recv around it
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It is the responsibility of the person who actually finishes the receiver to register it and comply with all laws.
Click to expand...
If the person finishing it is just doing so for his own use, he's not required to register it. If he's manufacturing it for resale, he needs a license.
 
GC70- Thanks for the links to the documents.

I want to discuss this from a different perspective. When I saw the posting here that the ATF violated a temporary restraining order (TRO) on March 15th, I went to Ares Armor's website where they emphatically said the ATF had violated the TRO. I wanted to see the TRO because of the extraordinary nature of the relief. As it turns out, the TRO, as modified, specifically said it did not enjoin "lawful criminal proceedings, including the application for or lawfully executed seizure of evidence and contraband pursuant to a search warrant ... ." Tom Servo previously noted this. The modified TRO was signed March 14th, the day before the ATF seized the "contraband."

So, we know two things: (1) the ATF did not violate the TRO and (2) that Ares misrepresented that the ATF did.

ATF alleges in its response that Ares used one attorney to negotiate turning over the "lowers" along with the customer list while retaining a second lawyer to prepare a lawsuit and motion for TRO. The ATF says that Ares' CEO admits this in his declaration. Whatever one thinks about such a tactic under the circumstances, I feel sure the ATF considers it duplicitous and this will likely color how the litigation proceeds. I don't have a clue as to the legality of what Ares' has been doing.
 
The 80% finished (anything) receiver is not a firearm under the law. Its a chunk of metal or plastic. Period.
Click to expand...

A BATFE approved "80 percent" finished receiver is not a firearm under the law. The BATFE refuses to state what constitutes an "80 percent" receiver.

Legal "80 percent" receivers are blessed by the BATFE on a case by case basis.

Anyone who manufactures and sells their "80 percent" receiver without first having it blessed by the BATFE Tech Branch is asking for trouble. The proposed "80 percent" receiver will either be declared a firearm or a chunk of metal.
 
"The BATFE refuses to state what constitutes an "80 percent" receiver."


Now that is the problem right there, this allows the ATF unfettered discretion over what it allows or does not allow. I'm no expert in this field, but it seems to me that there should be some sort of regulation enacted spelling this out. Rules and regulations are subject to a bunch of administrative rule making rules, and require notice, a period for public hearing, and an opportunity to judicially challenge a regulation. If this hasn't been done, isn't the ATF unlawfully using an "underground" regulation?
 
I just read over the ATF opposition to the TRO filed by the AG--interesting that she refers to all of these "AK-15" lowers as "firearms" but without any proof at all that this is true. In fact, the declaration of Ware attached to the opposition expressly admits that this is the central disputed question of fact. So what we see is that the ATF wants to go forward with its seizure of lowers and records even before it decides if they are wrong in their determination.

The excuse that it seized records from Ares to see if these "FIREARMS" are going to prohibited persons is totally bogus--because it again begs the question. If they are not firearms, then they are not illegal for prohibited persons to possess--at least until they are milled out and become firearms.

I also note the dissembling with respect to the report of conversations with attorney Jason Davis--he says that Davis agreed to turn over "the firearms" (not, as he should have, alleged firearms); obviously Davis did not admit that these are actually firearms.
 
"I do not understand why this company put itself into this position. Ares Armor seems like a legitimate company. Why didn't they just serialized the receivers, completed or not? Especially if they're showing their customers how to complete the lowers. If the lowers are sold by Ares Armor as incomplete lowers, when the customer completes the lowers, and then drills where shown to then complete the lower, then the customer would have created felonious object, in the form of an unregistered lower. "

Not true in most states. NY or NJ is probably different, but currently in California it is perfectly legal to manufacture your own firearms, and they do not need to be serialized unless and until they are sold. Ares (and EP Armory) contend that what is being manufactured and sold is an 80% lower, which is not a firearm and does not need to have any sort of marking or serial number on it. There is a bill pending by Senator De Leon to change this.
 
