Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: ATF Bans Import of UTM for Private Citizens

  1. #1
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !

    ATF Bans Import of UTM for Private Citizens

    From Sage Dynamics Social Media:

    Name:  IMG_3049.jpg
Views: 1223
Size:  43.3 KB

    I’m curious what authority ATF is using to ban or restrict the importation of UTM ? I’m guessing sporting purposes test under the gun control act of 1968 since it is considered “ammunition?”

    My understanding is the main alternative, Simmunitions FX, is a Canadian company so I wonder if they will be facing the same restrictions ?

    That would leave Speer’s Simmunition compatible “Force on Force” ammunition as the primary alternative.

    It raises the question: Is this the opening Salvo of a Biden Administration move vs private training?

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by HCM View Post
    My understanding is the main alternative, Simmunitions FX, is a Canadian company so I wonder if they will be facing the same restrictions ?

    That would leave Speer’s Simmunition compatible “Force on Force” ammunition as the primary alternative.
    General Dynamics owns both Simunitions and Force-on-Force, Vista Outdoor sold Force-on-Force awhile back (late 2020). Simunition is under GD-OTS Canada nominally, but GD-OTS CA is still under GD-OTS overall, which is an American company (unless they've changed the structure to place Simunition directly under GD-OTS, which they might have). Either way, GD-OTS is then under General Dynamics overall, which is also an American company. I believe that Force-on-Force is also under GD-OTS.
    Last edited by Default.mp3; 10-04-2023 at 03:40 PM.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Default.mp3 View Post
    General Dynamics owns both Simunitions and Force-on-Force, Vista Outdoor sold Force-on-Force awhile back (late 2020). Simunition is under GD-OTS Canada nominally, but GD-OTS CA is still under GD-OTS overall, which is an American company (unless they've changed the structure to place Simunition directly under GD-OTS, which they might have). Either way, GD-OTS is then under General Dynamics overall, which is also an American company. I believe that Force-on-Force is also under GD-OTS.
    I would guess an import restriction would apply even if the foreign manufacturing plant was owned by an American company, though I don't know that.

  4. #4
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by Chemsoldier View Post
    I would guess an import restriction would apply even if the foreign manufacturing plant was owned by an American company, though I don't know that.
    It would.

  5. #5
    I'm glad someone is focusing on the real important issues facing our country. I feel safer already.

  6. #6
    Site Supporter Palmguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    NW Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Default.mp3 View Post
    General Dynamics owns both Simunitions and Force-on-Force, Vista Outdoor sold Force-on-Force awhile back (late 2020). Simunition is under GD-OTS Canada nominally, but GD-OTS CA is still under GD-OTS overall, which is an American company (unless they've changed the structure to place Simunition directly under GD-OTS, which they might have). Either way, GD-OTS is then under General Dynamics overall, which is also an American company. I believe that Force-on-Force is also under GD-OTS.
    This is correct. Both are OTS products; Simunition is out of Quebec, Force on Force is manufactured in the US.

    I got to see the Force on Force production line last week - pretty cool.

  7. #7
    I’ve been using Force on Force exclusively for years.

  8. #8
    My guess for the authority they’re using is also “sporting purpose” per the ‘68 GCA. If I could wave a magic want and make just one federal firearms law disappear, it would be the sporting purpose bullshit. That’s the basis for practically every firearm/ammunition import restriction anyone has to deal with.

    This decision is bullshit and flies in the face of the Second Amendment. Training helps people resist tyranny which is the whole purpose of the Second Amendment. If the government is starting to limit training opportunities for private citizens, this is a problem. Hopefully the NRA, 2nd Amendment Foundation, and FPC are already moving against this in court. The only upside to this, as minor as it is, is that the next time someone talks about government mandated training as a requirement for someone to exercise their rights, we can point to this and discuss how the government is trying to limit training.
    My posts only represent my personal opinion and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or official policies of any employer, past or present. Obvious spelling errors are likely the result of an iPhone keyboard.

  9. #9
    I feel safer already.

    Wonder if we could have some type of study performed that show fentanyl can be used as propellant for simunitions or something so this admin will do something to help slow the influx.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  10. #10
    Site Supporter Odin Bravo One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    In the back of beyond
    Dumb shit like a his is what has rendered them irrelevant in my world. “Oh BATFR announced something? Who gives a fuck?” And if I don’t comply? What are they gonna do, shave my head and send me to Iraq?”

    Fuck EM…..
    You can get much more of what you want with a kind word and a gun, than with a kind word alone.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •