Ridiculous US state dept ruling: my rant of the day

I hear you, Greentips. I tried to order 2 magazines for my 1911 yesterday, and the export permit was refused. The one thing, the only thing I want from the U.S. is their firearms and firearm accessories, and I can't get it. Their government spending has caused our dollar to rise to parity, making it the perfect time to shop for U.S. goods, and I can't get an M-1A stock, or a 14.5" barrel, and their firearm laws mean that the pistol-caliber carbines we get are at least 16" instead of something reasonable.
 
Its to bad AK type stuff is prohib..because we could have endless supply of Soviet warsaw stuff...

Maybe its time we sent Greentips to North Korea on a "fact finding" trip :)
 
"...WTF ever happened to NAFTA, eh?..." NAFTA applies to nothing firearm related. Firearm related goods were specifically left out by Mulroney's bunch.
The NRA doesn't care about anything that happens anywhere but in the U.S. They're not exactly helping our Southern cousins with any of the post AWB issues either.
 
Last edited:
sunray said:
"...WTF ever happened to NAFTA, eh?..." NAFTA applies to nothing firearm related. Firearm related goods were specifically left out by Mulroney's bunch.
The NRA doesn't care about anything that happens anywhere but in the U.S. They're not exactly helping our Southern cousins with any of the post AWB issues either.
Click to expand...


It is more the hypocrisy that bothers me more than anything. The US is one of the biggest (if not the biggest) arms suppliers in the world and always speaks of spreading free trade. It is ridiculous that they arbitrarily block export of civilian firearm parts to a 'close ally' and have numerous export hoops to jump through for everything that is allowed. I have american citizenship, but the hypocritical stink coming from down there turns me right off.
 
Unregistered said:
I hear you, Greentips. I tried to order 2 magazines for my 1911 yesterday, and the export permit was refused. The one thing, the only thing I want from the U.S. is their firearms and firearm accessories, and I can't get it. Their government spending has caused our dollar to rise to parity, making it the perfect time to shop for U.S. goods, and I can't get an M-1A stock, or a 14.5" barrel, and their firearm laws mean that the pistol-caliber carbines we get are at least 16" instead of something reasonable.
Click to expand...

That was fast it usually takes weeks to get a export permit.
 
Unregistered said:
I hear you, Greentips. I tried to order 2 magazines for my 1911 yesterday, and the export permit was refused. The one thing, the only thing I want from the U.S. is their firearms and firearm accessories, and I can't get it. Their government spending has caused our dollar to rise to parity, making it the perfect time to shop for U.S. goods, and I can't get an M-1A stock, or a 14.5" barrel, and their firearm laws mean that the pistol-caliber carbines we get are at least 16" instead of something reasonable.
Click to expand...


Where were you ordering your 1911 mags from???
 
Perhaps this is what we get for continually voting in Lefty Libs and haveing a open door immigration policy where you don't even have to have any docs to come in and claim refugee status
I still say Bin laden is in Scarborough
 
ESQ said:
It is more the hypocrisy that bothers me more than anything. The US is one of the biggest (if not the biggest) arms suppliers in the world and always speaks of spreading free trade. It is ridiculous that they arbitrarily block export of civilian firearm parts to a 'close ally' and have numerous export hoops to jump through for everything that is allowed. I have american citizenship, but the hypocritical stink coming from down there turns me right off.
Click to expand...

Well to you hypocrisy to me a reasoned approach to a possible problem. The US is currently engaged in a war. They have good reason to worry about their our weapons showing up in enemy hands. They are trying to make reasonable restrictions as opposed to a complete ban on exports to civilians (because they really have no control over what you then do).
Also it matters no what we think is a civilian or a military part. Bureaucracts make these decisions. The same type of folks that make gun laws. It is pretty apparent that they have but passing knowledge of firearms, but it is their job.
I think if you do a little research you will see that US civilian gun sales to foreign countries tend to disappear during times of conflict. It really does not matter what party is in charge.
 
THere are millions of M16 floating around - just look at the ones floating around in the middle east, whether they are stolen from the IDF or the Lebanonese. How about the ones in the hands of Columbia, Guatamela and Philippine

The number of civilian rifles ended up in the enemies is very limited. WHy will anyone buy a Kel tech or a FS2000, and somehow ship it to the hotspot across the Atlantic, while you can get M16 in philippine or Lebanon straight from somone's car that are stolen from corrupted military armories?

I venture to say that more M16A4s will be stolen in a month from the iraqis army, and got funnelled to someone else than the total import of AR15 to Canada in a year. I can see why they should restrict sales to certain places, like Philippine or Brazil....,but Canada???

THings like thermo sight, NVG and certain comm gear do make sense and they need to be restricted. Even more damaging -Satellite pictures posted by Google!! However, restricting semi automatic firearms to an allied country with strict firearms regulations that is not connected by landline to any enemy territories, is more a gesture than anything else. I don't think that's the way to treat the allies, especially it affects the population in your allied countries that give most support to their own governments for supporting the agenda of the US government.

Winning the hearts of your allies ......I argue that the current restrictions contribute nothing to winning the GWOT- instead, it damages the goodwill of the US to the supporting population in the allies.











redleg said:
Well to you hypocrisy to me a reasoned approach to a possible problem. The US is currently engaged in a war. They have good reason to worry about their our weapons showing up in enemy hands. They are trying to make reasonable restrictions as opposed to a complete ban on exports to civilians (because they really have no control over what you then do).
Also it matters no what we think is a civilian or a military part. Bureaucracts make these decisions. The same type of folks that make gun laws. It is pretty apparent that they have but passing knowledge of firearms, but it is their job.
I think if you do a little research you will see that US civilian gun sales to foreign countries tend to disappear during times of conflict. It really does not matter what party is in charge.
Click to expand...
 
greentips said:
I venture to say that more M16A4s will be stolen in a month from the iraqis army, and got funnelled to someone else than the total import of AR15 to Canada in a year. I can see why they should restrict sales to certain places, like Philippine or Brazil....,but Canada???
Click to expand...
The problem is that you are trying to apply logic to a situation that is driven by political optics. Restricting the export of "military equipment" makes the Congress look like it's doing something about "homeland security". It's purely a matter of perception. Restricting civilian exports is good optics because it results in little economical loss (as the export market for civilian firearms is so small) and doesn't cause political problems. On the other hand, in the Americans stopped selling weapons to "friendly governments" it would bad both for the economy and foreign relations.
 
Last edited:
Another point is that some of the people wishing to buy things like Magpul stocks and ACOG/Dr. Optic combos (off the top of my head) just happen to be Canadian soldiers that are about to deploy to Afghanistan.

It's essentially a given that no military procurement process will ever be effective enough so that the members of "line" units will be issued with the same quality of gear as they can purchase from civilian sources. Keeping the soldiers of an allied nation from having access to the truly first-rate pieces of equipment doesn't make a lot of sense.
 
w squared said:
Another point is that some of the people wishing to buy things like Magpul stocks and ACOG/Dr. Optic combos (off the top of my head) just happen to be Canadian soldiers that are about to deploy to Afghanistan.

It's essentially a given that no military procurement process will ever be effective enough so that the members of "line" units will be issued with the same quality of gear as they can purchase from civilian sources. Keeping the soldiers of an allied nation from having access to the truly first-rate pieces of equipment doesn't make a lot of sense.
Click to expand...


They are able to get kit through official sources. I don't think some folks not being able to buy a few items for personal use will affect the outcome of the war.

As for GTs post, it isn't civilian guns that are being focussed on it is military use items. Again I agree that they sometimes get overzealous concerning what might be of military use, but again what bureaucracy is both accurate and effective?
And as far as us being just good ol' Canada, you need to remember that this all started some years ago after our Government allowed military use items to be sold to Iran.
 
Unregistered said:
I hear you, Greentips. I tried to order 2 magazines for my 1911 yesterday, and the export permit was refused. The one thing, the only thing I want from the U.S. is their firearms and firearm accessories, and I can't get it. Their government spending has caused our dollar to rise to parity, making it the perfect time to shop for U.S. goods, and I can't get an M-1A stock, or a 14.5" barrel, and their firearm laws mean that the pistol-caliber carbines we get are at least 16" instead of something reasonable.
Click to expand...

You don't need an export licence for most accessories, only firearms or major components of them, from Title 1 of PL 109-108:

SEC. 629. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law or treaty, none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available under this Act or any other Act may be expended or obligated by a department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States to pay administrative expenses or to compensate an officer or employee of the United States in connection with requiring an export license for the export to Canada of components, parts, accessories or attachments for firearms listed in Category I, section 121.1 of title 22, Code of Federal Regulations (International Trafficking in Arms Regulations (ITAR), part 121, as it existed on April 1, 2005) with a total value not exceeding $500 wholesale in any transaction, provided that the conditions of subsection (b) of this section are met by the exporting party for such articles.
(b) The foregoing exemption from obtaining an export license--
(1) does not exempt an exporter from filing any Shipper's Export Declaration or notification letter required by law, or from being otherwise eligible under the laws of the United States to possess, ship, transport, or export the articles enumerated in subsection (a); and
(2) does not permit the export without a license of--
(A) fully automatic firearms and components and parts for such firearms, other than for end use by the Federal Government, or a Provincial or Municipal Government of Canada;
(B) barrels, cylinders, receivers (frames) or complete breech mechanisms for any firearm listed in Category I, other than for end use by the Federal Government, or a Provincial or Municipal Government of Canada; or
(C) articles for export from Canada to another foreign destination.
(c) In accordance with this section, the District Directors of Customs and postmasters shall permit the permanent or temporary export without a license of any unclassified articles specified in subsection (a) to Canada for end use in Canada or return to the United States, or temporary import of Canadian-origin items from Canada for end use in the United States or return to Canada for a Canadian citizen.
(d) The President may require export licenses under this section on a temporary basis if the President determines, upon publication first in the Federal Register, that the Government of Canada has implemented or maintained inadequate import controls for the articles specified in subsection (a), such that a significant diversion of such articles has and continues to take place for use in international terrorism or in the escalation of a conflict in another nation. The President shall terminate the requirements of a license when reasons for the temporary requirements have ceased.
Click to expand...

So you don't need an export license for 1911 mags. AR-15 collapsible stocks I think they feel fall under the "full-auto" parts subsection but I can't seem to get anyone at the State Dept. to confirm that.

Apparently from what I've been told, even ATF think the State Dept. are stretching it with some of their definitions, but ATF is not responsible for the AECA.
 
redleg said:
And as far as us being just good ol' Canada, you need to remember that this all started some years ago after our Government allowed military use items to be sold to Iran.
Click to expand...


The US has sold plenty to Iran (Iran-Contra affair). And to Iraq. And to the 'pre'-Taliban. And many more they are now at war with.
 
I've got to say my patience with all this nonsense has now run out, in fact it ran out awhile ago.

I think the time has come to start writing to MPs moaning about how you have no clue whether you can legally bring in a scope mount from the US because the State Dept. and Commerce Dept. have their heads up their asses, and then get DFAIT to write a nasty letter to the Secretary of State.

I know it's a long shot but it's better than doing nothing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom