Multi State travel with SBR

[Yarome]

3. There would literally be nothing to charge you with if you filed for a 5320.20 that encompassed the entire state. They say you have to put an address on the form. Thats it and thats as far as the enforcement goes. .

"Transporting to (number, street, city, county, state, and zip). The address where the NFA firearm is going to be transferred to."

This is where one would hope common sense would kick in as to what the plain English is asking for.

If "transporting to" is true (state only is allowed) then why not the other? "Transporting from", and requiring your home address?
Food for thought, hu!

Heck... by your interpretation ... there is nothing stopping you from entering coords for entire chunks of U.S states.. Why limit yourself??

Note that there is a difference between the legal definitions of "travelling/traversing" and "destination". Or in the case of a dot20... an "authorized destination".

3. Of course they could. Failing to properly fill out a gooberment document... they "could" null and void your permission slip and charge you with illegal interstate transport of an SBR. They may also charge you if your destination is not within a reasonable distance from the authorized location on your dot20.


"There is always room for interpretation of laws."

If by that you mean that many believe it is always possible to redefine plain English to mean whatever a person wants it to mean... "my own reality trumps all"... that does seem to be a very common belief these days. If facing a judge... good luck with that.


An interesting mental exercise, but not exactly worthy of continuing to repeat previous discussions on a subject already beaten to death in the not so distant past. I'm done.

 

[wired]

"Transporting to (number, street, city, county, state, and zip). The address where the NFA firearm is going to be transferred to."

This is where one would hope common sense would kick in as to what the plain English is asking for.

If "transporting to" is true (state only is allowed) then why not the other? "Transporting from", and requiring your home address?
Food for thought, hu!

Heck... by your interpretation ... there is nothing stopping you from entering coords for entire chunks of U.S states.. Why limit yourself??

Note that there is a difference between the legal definitions of "travelling/traversing" and "destination". Or in the case of a dot20... an "authorized destination".

3. Of course they could. Failing to properly fill out a gooberment document... they "could" null and void your permission slip and charge you with illegal interstate transport of an SBR. They may also charge you if your destination is not within a reasonable distance from the authorized location on your dot20.


"There is always room for interpretation of laws."

If by that you mean that many believe it is always possible to redefine plain English to mean whatever a person wants it to mean... "my own reality trumps all"... that does seem to be a very common belief these days. If facing a judge... good luck with that.


An interesting mental exercise, but not exactly worthy of continuing to repeat previous discussions on a subject already beaten to death in the not so distant past. I'm done.

The ATF has authority of regulating interstate travel of NFA items. They do not have authority to regulate intrastate travel of NFA items. Its the same reason you can permanently move intrastate and not be prosecuted forpermanently moving with a NFA items without notification even though they say you need to notify them of any permanent move ( You dont) . They can compel you to put an address on the 5320.20 that you are going to on the form before they will approve it. There is absolutely nothing they can do if you go somewhere else in the state while you are there.

I understand that your knowledge and understanding of NFA law and ATF past practice are severely limited but you like typing even though youre wrong so go for it...

Plain English. How quaint.

 

[Nwcid]

So it sounds like I should do the following;
File a form for any state that I will be staying in for more than a day or two passing through.
While I know I could do it for 365 days, it might be best to put a smaller date range that covers the actual time I will be there.
While I have seen the, "whole state" GPS, it seems that putting the GPS of a location we are likely to stay would be best. Even better if I pick locations and spend at least 1 night there.
My intent is to do things as legally as possible within the constraints of the functionality of the process.

Did I miss anything in that?

Thank you!

 

[wired]

So it sounds like I should do the following;
File a form for any state that I will be staying in for more than a day or two passing through.
While I know I could do it for 365 days, it might be best to put a smaller date range that covers the actual time I will be there.
While I have seen the, "whole state" GPS, it seems that putting the GPS of a location we are likely to stay would be best. Even better if I pick locations and spend at least 1 night there.
My intent is to do things as legally as possible within the constraints of the functionality of the process.

Did I miss anything in that?

Thank you!

What you should do is put down the entire year. It takes no longer to do that than to file for a few days and it adds flexibility . That lets you travel back and forth as needed and you should put down a location at every state you intend to shoot at . You do not need to file for states you will just be passing through. Again, the ATF has no say what you do in the state you have filed for as far as travel locations. Once youre there youre good to go for extra locations.

We are talking SBR's. Silencer require no notice. And if you dont want to go through the 5320.20 hassle at all just take the stock off and put one of those monstrosity braces on it. That whole debacle is in limbo.

 

[Nwcid]

What you should do is put down the entire year. It takes no longer to do that than to file for a few days and it adds flexibility . That lets you travel back and forth as needed and you should put down a location at every state you intend to shoot at . You do not need to file for states you will just be passing through. Again, the ATF has no say what you do in the state you have filed for as far as travel locations. Once youre there youre good to go for extra locations.

We are talking SBR's. Silencer require no notice. And if you dont want to go through the 5320.20 hassle at all just take the stock off and put one of those monstrosity braces on it. That whole debacle is in limbo.

Ok, I will do the full year.

Yes, if it was not clear, I will put down 1 place at each state where I know I will be staying. My point was that if I know I am staying in state A for a month, but not sure where, I would pick one location that I could easily spend a night as the "destination".

Yes, SBR. I have been traveling with silencers for quite some time.

 

[wired]

Ok, I will do the full year.

