Here it is, the proposed ATF rule regarding trusts

Discussion in 'NFA Weapon Discussion' started by Modeler, Sep 4, 2013.

  1. Modeler

    Modeler
    Molalla, Oregon
    Soccer Fan

    Messages:
    2,549
    Likes Received:
    1,535
    Here ya go!

    https://www.atf.gov/sites/default/f...uctive-devices-and-certain-other-firearms.pdf

    The high points:

    Photos, fingerprints and CLEO signoff will be required for each responsible person in the entity (trust, corporation, llc); pages 21 and 30.

    An estimate of cost and time is provided on pages 31-34 and summarized in two tables on page 35. The time requirements are ridiculously underestimated, but even their silly underestimate is 3 hours and 40 minutes for each person. They also don't include the fee charged by some CLEO's for signing Forms 1 and 4.

    The 90 day comment period has not yet been opened; be sure to comment when it is opened! (not that it will do any good...)
     
  2. jbett98

    jbett98
    NW Oregon
    Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    7,782
    Likes Received:
    11,888
    When this is enacted after the 90 day review process, does a trust that's already submitted have to follow the new rules, or is it grandfathered in?.
    I read the whole text, but I couldn't find any relevant info regarding my question.
     
  3. Dan-Dee Sales Inc

    Dan-Dee Sales Inc
    Sweet Home, Oregon, United States
    Active Member

    Messages:
    597
    Likes Received:
    58
    We are working on trying to answer that question.
     
  4. Dan-Dee Sales Inc

    Dan-Dee Sales Inc
    Sweet Home, Oregon, United States
    Active Member

    Messages:
    597
    Likes Received:
    58
    Just talked to ATF today and nothing has happened and he is not sure how it will play out. And jbett98 has the question of the year and cannot wait to be able to answer that one. :(
     
  5. Modeler

    Modeler
    Molalla, Oregon
    Soccer Fan

    Messages:
    2,549
    Likes Received:
    1,535
    Thanks for the info Jack. The 90 day comment period hasn't started yet, I guess we'll just have to wait and see. Hopefully it'll be similar to the 1986 cutoff, I hear they had a date by which Form 1's had to be submitted to make full auto before the Hughes Amendment took effect.
     
  6. Outrider

    Outrider
    Oregon
    Active Member

    Messages:
    390
    Likes Received:
    194
  7. Modeler

    Modeler
    Molalla, Oregon
    Soccer Fan

    Messages:
    2,549
    Likes Received:
    1,535
    Thanks Outrider, that's a good article.
     
  8. Burt Gummer

    Burt Gummer
    Portland
    Completely Out of Ammo

    Messages:
    5,989
    Likes Received:
    5,576
    Why does it say it closes some loophole regarding background checks?

    Anytime you go to pick up an NFA item from your FFL you have to get thumb printed and they run a background check. Using a trust does now stop a person from being vetted. Plus the ATF checks out the trustees beforehand.

    More stupid posturing that accomplishes nothing. Plus I've never heard of a criminal going through the NFA process. Kind of comical to think one would.

    Let's see here, hmm, I am a criminal and I want to rob a bank with a hidden shotgun. A hacksaw and 5-10 minutes and done or maybe I should submit paperwork and $200, wait nine months and do it legal! I'll have it engraved also!

    Whatever false safety makes idiots sleep better at night I guess.

    No, not one criminal will be stopped by this worthless nonsense. I am sure the ATF would agree, but they have to play the cards they are politically dealt.
     
  9. ThePhonMan

    ThePhonMan
    Spokanistan
    Gold Supporter Gold Supporter

    Messages:
    280
    Likes Received:
    440
    It’s already a crime for a prohibited person to be in possession of any NFA item.

    Are they going to prosecute people who attempt to sneak one by with these new NFA rules or will it be like the Form 4473 situation we have now? Try all you want with no consequences.

    Let’s just make it a crime to breath and our ruling class will choose when to enforce that law too.
     
