FYI; One Week Left to Object to Proposed ITAR Censorship of Online Gunsmithing Forums

[barnbwt]

Johnson, Grassley Question State Department Gun Regulations - Press Releases - Ron Johnson)

Really not trying to be too political here, but this issue directly applies to this specific forum and its continued operation as we all like it. Senators Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) have written a letter to the State Dept seeking clarification of the proposed ITAR changes which seek to classify vast sections of firearms technical knowledge as 'defense articles' subject to strict federal controls against publishing, specifically over the internet. I ask everyone reading to look over the letter, and the concerns raised within. Multiple examples of now-legal online firearms activity are put forward, with a request for how they would be held under the regulation. At first glance, several would appear to be problematic if the rules change goes forward.

http://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/pu...728372f/johnson-grassley-to-kerry-re-itar.pdf
From the letter (emphasis mine):

Because the proposal grants the State Department the power to classify what is and what is not in the "public domain" for "defense articles" under ITAR, the Department will apparently have unilateral authority to require citizens to seek preapproval for what had previously been free speech. Given the proposal's nexus to firearms, a number of Second Amendment and Constitutional rights organizations have expressed concern over the chilling effects that this regulation may have on free speech and the right to bear arms. When asked about these constitutional implications, the State Department has been unable to adequately clarify what specific activities would be subject to preapproval under the proposal. So far, during the public comment period, over six thousand [make that seven thousand] comments have been submitted by citizens, with the overwhelming majority opposing these proposed changes.

Daily Press Briefing - June 10, 2015
The State department actually had a press conference last month in which some very basic questions about the implications of the proposal were taken.

QUESTION: Okay. So these rules would not apply to private citizens, only to manufacturers – and only to highly sensitive technical details? Is that --
MR RATHKE: They apply to the technical data and detailed schematics for the production of defense articles.
QUESTION: So they don’t apply to private citizens.
MR RATHKE: Well, they apply to anything that relates to those areas of subject matter, whether discussed by --
QUESTION: Okay. Well, the concern that had been raised by the Second Amendment groups is somehow this is going to restrict or stop or ban discussions about gun – about firearms --
MR RATHKE: Well, I go back to the – also the point that general descriptions – that is general, not technical and detailed ones – general descriptions or public discussions and imagery of defense articles would – have never been subject to these regulations and wouldn’t --
QUESTION: So the concern that has been expressed is misplaced, yes?
MR RATHKE: Yes, that would be our view.

Sure seems like that 'misplaced concern' applies directly to this forum, does it not?

Regulations.gov
This is the link to the proposed change's docket; there is a great, big "comment now" button --use it if you have not already. I'd sure hate to lose the freedom to openly discuss the manufacture, modification, and development of firearms here and elsewhere.

TCB

 

[barnbwt]

Last day left, folks!