TexasCHLforum.com

I also heard this on Guntalk yesterday and the interview with the Pres. of Georgia Arms. Gresham does a good job about checking his facts and not reacting to something unless it's warranted. This is for real.

Here's another source for more info...

http://havegunwillvote.blogtownhall.com ... back.thtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think we are in big time trouble...

I wonder how the major manufactures (factory guys) are handling this??? Federal, Hornady, Remington, Winchester, etc etc etc...

Will their adjustment be condusive and affordable for the civilian ammunition market???

I'm sure the reloading community is concerned because I know that most casings are only good for a few reloads, and the casings become risky to use after a few of those cycles...

I'm not a reloader, but even my novice knowledge of that process has me concerned...

The more I think about this, the angrier I get.

It's about high time we start hitting our state reps and demand they do something to defend us from these villains in the Federal government. This is absurd craziness.

steve_d_64 wrote:I wonder how the major manufactures (factory guys) are handling this??? Federal, Hornady, Remington, Winchester, etc etc etc...

Will their adjustment be condusive and affordable for the civilian ammunition market???

While this will eliminate many of our lower cost ammunition sources, I fail to see how it will affect any of the major manufacturers or for that matter, any source that already uses new brass.

Hello. Below is the text of an email I just sent out to an informal group of 2A Supporters. It contains all that I THINK I "know" on this issue:

"As you all know, word is out that all military brass is to be shredded or otherwise destroyed before it can be sold for scrap.

This may or may not be true and on the gun forums, arguments are loud for both possibilities.

First, no one can find any documentation that this is an executive order. To me that does not necessarily mean that the little bastard didn’t instigate this “action on the part of the DoD (Department of Defense) Surplus via a new “directive” from whomever sits at the top of their pecking order. This would allow for the action to be taken with less possible resistance than if it had to pass both the US Senate and House. He may can do this as the military “commander-in-chief” (again, purposely not capitalized), but it has not been done before. He can claim that it is being done in the name of “homeland security” and just wait for a court challenge for “guidance”. The sad part is that during the years until that challenge is heard, appealed, etc, the honest American citizen as well as reloading companies would be forced to endure the fired military case shortage.

I do NOT know that the above is true. I do know that our “president” (purposely not capitalized) speaks out of both sides of his mouth, claiming to support “gun control” (with the voting record to prove it) on the one hand and then claiming to “Support the Second Amendment” on the other. If either one is true, the other has to be false. Think about that; both cannot be true. I believe that he is against us despite his words. His “Pro-Second” claims are just like Pelosi’s and Reid’s: “Good” until politically expedient to drop the guise and gut the Second.

IF this is purposely intended to include any and all fired military cases, I do not think the antis involved expected word to get out so quickly…which would be stupid considering the speed of internet communications these days and the fact that all of the Pro-Second groups are watching this administration (of crooks) with both eyes.

Here is a letter reportedly sent by a company (Government Liquidation) to one of their regular purchasers of fired military cases. They are advising of the new directive and why they can no longer sell fired cases to long-time, regular customers:

“Dear Valued Customer:

Please take a moment to note important changes set forth by the Defense Logistics Agency:
Recently it has been determined that fired munitions of all calibers, shapes and sizes have been designated to be Demil code B. As a result and in conjunction with DLA's current Demil code B policy, this notice will serve as official notification which requires Scrap Venture (SV) to implement mutilation as a condition of sale for all sales of fired munitions effective immediately. This notice also requires SV to immediately cease delivery of any fired munitions that have been recently sold or on active term contracts, unless the material has been mutilated prior to sale or SV personnel can attest to the mutilation after delivery. A certificate of destruction is required in either case.

Thank you,
DOD Surplus
1501 N. Kierland Blvd #300
Scottsdale, AZ 88254”

Obviously, the next thing is to find out what “Demil Code B” refers to. So here it is: (I apologize for the spacing but it cannot be helped and correction is tougher than it looks.)

“DEMILITARIZATION CODES TO BE ASSIGNED TO FEDERAL SUPPLY ITEMS AND CODING GUIDANCE

DEMILITARIZATION CODES

CODE EXPLANATION

A Non-MLI/Non-CCLI -- Demilitarization not required.

B MLI (Non-SME) -- Demilitarization not required. Trade Security Controls required at disposition.

C MLI (SME) -- Remove and/or demilitarization installed key point(s), as prescribed in this manual, or lethal parts, components and accessories.

D MLI (SME) -- Total destruction of item and components so as to preclude restoration or repair to a usable condition by melting, cutting, tearing, scratching, crushing, breaking, punching, neutralizing, etc. (As an alternate, burial or deep water dumping may be used when approved by the DOD Demilitarization Program Office.)

E MLI -- Demilitarization instructions to be furnished by the DoD Demilitarization Program Office.

F MLI (SME) -- Demilitarization instructions to be furnished by the Item/Technical Manager/Equipment Specialist.

G MLI (SME) -- MLI Demilitarization Required -- AEDA. Demilitarization, and, if required, declassification and/or removal of sensitive marking or information, will be accomplished prior to physical transfer to a DRMO. This code will be used for all AEDA items including those which also require declassification and/or removal of sensitive markings or information.

P MLI (SME) -- MLI (Security Classified Item) -- Declassification, and any other required demilitarization, and removal of any sensitive markings or information will be accomplished prior to accountability or physical transfer to a DRMO. This code will not be assigned to ammunition, explosive and dangerous articles (AEDA) items.

Q CCLI -- Commerce Control List Item -- Demilitarization not required. CCLIs are dual use (military, commercial and other strategic uses) items under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, through the Export Administration Regulations. The types of items controlled under the CCL are commodities (i.e., equipment, materials, electronics, etc.), software and technology. The CCL does not include those items exclusively controlled by another department or agency of the U.S. government. (See DOD 4160.21-M-1, Chapter 3 and Appendix 5).”

If the above is too distracting in current form, try here for the same information: http://www.dlis.dla.mil/demil/demil_codes.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So, under the published Demil Codes, an exception for fired cases in the US existed and these cases could be sold to the private market w/o being destroyed. The question at this point is if the directive shown above from DOD Surplus is legitimate or not.

Evidently, Georgia Arms believes it to be accurate. This is on their site at www. Georgia-arms.com:

Attention!!

Due to new government regulations concerning the purchasing of surplus brass, we are removing sales of all 223 and all 308 until further notice. Below is a copy of the email we received from Government Liquidations.

"Effective immediately DOD Surplus, LLC, will be implementing new requirements for mutilation of fired shell casings. The new DRMS requirement calls for DOD Surplus personnel to witness the mutilation of the property and sign the Certificate of Destruction. Mutilation of the property can be done at the DRMO, if permitted by the Government, or it may be mutilated at a site chosen by the buyer. Mutilation means that the property will be destroyed to the extent prevents its reuse or reconstruction. DOD Surplus personnel will determine when property has been sufficiently mutilated to meet the requirements of the Government."

This is a huge waste of taxpayer's money. The value of these products is reduced by 80% by going from a recycled product to a scrap product.

CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN!!!!!!!!!

I finally located the following on one of the gun forums:

“I called the NRA-ILA (INSTITUTE FOR LEGISLATIVE ACTION). I spoke with a guy named Eric and he put me on hold for a few minutes till he could get the latest info on this subject.

After returning to the phone he gave me a bunch of info. The NRA is definitely aware of the problem and have heard from some reloaded ammo companies and individuals. Eric rattled off all the DOD agencies involved and apparently this may have been "somewhat of a mistake" The ranking DOD agency has heard our concerns and considers them VALID!!

Right now, the word is from DOD to the NRA that they hope to have a WAIVER put into place within a two or three weeks which will CORRECT this situation and return once fired brass, .50 caliber and below to the sales policies previously used!!!”
I tried to call but could not get through, no doubt due to the concerns over this issue.

So, what does this all mean? I am not sure to tell the truth. It could be by Obama & Company’s design or it could be a mistake that has “snowballed” and will be corrected. It could also be unintentional (though I doubt that) but implemented as a possibly overlooked manner of “gun control” via ammunition that doesn’t require action through the legislative branch.

