Taken from the thefireingline.com (credit where credit is due)... Thanks F4GIB

November 16, 2002
[b]BATF Fighting Proposal to Import Old Weapons[/b]

By JEFF GERTH and RICHARD W. STEVENSON (NY Times)

WASHINGTON, Nov. 14 - The federal gun control bureau is strongly opposing a proposal to let gun sellers and owners import as many as two million World War II era infantry weapons that were made in the United States and exported to the world's armies decades ago [Hakims, FN 49's, K-98's, M-48's and FAL's are OK but Garands are not???].

The objections from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms come as the State Department is considering the proposal, which is being pressed by a trade association that lobbies for gun importers. The bureau says the idea, which would lift a 50-year-old ban, would [b][i]flood the market with outdated but deadly weapons that could fall into the hands of criminals and would be hard
to regulate.[/i][/b]

A letter from the firearms bureau, part of the Treasury Department, warned that the change would prevent it from [b][i]stopping the criminal use of
"particularly dangerous" old guns: pistols that are readily concealed and carbines and Garand rifles, which can be easily converted into automatic weapons[/i][/b] [a lie]. Moreover, the letter warned, the carbine and [b][i]Garand can fire bullets
capable of piercing the soft body armor worn by police officers[/i][/b] [so can ANY deer rifle].

The weapons, exported to Asia, South America and countries elsewhere and still available around the world, have generally not been allowed back into the United States, though there is a legal exception that permits the import of
equipment classified as "curio or relics."

The State Department, which by law regulates trade in United States defense equipment, is weighing a proposal made last year by the Firearms Importers'
Roundtable Trade Group, which is led by a top dealer in and collector of machine-gun parts and accessories. The group, set up in the wake of import restrictions by the Clinton administration, argues that the imports would be used by collectors, in shooting competitions or for other legitimate purposes.

A briefing paper prepared by the firearm importers says the guns "are not crime guns" or "weapons of choice among criminals," an argument based on the
group's analysis of crime reports by the firearms bureau [this is true].

[i][b]But the bureau warned that the change could allow as many as two million weapons, many of them able to shoot the deadlier kinds of bullets [another lie, FMJ is less deadly that hunting soft-points], to enter the private commercial market legally for the first time. The bureau cited a recent report of its own that found that 7,243 American-made weapons intended for military use had been used in crimes, even though it was unlawful to re-import most if not all of them.[/i][/b]

John P. Malone, the assistant director for firearms and explosives at the bureau, cited this statistic two months ago when he wrote the State
Department to oppose the proposal.

A department spokesman declined to discuss the proposal, saying it was still under review.

"It is a matter of interagency discussion, and it would be inappropriate to comment," the spokesman said on the condition of anonymity.

At issue are rifles and handguns sold to United States allies more than 50 years ago. The potential universe, a 1998 federal report says, includes more than 950,000 Garand rifles, more than 1.2 million M-1 carbines and nearly
300,000 M-1911 pistols. A firearms expert who supports the policy change estimates the market at 1.5 million, but says many of them may not be capable of being fired. * * *

The firearms trade group says "there will not be millions of guns flooding the marketplace" because "market forces will control what is imported" and there would be "unusually lengthy" reviews by the firearms bureau and the State Department. The group also says buyers would be subject to the "same requirements that apply when purchasing other firearms," like background checks.

But Mr. Malone, in his letter to the State Department, said the group's proposal "would open the United States commercial market to potentially 2.5 million new weapons" which "A.T.F. generally has no authority to control [absolutely false, the same resale restrictions apply to all guns]."

Mr. Malone's letter was provided by an official opposed to the policy change. * * *

On June 27, 2001, Mr. Steen's group petitioned the State Department to "lift the import restrictions historically imposed on `obsolete and historic U.S. military small arms, ammunition, and demilitarized equipment,' " according to
Mr. Malone's letter.

The trade group's lawyer is Mark Barnes, a leading firearms lobbyist in Washington. Mr. Barnes provided a copy of the trade group's background paper - which echoes its 2001 proposal - but Mr. Steen declined to be interviewed for this article.

After the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the proposal sat idle, but more recently the trade group has met with State Department officials, including once late last summer, a person who attended said.

On Sept. 10, Mr. Malone wrote to Lincoln P. Bloomfield Jr., the assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs, saying that the proposal would "undo over 50 years of established policy governing the transfer and import of these weapons."

Surplus military firearms have been banned from import under federal gun control laws [a provision requested and supported by guess who ... Smith & Wesson]. But in 1984, the Gun Control Act was amended to create an exception: firearms classified as "curio or relics," which include weapons and ammunition more than 50 years old.

Since 1949 there have been strict limits on the ability of foreign governments to distribute equipment they receive under United States military assistance programs. In 1987, the State Department restated its general ban on the
initial retransfer of United States military weapons, but created an exception.

Foreign governments could sell to private entities if they could show "significant public interest," including guarantees that the equipment would
be used for its intended purpose, such as being placed on "static display in a museum and demilitarized," Mr. Malone's letter said.

Mr. Steen's group maintains that the State Department has interpreted the law
too narrowly and should approve as "the rule, rather than the exception," imports of United States military equipment. [end of cut & paste]


[red]I guess we now have an idea of what Ashcroft meant when he said that the 2nd. Amendment is an individual right, but that it is subject to restrictions in the case of firearms that are "[i]particularly suitable for criminal purposes."[/i]

I swear... the BATF letter reads like it was written by Sarah Brady herself (lies, exaggerations, fear mongering).  Remember folks... the ATF is NOT your friend, nor are they some impartial Gov. agency that is "just doing their job".  They OBVIOUSLY have an agenda, and it is NOT in our best interest!!!


If they feel this way about obsolete, overweight 60 year old long guns that fire a very popular deer cartridge, imagine what they think of your AR!!![/red]

What a load of shit.  I think I'm going to sign off of the board for the rest of the day, every post i've read has sickened me today.  

Enjoy the weekend.

 The main thing 'particularily suitable for criminal purposes' is the bureaucracy's INFRINGEMENT of our Constitutional Rights-NOT some inanimate objects!
 Allowing any cretinous bureaucrats ANY 'say'/discretion over restrictions or regulations is inane.
 Damn the gutless NRA and their 'reasonable' insipid accomodations with these pigs.
 GOA all the way! Ghost

Sorry to spoil your conspiricy theory NY Patriot but ATF has NOT been transferred to Justice Department yet and therefore is NOT under the control of the Attorney Generals office YET.

That transfer is part of the Homeland Security Act, which still is sitting in the Senate and may be subject to a fillibuster.

This should not, however, stop anyone from writing the Treasury Secretary and their Senators and Congressmen over this. So your opposition WILL be on file when the transfer and reorganization does occur.

We should be writing Congresspersons, Senators, and anyone else involved and urge them to disband the BATF.  BATF has shown a willingness to operate outside the law, has displayed its incompetence on numerous occasions, and perpetrates numerous lies, such as the ones in this article.  Frankly, I wish they'd regulate dildos instead of firearms.  That would be more in line with their level of competence and trustworthiness.

it strikes me as rather odd.....Did it ever occur to anybody that a weapon's 'suitability for criminal activities' characteristics are almost the same characteristics that make a weapon suitable for defense?

it strikes me as rather odd.....Did it ever occur to anybody that a weapon's 'suitability for criminal activities' characteristics are almost the same characteristics that make a weapon suitable for defense?

For example, the short barreled shotgun is easily handled and very powerful at close range. That makes it suitable for criminal use.

Funny, but those are the VERY EXACT CHARACTERISTICS of a weapon I would want if I had to defend my home against an intruder.

No conspiracy theory here ArmdLbrl. I'm fully aware that the BATF is under the jurisdiction of the Treasury Dept., and not the Justice Dept.

But... I do think it is fair to note that the BATF is couching their opposition to the importation of these rifles in the [i]very language[/i] that that the Attorney General used in justifying current & future infringements of the 2nd. Amendment.  

What this says to me is that Bush Administration is not as pro-gun as some people would like to believe (I guess we will all know the real deal come Sept. 14, 2004). IMHO, Ashcroft's "particularly suitable for criminal purposes" caveat is big enough to drive a truck through (you know.. the truck that will be used to run over & crush all your "assault weapons") [;)]  

What this article also shows is that ATF will actively seek to interpret any and all gun legislation in the [b]most restrictive manner possible[/b], and they will base their interpretations of half truths, exaggerations, and out right lies!!!      

WOO HOO!

The Homeland Security Bill is a done deal. Dubya wanted it on his desk before the end of the year, but your representatives wanted to give you all a big pre-christmas present in the form of a big presidential signing ceremony right after Thanksgiving.

Oh what a wonderful time it is to be alive to experience interesting times.

I just added my name to "the list" kept by the BATF.
The "other list" of people who bought firearms dosen't count, right. That list does not exsist.

Nothing the ATF said in that letter can be call "law enforcement"
It's one thing to pass unconstitutional laws but to lie and make things up as you go is criminal.
We need to go after this POS's job,none of this was ment to be up to him anyway.

Is this the same story when Klinton signed not to allow the garands from Korea be shipped back to the USA?

The only difference between a device that is   'particularily suitable for criminal purposes' and one that is not is the intent of the person behind it......

Hell, my car could be considered 'particularily suitable for criminal purposes' if I wanted to use it that way.  So could a baseball bat, knife, shovel, tape, gasoline, radio transmitter, saran wrap, couch pillow, whatever!