Ares Armor Crayon Drawing Sent To BATFE Director

Nathaniel F
by Nathaniel F

Dimitrios Karras of Ares Armor is a little frustrated with the BATFE’s inconsistency regarding 80% lowers, and what constitutes their manufacture. To assist ATF director B. Todd Jones in understanding, Karras wrote a letter outlining some of the previous statements made by Jones regarding this issue:

On page 2 and 3 you state the following,

“…it generally requires substantial additional machining before it can accommodate fire control components such as a trigger, hammer, or sear…”

“…incapable of being assembled into a weapon…”

And my personal favorite quote on page 3,

“ATF Ruling 2010-10 assumes that a licensed dealer-gunsmiths would perform certain activities on articles ALREADY classified as frames or receivers (i.e., no machining or other processes required to allow it to be used to assemble a weapon)… *emphasis added

Here, you have very clearly stated that an item that requires “machining or other processes” before it is suitable for use in assembling a weapon would not ALREADY be classified as a frame or receiver. THANK YOU FOR THIS GIGANTIC ADMISSION!

  1. ) Indexing marks DO NOT make a random object into a “receiver”.

On page 3, you incorrectly and in pompous contempt of the Court make the following statement,

Although such an article may be classified as a “receiver” when it is indexed…

As you are fully aware, this is direct conflict with UNITED STATES v. PRINCE. The ATF has already lost this argument in Federal Court. I have mentioned this case in previous communication with you. It is fully on record that you are aware of this case and its implications.

If Karras’ language seems a little bit soured, that is because the ATF raided Ares Armor back in March, and took all of their EP80 polymer lower receivers:

Let me ask one simple question… If a “receiver” is a “weapon”, why are they defined separately and uniquely in the GCA as firearms?

A “receiver” by itself cannot be “readily converted to expel a projectile” as the receiver by itself lacks the necessary parts. I would love to hand you a receiver and ask you to readily convert it into a weapon. Perhaps you would do that hand waiving Jedi-Mind trick thing you did to Congress when you were asked about why you raided my business!

Attached to the letter was a pictorial explanation of Karras’ interpretation of what Director Jones had previously said about the manufacture of a firearms receiver, done in crayon:

That is certainly an unconventional way to vent your frustrations! Hopefully this dispute is settled soon, and Ares Armor can get back to their business.

H/T To Daniel Watters, and The Firearms User Network

Nathaniel F
Nathaniel F

Nathaniel is a history enthusiast and firearms hobbyist whose primary interest lies in military small arms technological developments beginning with the smokeless powder era. He can be reached via email at nathaniel.f@staff.thefirearmblog.com.

More by Nathaniel F

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 52 comments
  • Norman Norman on Jan 13, 2015

    It just goes to show that agency needs to be defunded and scrapped. They make arbitrary decisions based on politics and not real legal facts. Instead of going after actual criminals who smuggle and use arms in crimes (oops, they do that, too , don't they?) they go after legitimate business men and hobbyists.

  • Angrymike Angrymike on Jan 18, 2015

    I love the guy, he was raided for no reason and is mad, I'd be mad to !! I've bought parts from them and must say they are of the highest quality and very fairly priced !!!!!!

Next