President Obama Changes Directions Under ITAR
- Thread starter LogicMan
- Start date
I know the difference between a mold for casting balls and a mixer/grinder for making black powder.
While it is possible to make black powder with nothing but the ingredients, a bowl and a stick, a ball mill is virtually required for making black powder that is consistent enough to use and have any hope at consistent velocities and accuracy.
http://www.skylighter.com/fireworks/how-to/ball-mill.asp
While it is possible to make black powder with nothing but the ingredients, a bowl and a stick, a ball mill is virtually required for making black powder that is consistent enough to use and have any hope at consistent velocities and accuracy.
http://www.skylighter.com/fireworks/how-to/ball-mill.asp
ITAR Registration Fee
Where does the ITAR Registration Fee of 2250.00 end up: at the UN?
Frrom what I've been reading, Manufacturers of Rifle scopes, Telescopes, gun stocks, reloading equipment, brass, bullets, powder, and a very long list and a lot that has nothing to do with firearms and certainly not to export.
It appears to be a tax on most American Manufacturers, not to mention onerous regulations and records keeping.
No wonder everything cost so much.
After posting this I see a related earlier post, that possibly this should have been tagged on to.
Move it or delete or leave it mod. sorry bout that
Where does the ITAR Registration Fee of 2250.00 end up: at the UN?
Frrom what I've been reading, Manufacturers of Rifle scopes, Telescopes, gun stocks, reloading equipment, brass, bullets, powder, and a very long list and a lot that has nothing to do with firearms and certainly not to export.
It appears to be a tax on most American Manufacturers, not to mention onerous regulations and records keeping.
No wonder everything cost so much.
After posting this I see a related earlier post, that possibly this should have been tagged on to.
Move it or delete or leave it mod. sorry bout that
Last edited:
As I understand it is the manufacturing ffl fee that you pay to the federal government. That hasn't changed, just what is considered "manufacturing." It used to be a company that actually makes guns. Now its a gunsmith that can ream a chamber to change a barrel...
Still makes me mad.. Asinine rule change to "comply with an arms treaty..." One that was signed years ago but this has just now come up in the last few months of Obamas presidency.
Still makes me mad.. Asinine rule change to "comply with an arms treaty..." One that was signed years ago but this has just now come up in the last few months of Obamas presidency.
carguychris
New member
No, it's paid to the Department of State (DoS).Tinbucket said:
Technically it's not a rule change and it has nothing to do with any treaty. It's mere "policy guidance."5whiskey said:
The ambiguity regarding the significance of such guidance is much of the reason why people are so upset. A federal rule or regulation is subject to a deliberate vetting and comment process, so it's generally pretty clear what it means by the time it takes effect, and what will happen if one violates it. Not so with so-called policy guidance.
Lastly, ITAR has nothing to do with FFL licensing rules enforced by the ATF. They are separate and distinct. "Manufacturing" is much better defined under 68 GCA regulations enforced by the ATF. One of the underlying issues here is that many ITAR regulations are rather vague and therefore subject to broad interpretation by the DoS.
True. That said, this letter amounts to a loud proclamation of "I Dare Ya!" by the DoS.JaxRolo said: