Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ATF ‘cease and desist’ order to parts-maker defies logic and law
Gun Rights Examiner ^ | 21 November, 2010 | David Codrea

Posted on 11/22/2010 3:48:24 AM PST by marktwain

On Thursday, Montana unfinished firearm frame manufacturer Richard Celata of KT Ordance received a hand-delivered “cease and desist” letter from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (see sidebar slide show).

What for?

The order states:

NOTICE OF UNLICENSED FIREARMS DEALING IN VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW

There’s only one problem: Celata’s not doing that. He has manufactured parts for gun owners who wish to build their own firearms, a perfectly legal activity that ATF apparently wishes to squelch through threat of prosecution —what Mike Vanderboegh of Sipsey Street Irregulars has termed an “economic Waco.” Mike shares his thoughts with us on this latest act of intimidation and includes an important update from Celata that raises the possibility this action is retaliatory for his helping craft the Montana Firearms Freedom Act—something ATF has warned everyone against testing.

Long-time WarOnGuns readers will recall Celeste’s persecution by the agency has been the subject of numerous posts and updates on that blog, including:

* BATFU Raids KT Ordnance * Help KT Ordnance * Fighting the Swarm

to name a few and give you a feel for what this man has been going through—for years. Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership summarized Celata’s plight and speculated on ATF motivations over four years ago, and it appears nothing has changed.

Here’s the thing: IF Celata is doing what the government accuses him of, since when do they give out warnings and advise people to get a license? Can you imagine the DEA finding you formulating and selling Oxycontin and responding by hand-delivering a letter telling you to stop and not resume activities until you become a legally-authorized pharmacist?

(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Montana
KEYWORDS: atf; banglist; batf; batfe; bootthebatfe; constitution; montana
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-87 next last
ATF should be abolished. It was a bad idea to start with.
1 posted on 11/22/2010 3:48:31 AM PST by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marktwain
If what he is doing is legal, then let then hand-deliver a hundred warnings, it doesn't make a difference.

Now, making and selling gun parts sounds like something I would assume would be illegal. But if its not (and apparently its not, according to the article), then he's safe, legally.

2 posted on 11/22/2010 3:55:16 AM PST by Celtic Cross (I AM the Impeccable Hat. (AKA The Pope's Hat))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

Can the ATF produce, in court for the Judge, a firearm that he is accused of making?


3 posted on 11/22/2010 3:56:40 AM PST by Waco (From Seward to Sarah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Celtic Cross

Making and selling gun parts is legal as it should be.

As far as nothing to worry about, you are talking about an agency with the power of the Federal government behind it. They can break his doors down, turn his physically turn the place upside down and then seize his assets, forcing him to prove his innocence to get them back. They can shoot him in the process and probably never face trial.

He may be legally in the clear but very far from being safe.


4 posted on 11/22/2010 4:06:12 AM PST by dangerdoc (see post #6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Celtic Cross

As long as you do not produce certain specific parts (finished handgun frames, finished rifle and shotgun receivers of the type defined by BATFE as ‘the critical part of the firearm,’ full-auto conversion parts), it is legal and requires no licensure by BATFE.

The closest thing to that that KT makes is what’s called an 80% frame - where 80% of the machining is done, but certain precision machining must be done before the frame can be used as the basis to build a firearm from. This has been ruled as “not a firearm” over and over by not only the courts but BATFE itself.

Think of it this way - if this were a American pushrod car engine, KT would be delivering a block that had the water pump holes, cooling passages and oil galleries machined out, the cylinders would be rough bored, but the block would be lacking the critical crankshaft and camshaft bores and therefore it could not be used to make a functional product until someone spent the time money and effort to machine out those items themselves.

This is BATFE making yet another power grab and an attempt by the administration to ‘backdoor’ gun control by running such makers out of business.


5 posted on 11/22/2010 4:10:20 AM PST by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

This is a planned assault. How can I help defend the Second Amendment as regards to this situation?


6 posted on 11/22/2010 4:10:24 AM PST by J Edgar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spktyr

Excellent explanation and analogy - kudos to you for adding clarity.


7 posted on 11/22/2010 4:19:14 AM PST by T-Bird45 (It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
I read the article and went to the KT Ordnance website and looked at his 1911 frame. And IMHO what KT is doing is making a 'non-firearm firearm'. OR, the closest thing one can to a firearm.

And to me it seems like he's sticking his tongue out at the BATF and going 'nah-ya-nah-ya-nah-ya'. Mainly because he also gives instructions on how to make his 'non-firearm-firearm' INTO a firearm where one would need a BATF license.

So what I would do is have my LAWYER write a nice letter to the BATF, not admitting any guilt or wrong doing, but say KT will apply for a manufacturers license to avoid any further confusion.