  10. waltermitty

    waltermitty
    seattle
    Active Member

    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    119
    Section 9.12 Are FFLs/SOTs required to initiate a background check of the transferee under the
    Brady Law in connection with the transfer of an NFA firearm?

    No. Although 18 U.S.C. § 922(t) requires an FFL to complete a National Instant Criminal Background
    Checks System (NICS) check of the firearm recipient prior to completing the transfer, subsection
    922(t)(3)(B) removes ATF-approved transfers of NFA firearms from the NICS requirement for individuals.

    9.12.1 NFA Transfers to other than individuals.
    Subsequent to the approval of an application requesting to transfer an NFA firearm to, or on behalf of, a
    partnership, company, association, trust, estate, or corporation, the authorized person picking up the
    firearm on behalf of, a 176 Ibid. See also 27 CFR 479.105(d)177 27 CFR 479.105(c)66
    partnership, company, association, trust, estate, or corporation from the FFL must complete the
    Form 4473 with his/her personal information and undergo a NICS check.
     
  11. RifleEnthusiast

    RifleEnthusiast
    Close to Oregon City
    Active Member

    Messages:
    334
    Likes Received:
    56
    It's exactly like the FUD about buying guns at gun shows, every single non-gun enthusiast I talk to always throws the "but there are loopholes like buying at gun shows without background checks", then I have to go through the education of explaining that that's not the case and that anytime you buy a gun from a dealer, show or not you will be background checked, then they get the aaaahhaaa moment of "so why is the media spreading false information?"
     
    rsmccsman and (deleted member) like this.
  12. tjwong

    tjwong
    PDX
    Member

    Messages:
    126
    Likes Received:
    15
    To think a bad guy would contract a lawyer to make up a trust or a corporation to purchase NFA weapons, then pay the ATF tax fees and have to wait up to a year for the application to be processed, is totally ludicrous. The system in place works and works well. I searched and searched and could not find not even on instance of a registered NFA weapon used in commission of a crime.
     
    Burt Gummer and (deleted member) like this.
  13. jbett98

    jbett98
    NW Oregon
    Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    7,782
    Likes Received:
    11,888
    There are two instances that come to mind, and both involved law enforcement officers and their department issued weapons.
    One guy killed his wife and I believe another shot a neighbor over a dispute of some kind.
     
  14. tjwong

    tjwong
    PDX
    Member

    Messages:
    126
    Likes Received:
    15
    So basically what we have is that so far no one knows of not one legally civilian own and registered NFA weapon has yet to be used in a commission of a crime. That tells me that the system works and works well. And to think the two mentioned were LEO's and we would have to depend on one of them to sign for us??? Whats wrong with their thinking.......
     
    Burt Gummer and (deleted member) like this.
  15. waltermitty

    waltermitty
    seattle
    Active Member

    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    119
    On Monday Sept 9, 2013 the machines become self aware - NOPRM go-live
     
  16. Benny503

    Benny503
    Grants Pass
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,216
    Likes Received:
    269
    This is a bad news for me. My local sherrif only left with a sherif a d a deputy. How the heck are they have the time to sign off my NFA item?
     
  17. drew

    drew
    OR
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,050
    Likes Received:
    971
    Maybe bring it to the office in person. There's others that can sign too. Try the city police chief, the DA, etc. also.
     
  18. Stomper

    Stomper
    SCREW YOU SALEM!!
    SCREW YOU SALEM! Gold Supporter

    Messages:
    15,951
    Likes Received:
    32,128

    Thinking? Riiiiiiight..... :bluelaugh:
     
  19. mortar maggot

    mortar maggot
    western wa
    Active Member

    Messages:
    283
    Likes Received:
    88
    If I am a felon or other "prohibited person" from owning, or touching, a firearm, or even a bullet, being named on a trust does not exempt me from this law. So this change does nothing other than inconvenience and cost NFA owners money

    So this change is only a way to chip away at legal gun owners, their end game is to make it too much of a PITA to own NFA and then eventually too much of a PITA to have any firearms. If this erosion of gun rights is not stopped within 2 generations there will be virtually no gun ownership in the U.S.
     

Share This Page