Post #41.

Thanks Thallub. I hate when my google aint working right.:o

If I really understand it (I think I do), The main question is, are they making receivers then putting the block in, or are they making the block (magazine well) and putting the rest of the plastic around it second.

The manufacturing process, in this case, determines the whether it is a firearm or not. (Which came first, the chicken or the egg)
 
Last edited:
That is how Ares wants to define the main question, but may not be the position of the ATF. Even if ATF misunderstood the manufacturing process (incorrectly believed that the FCG was first molded and then plugged), if there position is based on how easily the resin lowers are completed with unsophisticated tooling (dremel and a hand drill) its a different ball game. (The lower is easily completed in under an hour, while the Complaint filed by Ares says it takes 3 to 5 hours to complete an 80% lower.)
 
Anyone who manufactures and sells their "80 percent" receiver without first having it blessed by the BATFE Tech Branch is asking for trouble. The proposed "80 percent" receiver will either be declared a firearm or a chunk of metal.
Click to expand...

So the question needs to be asked, DID they have the "Blessing" of the ATF to manufacture their version of the Lower Receiver?
 
on how easily the resin lowers are completed with unsophisticated tooling (dremel and a hand drill) its a different ball game.
Click to expand...

Why is that? People made firearms for decades or more without any sort of powered tooling like a dremel or a hand tool.
 
So the question needs to be asked, DID they have the "Blessing" of the ATF to manufacture their version of the Lower Receiver?
Click to expand...
The owner of EP Armory claimed to have at least 4 evaluation letters for different versions of the 80% lower, none of which declared it a "firearm". He had a copy of one of them available on his website for a while, but it became irrelevant when he made changes to the mold (and had to submit a letter for an evaluation of the 'new' design).

So far, we only seem to have the ATF's side of the story for the latest design - that it was an illegal firearm, not a chunk of polymer.
 
Its a pity that the laws are what they are... But you have to play inside the lines or you get smacked.

Life is hard but its harder if youre stupid... Posting a billboard outside flaunting "unregistered AR's" is just plain dumb unless you have covered all the bases 100%

I dont agree with just about any of the firearms restrictions currently on the books. But at this point the BATF carries the big stick
 
After reading the documents, all I can say is that I smell a rat somewhere. It appears that the lowers in question did indeed meet the requirement for an 80% receiver, and as rendered by Frankenmauser, it appears they were manufactured in accordance with BATF regs. If indeed the question was concerning the lower receivers, why was the owner required to turn over his entire customer list, and not just those who previously purchased the lower in question? From the articles I've read, the owner was much more concerned about turning over the customer list than the lowers. Something else is going on here, but before you start throwing out accusations against the owner of the business, keep in mind that BATF just got spanked pretty hard by a judge for the way it ran it's "sting" ooperations.
 
You say the ATF got "spanked" for the way it ran it's sting operations. OK, who lost a job, got demoted, went to prison? I contend that until some of the perpetrators of the illegal actions they have committed go to jail, get their pants sued off or lose their jobs. None of them will change and none will follow the constitution, because we as American Citizens have no recourse from their extra legal activities.

Bill
 
r.ph.380
OK, who lost a job, got demoted, went to prison? I contend that until some of the perpetrators of the illegal actions they have committed go to jail, get their pants sued off or lose their jobs.
Click to expand...

^^this.
Until there's a penalty for violating the law, there's no penalty for violating the law.
 
You guys are absolutely right in respect to the loose interpretation of the law by BATFE. It is a sad day when the law means nothing to those whose job is to uphold it. In all honesty though, do you really expect repercussions for such things in this day and time? It begs a question that is at the center of much of our dilemma. How does one who respects the law and intends to honor it to the best of ones ability, confront those whose duty is to keep that set of laws, but ignores said law where they themselves are concerned? I'll paraphrase, a pertinent snippet from Firefly, the series. "A government is a group of people, themselves typically ungoverned."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top