Whether “innocent” or not, this and similar concerns over availability of ammunition is why I suggested quite a while back to buy ammunition. I hope our group did so just in case. As was suggested in previous emails, the Heller Decision by the Supreme Court does not protect us from those willing to “test” the very edges of what might can or cannot be done to the honest American gun owner. If the guns themselves are off-limits for legislation intended to essentially ban them, ammo would be the next logical choice. With people buying firearms and ammunition to the degree that it has made the national news a time or two and with Pelosi and Reid’s “claims” that there will be no “gun control” (at present), this would be a way for attorney general Holder (who pledged a ban as did Biden) to at least be able to say that this administration’s doing something to stop the evil flow of deadly weapons (Watch and see if ammo is mentioned if he pops off to the news) to Mexico. This could be used as an example to the antis in this country that the current leadership is implementing at least some new “gun restrictions”. At the same time, not a single anti-gun senator or representative has to say that they voted for any further gun control. Some still remember what happened at the mid-term elections in 1994 when the democrats lost control of both houses.

I do not suggest that we sit back and do nothing. I also suggest the possibility that this is an experiment to see how much we, the honest gun owner will take quietly. I suggest still contacting our respective senators and representatives and state our opposition to this latest directive. It might not be something to be voted on, but I doubt that they are completely without influence. I do not see that it can hurt anything.

If and as I learn more, I’ll advise. So far, this is all that I feel somewhat sure of.

Stephen A. Camp"

I don't know if this is of much use during this limbo period but it's what I have so far.

Best.

PS: I don't see any spacing issues on the the Demil thing but there were on the email.

Also being followed closely at The DOD Surplus Brass Controversy - Fact v. Rumor http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=435840" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Some comments there directly from some of the direct participants of last weekend's talk show - and a recent 45,000 pound purchase.

Right or wrong...This issue has certainly fired up the masses in our ranks...Me included...

Personally, I don't care, if this is the way they want to play, fine...

The word got out, they got caught, and now they know that this is not going to go away because we know about it...

Everytime one of these goobers gets on mic, everything they say is a lie, plain and simple...Not that I was expecting the truth anyway...

It is going to be interesting to see how this all turns out...

A little birdie told me that he just tried to get surplus ammo cans, guess what they are cited to be destroyed as well! Ain't life grand!

It is real!

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b ... 248&page=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I care.

For a President that is so deeply involved in re-invigorating our economy, how can he justify the elimination of a source of revenue for the Government? In my opinion he cannot and is using this as an excuse to stifle the ammunition market.

If things like this are allowed to proceed unchallenged, we'll see a lot more of them.

Time to call and write your senators and congressmen again.

With the way things are going, you may want to put them on speed dial.

I've gone an looked at all the forums I know about that are discussing this issue...

This forum...

The FiringLine...

AR-15.com

FreeRepublic...

All of the discussions are about the same, content and temperature-wise...

The one thing that has not happened, is that the NRA has yet to chime in on this...And I bet a dollar to a donut hole they will not till they get thru the menusha themselves and get it out for us to see...

I believe we need to stay vigilant, be polite, calm and collected till we see what they say...For the most part I believe we know what is going on here, its just that we are probably not sure what this means to us in the long run...The NRA may not be the definative answer to this, but they just might have a couple of doors we might not have access to to see what the real story is...Who knows somebody here already might be right...We just need verification...

I'm willing to be patient on this till we hear from them...And it might be comeing sooner than later...Then we'll know what to do...

I'm hoping we don't need to do anything about this...But that is just my optamist side speaking...

stevie_d_64 wrote:I've gone an looked at all the forums I know about that are discussing this issue...

This forum...

The FiringLine...

AR-15.com

FreeRepublic...

All of the discussions are about the same, content and temperature-wise...

The one thing that has not happened, is that the NRA has yet to chime in on this...And I bet a dollar to a donut hole they will not till they get thru the menusha themselves and get it out for us to see...

I believe we need to stay vigilant, be polite, calm and collected till we see what they say...For the most part I believe we know what is going on here, its just that we are probably not sure what this means to us in the long run...The NRA may not be the definative answer to this, but they just might have a couple of doors we might not have access to to see what the real story is...Who knows somebody here already might be right...We just need verification...

I'm willing to be patient on this till we hear from them...And it might be comeing sooner than later...Then we'll know what to do...

I'm hoping we don't need to do anything about this...But that is just my optamist side speaking...

I will wait until the smoke clears, pen at the ready, if needed.

I've already written to Hutchison, Cornyn and Pete Olson.

Hutchison sent back a canned reply about how she is a friend of firearm owners and doesn't support bans (it's word-for-word what she always sends).

The discussions on both THR and AR15 indicate that this has been rescinded as of 4:30pm today.

Also, GeorgiaA Arms has removed the notice from their web site.