It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
District Judge Janis L. Sammartino of the United States District Court, Southern District of California issued an order Friday to prevent Oceanside's gun parts supplier Ares Armor from divesting itself of inventory and records subject to a temporary restraining order the court issued Tuesday. Also included in the order was notice that the TRO did “not restrain lawful criminal proceedings,” as well as a modification of the briefing schedule ordering “the parties [to] fully address all of the facts and circumstances as alleged by one another." The TRO, as reported in this column on Thursday, was requested by Ares Armor to forestall a raid by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in which inventory and customer records were targeted for seizure. That ATF action was in response to the company selling so-called “80 percent lower receivers” manufactured by EP Armory, itself the subject of a raid and seizures over parts which have previously been determined by ATF not to be a firearm, as further machining operations must be taken by customers to turn them into functional components. As explained by St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner Kurt Hofmann, “EP Armory's polymer 80% lower receivers have a unique feature in that the material to be removed by milling and/or drilling is a different color from the material that is to be left untouched -- thus making it easy to do the machining, even without a jig.”
TO: Whom It May Concern FROM: Dimitrios Karras, CEO Ares Armor SUBJ: Temporary Restraining Order Against BATFE DATE: March 12, 2014 Sir or Ma’am, Last week the BATFE Raided EP Armory based on a determination letter that had deemed the 80% Polymer product to be a firearm. The determination letter that the BATFE used to obtain warrants against EP Armory is based on incorrect information about the manufacturing process. The BATFE has been notified of their error and the incorrectness of their determination based on this error. This week on Monday, March 10th the BATFE threatened to raid us even though they are fully aware that their determination letter is factually incorrect. They requested that we turn over a list of every customer that had purchased a polymer lower from us and turn over the remaining inventory that we have. Our customer’s privacy is of the utmost importance to us. I cannot in good moral conscience turn over a list of names to the BATFE just because they unduly threaten us with an unjust raid based on information they KNOW TO BE FALSE! For the time we are SAFE! We were granted a Temporary Restraining Order against the BATFE on March 11th.
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
Not sure I totally follow what your saying here? The whole debate between the 80% receiver and your focus on California might be what is throwing me for a loop. This has way more to do with the current laws on the books and how and what constitutes a lower receiver on an ar-15 style rifle and what the atf considers a serialized part. For the sake of clarity you probably already know but others might not when it comes to the serialized control of said firearms. For those that might not know the only part that the atf considers the actual firearm is the lower on the ar 15. It is where the serial # is located and when purchasing an ar 15 or it's components the only thing requiring registration other than tax stamps for barrel items which is beyond this discussion. So by purchasing an 80% complete lower until it is milled out by the end user it is nothing more than a hunk of aluminum or poly, or nonfunctional. And by their own set of rules a person can build a firearm for personal use and not have to have a serial # on it as long as it is not sold or transferred, the only requirement is that the maker of the gun has to stamp name, address of the builder onto the receiver thus avoiding the need for a serialized part. So in a nutshell this to me goes way beyond California and their crazy rules, hell even NY's new legislation can't currently touch these things the way the law is on the books right now. What I feel we are seeing here all over again is these agencies trying to change the rules without following the protocol and that is once again a scary road to go down. You cannot deny that between the gun grabs and everything that has gone on in states like Conn recently and things like this that certain people agencies are trying their hardest to push someones agenda through, and far from the legal and proper way.....