(I don't see any good coming from picking a fight with the BATF)

8 posted on 11/22/2010 4:22:11 AM PST by Condor51 (SAT CONG!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Celtic Cross
Now, making and selling gun parts sounds like something I would assume would be illegal.

There can be lots of parts in a gun. Do you think it's reasonable to expect that every company that makes screws, pins, or springs that might be used in a gun should have to be federally licensed gun dealers, How about the people who make aftermarket grips, scopes sights, or stocks? These are all "gun parts".

9 posted on 11/22/2010 4:25:34 AM PST by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

of course, you’re right. I’m merely suprised that the feds haven’t supressed peoples right to make parts.


10 posted on 11/22/2010 4:30:22 AM PST by Celtic Cross (I AM the Impeccable Hat. (AKA The Pope's Hat))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Celtic Cross
of course, you’re right. I’m merely suprised that the feds haven’t supressed peoples right to make parts.

That's what they're working on right now.

11 posted on 11/22/2010 4:33:54 AM PST by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Condor51

I have often wondered why a right specifically named in the constitution needs a permit or license to practice. I would call having to obtain a license an “infringement” on a right.


12 posted on 11/22/2010 4:39:21 AM PST by mc5cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Celtic Cross
Put every fed officer in a State penitentiary and put the State Guard on the gate with orders to shoot and kill anyone attempting to breach security. Stack them like chord wood.

LLS

13 posted on 11/22/2010 4:44:03 AM PST by LibLieSlayer (WOLVERINES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Celtic Cross

“Now, making and selling gun parts sounds like something I would assume would be illegal. But if its not (and apparently its not, according to the article), then he’s safe, legally.”

I don’t know why you would assume making gun parts would be illegal. So, long as items such as selector switches to enable full auto, etc., aren’t being manufactured I would the operation to be legal. Personally, I have long believed the ATF to be a rogue organization that badly needs to be reined in, maybe even disbanded.


14 posted on 11/22/2010 4:49:17 AM PST by snoringbear (Government is the Pimp,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mc5cents
*** I have often wondered why a right specifically named in the constitution needs a permit or license to practice. I would call having to obtain a license an “infringement” on a right. ***

I concur.
However until something changes, in the real world we have the BATF to deal with.

an side: I've had to have personal (voice) contact with the BATF on a couple occasions. At the field office near me they were nice as pie and helpful as they could be.

But down at the Atlanta Licensing Center office - typical gubmint slugs, aka: (morons). They wanted me to submit a form that didn't exist yet (part of the License renewal process 'back then').

15 posted on 11/22/2010 4:51:18 AM PST by Condor51 (SAT CONG!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

This is a situation where the state needs to step up and protect a citizen from imminent assault by a federal terrorist organization.

Send a heavily armed squad from the state’s national guard to the ATF office with a letter stating that any action by the ATF will have serious consequences.


16 posted on 11/22/2010 4:54:19 AM PST by sergeantdave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Condor51
And to me it seems like he's sticking his tongue out at the BATF and going 'nah-ya-nah-ya-nah-ya'. Mainly because he also gives instructions on how to make his 'non-firearm-firearm' INTO a firearm where one would need a BATF license.

AFAIK you do not need a BATF license to make a firearm for your own personal use.

17 posted on 11/22/2010 4:57:20 AM PST by Zeppo ("Happy Pony is on - and I'm NOT missing Happy Pony")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Zeppo

80% receivers are a legally gray area as they may not need serial numbers when completed by a personal owner. The BATF does not want legal firearms missing serial numbers that got around the rule by holes in their paper orthodoxy.


18 posted on 11/22/2010 5:13:14 AM PST by WaterBoard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Zeppo

You don’t. I even have a letter from the ATF to prove it.

I have made several: AK-47, AR-15, and 1911. I have bought parts from KT Ordinance. All are stamped with my last name and a homemade serial number. I even made one for a gift for my father (and have a signed, notarized statement from him that is was a GIFT; so the ATF can’t accuse me of manufacturing arms for sale)

Personally, I hope KT takes this to the USSC.


19 posted on 11/22/2010 5:17:19 AM PST by clee1 (We use 43 muscles to frown, 17 to smile, and 2 to pull a trigger. I'm lazy and I'm tired of smiling.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Zeppo
*** AFAIK you do not need a BATF license to make a firearm for your own personal use. ***

I don't know about that. I'd have to check the CD of All Firearm Laws the BATF sends me (thank God they stopped printing that big book, the size 2 font was hard to read)

20 posted on 11/22/2010 5:19:33 AM PST by Condor51 (SAT CONG!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-87 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson