Posted on 03/15/2014 7:21:44 PM PDT by South40
We’ve always said that a restraining order is just a piece of paper. Usually we’re referring to defensive gun uses when we say that. However, in this case we have the government violating a restraining order issued by… the government.
As we reported earlier this week, the ATF has demanded that Ares Armor, along with some other vendors, turn over their customer records in relation to an 80% lower that may have actually been a firearm under law. Ares agreed to stop selling the product in question as well as turn over their stock to the ATF, however they refused to provide their customer records.
Fearing a raid by the ATF after the refusal, Ares sought a restraining in order against the ATF in court. They were granted a restraining order, and both sides were supposed to show up in court next week. However, the ATF didn’t like that one bit. So, what did they do? Oh, just violated the crap out of that restraining order and raided Ares anyway.
(Excerpt) Read more at gunssavelives.net ...
Here is a blog that details an EP Armory build. It is not as you describe.
http://www.thebangswitch.com/building-an-ep-armory-80-ar-lower/
Problem is the receiver was built in two steps, first the plug and molding the rest of the lower around it. Most 80 percent receivers are cast in one step. ATF is contending that the second molding is not a 80 percent complete receiver (the trigger/safety void is complete) thus violate the regs or spirit of the regs. If the EP process is acceptable what is to prevent someone to mold a 90 percent finished receiver (which is illegal) and fill in the trigger/safety void with wax. All the user has to do is heat the receiver and pour out the wax and drill out the pin holes. This needs to be resolved in court to determine technically if the second mold around the plug violates the 80 percent rule or is the product judged on final and not in the middle of the process. ATF does have one black eye, EP Armory cannot sell the product without ATF approval. The ATF approved the design for sale and now are having second thoughts on the approval. In the past courts have backed the ATF if the agency can show the original approval was an error in assessment by the agency.
Again, at no point is there a void in the firearm till the manufacturer puts it there.
The plug itself is not a firearm anymore than a cast is a firearm.
Anyway, here’s video of the raid.
But EP Armory claims that they start with the plug, then mold the rest of the lower around the plug, so a lower with a cavity never existed. If you machined an aluminum lower then filled the void with wax, the lower with a void did exist at one time.
Semantics? Maybe. But the BAFTE did issue a letter confirming that the EP Armory lower was compliant with the 80% rule. Problem is that BAFTE changed their minds.
Bump
Oh, but registration isn’t a precursor to confiscation and persecution or anything.
If you look at the link showing the completion of the EP lower, it is not a simple plug that is the correct shape of the void. There appear to be grooves and a complex shape to insure that the white plastic cannot be easily separated from the black plastic. The plastic is all one piece in the end, all welded to gether, and intermingled, but arranged so that the white plastic serves as a marker. It has to be machined away for the lower to work.
BATFE did not violate the restraining order. They legally got clarification that they could proceed before they served the search warrant.
The big question that they never inform the judge about is whether the items in question are legally defined as guns or not.
BATFE simply says that they are, when it is *the* major point of contention.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/212487675/DOJ-Response-Ares-Armor
Thanks
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.