Page 1 of 2
Proposed rule change that would bar "gun talk" on line?
Posted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 12:45 pm
by E.Marquez
So I read this in my FB feed
http://bearingarms.com/constitution-oba ... ed-speech/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I'm teaching a MSF class plus only have my phone
Not able to research if this is a real issue or chicken little pretend faux rage to bash the current administration (no need to make stuff, plenty to pick on)
I did a search here and did not see anything like it discussed
What say you?
Re: Proposed rule change that would bar "gun talk" on line?
Posted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 1:08 pm
by Vol Texan
E.Marquez wrote:So I read this in my FB feed
http://bearingarms.com/constitution-oba ... ed-speech/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I'm teaching a MSF class plus only have my phone
Not able to research if this is a real issue or chicken little pretend faux rage to bash the current administration (no need to make stuff, plenty to pick on)
I did a search here and did not see anything like it discussed
What say you?
Wouldn't surprise me one bit if he were to try something like this. As far as if being a "Chicken Little" type article, you may notice the NRAILA also has a similar article posted:
https://www.nraila.org/articles/2015060 ... ted-speech
The NRA is a bit too savvy to get suckered into a story like this. That alone suggests to me that it is worthy of our attention.
Re: Proposed rule change that would bar "gun talk" on line?
Posted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 1:18 pm
by baldeagle
I believe this is what they are referring to. The article references this
proposed rule change which contains the following section.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Parts 120, 123, 125, and 127
[Public Notice 9149]
RIN 1400–AD70
International Traffic in Arms: Revisions
to Definitions of Defense Services,
Technical Data, and Public Domain;
Definition of Product of Fundamental
Research; Electronic Transmission
and Storage of Technical Data; and
Related Definitions
AGENCY: Department of State.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: As part of the President’s
Export Control Reform (ECR) initiative,
the Department of State proposes to
amend the International Traffic in Arms
Specifically this section on technical data:
2. Revised Definition of Technical Data
The Department proposes to revise
the definition of ‘‘technical data’’ in
ITAR § 120.10 in order to update and
clarify the scope of information that
may be captured within the definition.
Paragraph (a)(1) of the revised definition
defines ‘‘technical data’’ as information
‘‘required’’ for the ‘‘development,’’
‘‘production,’’ operation, installation,
maintenance, repair, overhaul, or
refurbishing of a ‘‘defense article,’’
which harmonizes with the definition of
‘‘technology’’ in the EAR and the
Wassenaar Arrangement. This is not a
change in the scope of the definition,
and additional words describing
activities that were in the prior
definition are included in parentheticals
to assist exporters.
I think it would be a massive stretch to define online discussion of firearms as the exporting of technical data, and I can't imagine a court upholding such an interpretation, but only a qualified lawyer could read through this gobbledy gook and figure out what it means practically.
Re: Proposed rule change that would bar "gun talk" on line?
Posted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 3:01 pm
by oohrah
ITAR is crazy. You can look up a piece of electronics online at Besy Buy, read all the specs, and go buy it. But if you try to take it to China, you may be violating ITAR.
Added: I forgot to mention that you could buy the same piece of gear once you got to China - at Best Buy.
Re: Proposed rule change that would bar "gun talk" on line?
Posted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 3:46 pm
by EEllis
This has got to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.
Re: Proposed rule change that would bar "gun talk" on line?
Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2015 8:01 am
by AJSully421
So, my question is: What is considered "Technical Data"?
Is saying that a Glock 17 has a 4.49" barrel, holds 17+1 rounds, and is 1.18" wide considered "technical data"? or is it more like CNC or 3D printer codes to make actual gun parts?
Re: Proposed rule change that would bar "gun talk" on line?
Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2015 9:30 am
by CleverNickname
AJSully421 wrote:So, my question is: What is considered "Technical Data"?
Is saying that a Glock 17 has a 4.49" barrel, holds 17+1 rounds, and is 1.18" wide considered "technical data"? or is it more like CNC or 3D printer codes to make actual gun parts?
The answer is "As much as they think they can get away with."
They want to implement so many bad regulations in these next two years that a prospective Republican president and Congress in 2017+ will be busy returning everything to the 2015 status quo instead of really changing anything for the better. And that's if Congress actually bothers.
Re: Proposed rule change that would bar "gun talk" on line?
Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2015 10:17 am
by VMI77
One obvious target here is 3D printing.
Re: Proposed rule change that would bar "gun talk" on line?
Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2015 10:48 am
by canvasbck
The scary part here is where information needed for maintenance or repair is considered technical data. I cant do a darn thing to my firearms unless I watch a youtube "how to" video while I'm doing it.
I even used youtube before applying Froglube!
Re: Proposed rule change that would bar "gun talk" on line?
Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:25 pm
by TVGuy
I guess we're all soon to be felons!
Re: Proposed rule change that would bar "gun talk" on line?
Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2015 4:52 pm
by stevie_d_64
So, if we go a head and self-regulate and stop talking/discussion/posting on websites like this...
Does that make us more or less dangerous to the numbnuts who are pushing the edge of the envelope here???
I saw this today...It just additional media copy-catting journalism...
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/nra-g ... le/2565762" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I guess we can shift the discussion here on this website to knitting??? Bread making???
Re: Proposed rule change that would bar "gun talk" on line?
Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2015 5:23 pm
by Dave2
TVGuy wrote:I guess we're all soon to be felons!
On average, we each commit three felonies a day:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014240 ... 0830760842" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Re: Proposed rule change that would bar "gun talk" on line?
Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2015 1:33 pm
by VMI77
More info here:
http://gunfreezone.net/wordpress/index. ... epartment/
A list of designated "defense articles" and "services":
Nonautomatic and semi-automatic firearms to caliber .50 inclusive.
Combat shotguns. This includes any shotgun with a barrel length less than 18 inches.
Silencers, mufflers, sound and flash suppressors.
Riflescopes manufactured to military specifications.
Barrels, cylinders, receivers (frames) or complete breech mechanisms for the articles.
Components, parts, accessories and attachments for the articles.
And here:
http://www.pagunblog.com/2015/06/07/gra ... -yet-seen/
This is very dire, friends. If this moves forward there is a very good chance I, and many of my other fellow bloggers, forum admins, and YouTubers will end up in federal prison while the Courts sort this out. Don’t ever let anyone ever tell you what these people want are “common sense” regulations. They are fascists. That is no longer arguable. There will be a lot of firearms enthusiasts serving prison time for essentially the same crime they would be charged with had they traveled to Iraq and sold plans for a thermonuclear weapon to ISIS. Fundamentally transformed!
Re: Proposed rule change that would bar "gun talk" on line?
Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2015 4:20 pm
by MechAg94
VMI77 wrote:One obvious target here is 3D printing.
That is one. I imagine the intent is to make the rule as broad as possible so they can target whoever they want. Which is the intent of most of the numerous regulations in place.