Marlin Firearms Forum banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,061 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
ATF raids gun store despite restraining order protecting customer list - BizPac Review


When Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agents expressed interest in a Southern California gun part and accessory store, it sought the protection of a federal district court. But on Saturday, agents raided the store anyway.

Ares Armorsells what are called “80% lower receivers” to allow a buyer to make his own AR-15 rifle. According to federal law,”The term ‘firearm’” includes “the frame or receiver of” a weapon, but one that is only 80 percent complete does not fall under that category.

When ATF agents began nosing around Ares Armor and started asking questions, the store obtained a temporary restraining order prohibiting the agency from seizing its product line and customer list. A hearing was scheduled for March 20 to litigate the issue.

However, on Saturday, ATF agents raided Ares pursuant to an ex parte order — an order obtained without notice to the other party, in this case Ares — and did just what Ares feared, according to the amateur video below.

In ATF’s ex parte application dated Friday, the agency alleged that it “is conducting a lawful criminal investigation of the illegal manufacture, distribution, sale, and possession of AR-15 variant lower receivers, which are considered firearms under the Firearms Control Act.”

What the agency’s application failed to mention, however, was that none of the items were a complete product — they were “80% lower receivers,” which remove them from the “firearm” definition to be classified as “parts.”

In August, U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., introduced HR 2910, the “Gun Violence Prevention and Reduction Act,” which would define “80% lower receivers” as firearms.

Unless and until that bill is passed into law, ATF had no business making Saturday’s raid. If they claim that the receivers seized don’t meet the definition of an “80% lower receiver,” the issue is one that should more probably be litigated in the courts before raiding a lawful business and seizing everything in sight. - Michael Dorstewitz
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,815 Posts
Hey M,

They wonder why the law abiding citizens do not respect the law.

Seems to me the "jack booted thugs" of the BATF do poorly at respecting the law.

At least the BATF did not murder any Citizens, this time. (remember Ruby Ridge and Waco)

Later, Mark
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,407 Posts
it appears that the attorney for the gun store made an appointment for the ATF to come pick up the recievers. At least that is what it says in the media report attached.

"Karras’s attorney informed the ATF to pick up the receivers Wednesday morning at their Oceanside location, but the inventory was not the issue. The store owner said he will not comply with turning over their private client list."

Read more: http://fox5sandiego.com/2014/03/12/gun-store-owner-halts-federal-raid/#ixzz2wBd9ZZZ8

little details like this shed a different light on the situation. It appears as though it wasn't a "raid" depite the restraining order blah blah.....

I know it fit the agenda at first glance. Sounds like BizPac Review is another group of trolls.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,038 Posts
CONTROL

OBEY

I wonder if the new lord's, commanded all present to fall prostate at their feet in worship of authority real and imagined? BAH!
 
  • Like
Reactions: msharley

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,600 Posts
I'm very familiar with a receiver being a "gun" so to say having been in the business, but unclear on this 80% finished aspect. What if it was 70%, 50%, etc., or heck, just a billet or casting? Where does the ATF draw the legal line... bet it a blurry one?
 

·
Premium Member
All kinds. Enamored of their mechanisms!
Joined
·
11,361 Posts
I have been involved with Class II manufacturers. It is my understanding that the line between unfinished and a receiver requiring registratin can be blurry. We considered an unfinished receiver to be unable to 'readily' made operationable. 'Readily' being subject to interpretation, possibly by a judge, jury, or the ATF. Not 'readily' might include uncompleted machine processes such as, a finished magazine well, being able to accept a barrel, pin holes drilled for the firing mechanism, etc. The photos show a complete mag well, which is one ATF criteria. They may have to convince a jury on the 'readily' part. There is not enough information to make a determination at this point. The lawyers will be the only winners here I'm sure. AC
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,269 Posts
Ive been following this story since it has started, and I'm definately behind Ares on this one,
It all circulated and started around the polymer EB receivers they were re-selling, it all started with them (EB), as they were raided/shut down recently...

It seems to be that they (EB) were manufacturing (molding) the polymer receivers, finished, then injecting, or filling the fire control cavity
with a different color material to show you what material had to be removed to complete your 80%...

it APPEARS as though ATF decided that the receivers being produced finished, and then filled in, meaning that at one time in their life, they were officially functional receivers hence qualifying as being a serial numbered part.. sounds like a lot of splitting hairs, but if in fact they did that, they (EB) would be in the wrong..

Ares did voluntarily commit to turn over all of the polymer EB receivers they had, but not their customer lists.
hence the restraining order.
thats a whole legal area that way over my pay grade...I will leave that subject to the ones much smarter than I.

Recently, another company was shut down for having "Milling parties" after hours for people who bought their 80%..
You would go after hours to use their equipment to finish your receiver.
The problem lied in the fact that all you did was clamp it in a fixture, and turn on the CNC machine and it cut it all out.. ATF didn't like that because you were not fully manipulating the machine. or doing ALL of your own work..

Ive been Doing 80% ar receivers for myself a long, long time, and letting a few select responsible friends use my milling machine to complete theirs. There are some STRICT regs, and no Grey areas on it.

Heck, when a friend comes over to use my mill, All I can legally do is be in the same room, and offer WORDS of direction, or advice, I cannot touch the machinery if the part is clamped in, or I would be in violation of the same laws.

I wish them all the best and hope they're not forced to give over their customer list, but they are in Commiefornia.. hopefully they'll move operations out here to Arizona, Ive been buying from them forever.. real standup guys. would be nice for them to be within driving distance!
 
  • Like
Reactions: gunscrewguy

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,011 Posts
it appears that the attorney for the gun store made an appointment for the ATF to come pick up the recievers. At least that is what it says in the media report attached.

"Karras’s attorney informed the ATF to pick up the receivers Wednesday morning at their Oceanside location, but the inventory was not the issue. The store owner said he will not comply with turning over their private client list."

Read more: Gun store owner refuses to give feds customer list | FOX5 San Diego ? San Diego news, weather, traffic, sports from KSWB

little details like this shed a different light on the situation. It appears as though it wasn't a "raid" depite the restraining order blah blah.....

I know it fit the agenda at first glance. Sounds like BizPac Review is another group of trolls.
I guess I'm confused. Does the owner have the right to refuse access to documents without an appointment? I know you can make immigration wait outside and make an appointment to review documents when a search warrant is not in hand. It's usually not a good idea because the audit will be a grinder but, what's the deal?
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top