Would effectively close down most hunting and gun forums......

Scary govt in action.

http://www.foxnews.com/politic...n/?intcmp=latestnews

BO stinks !!!!

Republicans own the House and Senate, at this time.

I can't see this going anywhere, at this time.

All I can say after reading that link is you got to be shittin me!!!

quote:

Originally posted by k-22hornet:
Republicans own the House and Senate, at this time.

I can't see this going anywhere, at this time.

As a "clearer" interpretation of a current regulation it doesn't need congressional approval. Department of State just wants to add a "revised definition". The Dept of State is part of the president's Cabinet, part of the executive branch. It's up to the president to say yes or no. It's just the sort of thing many people expect him to do on his way out. Only public outcry will stop this.

quote:

State is updating International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), which implement the federal Arms Export Control Act (AECA).

quote:

Originally posted by k-22hornet:
Republicans own the House and Senate, at this time.

And they have done nothing but capitulate to obamas demands.

Before you get your undies in just too much of a bundle, consider the sourcing for this "story:" a Fox News citation to a Washington Examiner citation to a press release from the NRA. As usual, the point of this "story" is to whip up anti-Obama/Democrat/liberal hysteria without looking just too closely at the actual facts.

Maybe the moderators would like to move this post to the political forum where it probably belongs?

My take on the proposed regulations is that they are intended to address the online posting of CAD/CAM files for 3D printers and CNC machines. I really don't think the intent is to outlaw the sharing of mundane information such as .30-06 loading data and venison recipes.

As it stands now, you can legally download files from numerous sites and use it to produce undocumented firearms. Many people have made plastic AR-15 receivers and hi-capacity magazines that work for 100's of shots and there are already "home workshop" grade 3D printers that can produce metal objects.

Naturally, that sort of freedom will make any Democrat wet their pants. So they have to 'do something' even if it's a bogus, "feel good" regulation like this. (There's nothing to keep someone from designing a firearm from scratch if that's what they want to do.)

Intent and what ends up happening are often two separate and distinct outcomes. When the personal income tax was initiated to help pay off WWI debt the sponsors of the legislation were "insulted" when others expressed concern about what it could become. It has since become more than what they were concerned about.

Here is the wording in the CFR, not Fox not the Examiner but the CFR.

Some important highlights:
State Department is proposing that the State Department creates new definitions. A politically appointed individual(s) i.e., not elected by or beholding to the people, will create the new definitions.

They are part of the retrospective plans under a standing Executive Order.

What part of that conveys the notion of respecting the 1st and 2nd Amendments? We can suppose that it is intended for a specific purpose but the proposed does not instil great confidence that its scope will be limited. What did Rahm say? Never fail to capitalize on an opportunity.

Yes, I am sure if this comes to pass that it will be clearly and specifically written to explicitly limit the scope and impact of the action... probably as clearly and concisely as our tax code or maybe as simply as Obamacare which we had to pass to see what as in it.

Since all of this data is supposed to be controlled and verified as controlled how will they do this? I am sure the control will be strictly through voluntary compliance and self-auditing

DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Parts 120, 123, 125, and 127

[Public Notice 9149]
RIN 1400–AD70

International Traffic in Arms: Revisions to Definitions of Defense Services, Technical Data, and Public Domain; Definition of Product of Fundamental Research; Electronic Transmission and Storage of Technical Data; and Related Definitions

AGENCY
:
Department of State.
ACTION
:
Proposed rule.
SUMMARY
:
As part of the President’s Export Control Reform (ECR) initiative, the Department of State proposes to amend the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) to update the definitions of ‘‘defense article,’’‘‘defense services,’’ ‘‘technical data,’’‘‘public domain,’’ ‘‘export,’’ and ‘‘reexport or retransfer’’ in order to clarify the scope of activities and information that are covered within these definitions and harmonize the definitions with the Export Administration Regulations (EAR), to the extent appropriate. Additionally, the Department proposes to create definitions of ‘‘required,’’ ‘‘technical data that arises during, or results from, fundamental research,’’ ‘‘release,’’ ‘‘retransfer,’’ and ‘‘activities that are not exports, reexports, or retransfers’’ in order to clarify and support the interpretation of the revised definitions that are proposed in this rulemaking.

The Department proposes to create new sections detailing the scope of licenses, unauthorized releases of information, and the ‘‘release’’ of secured
information, and revises the sections on ‘‘exports’’ of ‘‘technical data’’ to U.S. persons abroad. Finally, the Department proposes to address the electronic transmission and storage of unclassified ‘‘technical data’’ via foreign communications infrastructure. This rulemaking proposes that the electronic transmission of unclassified ‘‘technical data’’ abroad is not an ‘‘export,’’provided that the data is sufficiently secured to prevent access by foreign persons. Additionally, this proposed rule would allow for the electronic storage of unclassified ‘‘technical data’’abroad, provided that the data is secured to prevent access by parties unauthorized to access such data. The revisions contained in this proposed rule are part of the Department of State’s retrospective plan under Executive Order 13563 first submitted on August 17, 2011.

DATES
:
The Department of State will
accept comments on this proposed rule
until August 3, 2015.

quote:

Originally posted by sdirks:
Before you get your undies in just too much of a bundle, consider the sourcing for this "story:" a Fox News citation to a Washington Examiner citation to a press release from the NRA. As usual, the point of this "story" is to whip up anti-Obama/Democrat/liberal hysteria without looking just too closely at the actual facts.

Maybe the moderators would like to move this post to the political forum where it probably belongs?

So it was not from a legit source such as the Huffington Post or The John Stewart Show or The New York Times???And a self appointed Forum Thought Policeman to boot!!!

quote:

Originally posted by sdirks:
Before you get your undies in just too much of a bundle, consider the sourcing for this "story:" a Fox News citation to a Washington Examiner citation to a press release from the NRA. As usual, the point of this "story" is to whip up anti-Obama/Democrat/liberal hysteria without looking just too closely at the actual facts.

Just another NRA fundraiser. We should be used to them by now since they generate about one per week. I've grown weary of them, but some people apparently get off on this kind of stuff, so if there are people who are buying the NRA will keep on selling. Can't blame them, either. Wish I had a money-making scheme this good.

I plead the 1st, while I exercise the 2nd!
I WILL NOT lay down
I WILL NOT be quiet
I WILL NOT give up my guns
I WILL NOT give up my rights
I WILL RESIST!

Read THIS you Commie Sum Bitch!

quote:

Originally posted by ravenr:
I plead the 1st, while I exercise the 2nd!
I WILL NOT lay down
I WILL NOT be quiet
I WILL NOT give up my guns
I WILL NOT give up my rights
I WILL RESIST!

Read THIS you Commie Sum Bitch!

Atta boy ravenr!!!

quote:

Originally posted by ravenr:
I plead the 1st, while I exercise the 2nd!
I WILL NOT lay down
I WILL NOT be quiet
I WILL NOT give up my guns
I WILL NOT give up my rights
I WILL RESIST!

Read THIS you Commie Sum Bitch!

I will be right beside you!

+1

What part of WE OUTNUMBER THEM does that F&^%$#g idiot not understand????

quote:

Originally posted by pagosawingnut:
+1

What part of WE OUTNUMBER THEM does that F&^%$#g idiot not understand????

Right you are Pagosa. Us and our friends.

quote:

Originally posted by pagosawingnut:
+1

What part of WE OUTNUMBER THEM does that F&^%$#g idiot not understand????

+2


.