Obama proposal would made P-F and similar subject to ITAR

[Kyle Reese]

I doubt the current administration gives a rip, so long as their agenda comes to pass.

When does My 600 Pound Life come on? What are the Kardashians up to this week?

[JodyH]

I look forward to breaking this law.

[TGS]

A treaty?

Check out the Supremacy Clause and Reid v Covert. Treaties do not override the US Constitution.

[fixer]

Stupid (and I don't use that term lightly) law to begin with; extending it's reach is unconscionable.

[TGS]

To build on my previous post:

Chuck, this isn't a treaty. From what I'm reading, this is a change to ITAR itself, which derives it's legitimacy as law through the Arms Export Control Act.

This is like rewriting the 1968 GCA......not a treaty.

[TR675]

I doubt the current administration gives a rip, so long as their agenda comes to pass.

Good thing they don't get the final say then.

The courts have been pretty actively shutting down executive overreach over the last couple years. It's hard to keep up with the flow of it, though.

[BehindBlueI's]

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx...#se22.1.121_11

That's the US munitions list.

The NRA's warnings these days are usually mixed with a healthy dose of marketing. Keeping the base stirred up keeps membership and donations up, but its not rewarded by impartial reporting. I sincerely doubt we'll see any effect from this any more than we did about the big scary UN small arms treaty that had certain folks in a tizzy a bit ago. We don't live in a tyranny. There are checks and balances, and I've yet to see one branch deploy force against another so it looks like the system has worked pretty well so far.

[ssb]

The way I read that rule change our recent "how to fix a S&W revolver rear sight" thread would be illegal, perhaps Pistol Training as well.....

I'm not so sure. Your quoted line specifies classified information. In that line's full context (a paragraph talking about encryption keys, "secured 'technical data,'" etc.), I don't see DOS as having the authority to go after the LSP guys for sharing from their bag of tricks unless their trick happens to also be classified information or a password/key to access the same.

[joshs]

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx...#se22.1.121_11

That's the US munitions list.

The NRA's warnings these days are usually mixed with a healthy dose of marketing. Keeping the base stirred up keeps membership and donations up, but its not rewarded by impartial reporting. I sincerely doubt we'll see any effect from this any more than we did about the big scary UN small arms treaty that had certain folks in a tizzy a bit ago. We don't live in a tyranny. There are checks and balances, and I've yet to see one branch deploy force against another so it looks like the system has worked pretty well so far.

The USML covers all small arms, and the definition of "defense service" could be read to cover all training on a "defense article" listed on the USML. NRA dropped the instructor certifications of all foreign nationals and will not export training materials because State refuses to give clear guidance on these definitions.

As to the ATT, I don't know if you've followed any of the implementation meetings, but "end use certificate" quickly changed to "end user certificate" exactly as NRA warned during the drafting process.

Full disclosure: I'm an attorney in NRA-ILA.

[HCM]

To build on my previous post:

Chuck, this isn't a treaty. From what I'm reading, this is a change to ITAR itself, which derives it's legitimacy as law through the Arms Export Control Act.

This is like rewriting the 1968 GCA......not a treaty.

This is my understanding ^^^