Yes, if it was not clear, I will put down 1 place at each state where I know I will be staying. My point was that if I know I am staying in state A for a month, but not sure where, I would pick one location that I could easily spend a night as the "destination".

Yes, SBR. I have been traveling with silencers for quite some time.

Any location is fine. I've known people to put the ATF field office. They truly don't care as long as lots a bonafide address.

 

[Yarome]

The ATF has authority of regulating interstate travel of NFA items. They do not have authority to regulate intrastate travel of NFA items. Its the same reason you can permanently move intrastate and not be prosecuted forpermanently moving with a NFA items without notification even though they say you need to notify them of any permanent move ( You dont) . They can compel you to put an address on the 5320.20 that you are going to on the form before they will approve it. There is absolutely nothing they can do if you go somewhere else in the state while you are there.

I understand that your knowledge and understanding of NFA law and ATF past practice are severely limited but you like typing even though youre wrong so go for it...

Plain English. How quaint.

That's something that didn't come up in the other discussions so...

That's missing one small detail. What is considered intrastate is dependent on the state where your NFA is currently registered. Crossing over a state line is "interstate" and you do not miraculously become an "intrastate" traveler within a new state... which is other than your home/registered state.

I can see it now!
"No officer! I'm not trafficking non taxed goods illegally over state lines! I'm still in the same state you stopped me in!!"

Good luck with that.

Which all means that... yes... they absolutely "can" enforce the interstate transport regulations if you go to a "destination" outside of your own state and other than the one authorized on your permission slip. Will they? Not hardly likely, but lack of active enforcement or getting away with something does not equate to "it's legal... no matter what the law says." Sorry....

Blah blah blah... demean and condescend whenever someone doesn't snap to and agree with you. Nothing new!


*To each their own to decide what level of risk they are comfortable with.

 

[Yarome]

While I know I could do it for 365 days, it might be best to put a smaller date range that covers the actual time I will be there.

It's common to file for a date range that will cover the full time period between departure from your home state and return... with a cushion period. That way, there is more validity to claim you are either "travelling" toward your authorized destination... or... in transit returning home from it.

Filing on the road for extended stays in other areas doesn't impact or invalidate your original permission slip. It's simply requesting additional permissions for additional locations. There is really no limit on how many open permission slips you can have.

Personally, I wouldn't necessarily file for a 1-3 night stay. That would get incredibly tedious. Maybe a week+ jack drop I would be more inclined to. That approach really being a balance between mitigating risk without fully eliminating it all together. KWIM?

It's purely a personal call how you decide to approach it.

Those temporary, interim permission slips you would likely want to do for the duration you plan to be in that particular area, plus a small cushion for unexpected eventualities or short side trips. There is no skin off your nose if you depart a location before the time period requested has expired.

 

[wired]

That's something that didn't come up in the other discussions so...

That's missing one small detail. What is considered intrastate is dependent on the state where your NFA is currently registered. Crossing over a state line is "interstate" and you do not miraculously become an "intrastate" traveler within a new state... which is other than your home/registered state.

I can see it now!
"No officer! I'm not trafficking non taxed goods illegally over state lines! I'm still in the same state you stopped me in!!"

Good luck with that.

Which all means that... yes... they absolutely "can" enforce the interstate transport regulations if you go to a "destination" outside of your own state and other than the one authorized on your permission slip. Will they? Not hardly likely, but lack of active enforcement or getting away with something does not equate to "it's legal... no matter what the law says." Sorry....

Blah blah blah... demean and condescend whenever someone doesn't snap to and agree with you. Nothing new!


*To each their own to decide what level of risk they are .

Getting back to the old Trope of when you want to prove a point and not just your opinion get out the legal cites.In 90 years of the NFA there have been a grand total of zero convictions for what you claim is clearly illegal . Why is that?

 

[nehalemguy]

"Transporting to (number, street, city, county, state, and zip). The address where the NFA firearm is going to be transferred to."

This is where one would hope common sense would kick in as to what the plain English is asking for.

If "transporting to" is true (state only is allowed) then why not the other? "Transporting from", and requiring your home address?
Food for thought, hu!

Heck... by your interpretation ... there is nothing stopping you from entering coords for entire chunks of U.S states.. Why limit yourself??

I'm glad this thread came up because it has reminded me that I need to submit my 5320 for my annual camping trip into NW Nevada. I list the address as "Black Rock Desert, NW Nevada" and I'll be giving a date range of Feb 1st-May 31st for this year. Last year we went in April, and it was a muddy mess.

Never been denied. Never been questioned. Never been asked to show paperwork.

-E-

 

[CountryGent]

Another 5320.20 debate? To quote Yogi Berra, "It's déjà vu all over again."

 

[Yarome]

Getting back to the old Trope of when you want to prove a point and not just your opinion get out the legal cites.In 90 years of the NFA there have been a grand total of zero convictions for what you claim is clearly illegal . Why is that?

Do you ever listen to yourself(?)

You're arguing that fed interstate jurisdiction doesn't exist (which would mean interstate protections while traveling with a firearm doesn't either) and despite what the plain text of the law says... not to mention ignoring the alphabets direct response to this very question... what you do and represent to others as perfectly legal is based on the fact that, routinely, people are not convicted for doing so.

Essentially, it's not illegal if the odds are vastly in your favor not to have to pay the piper.

That's some pretty over the top mental gymnastics well beyond your norm.


I'm done wasting my time responding to obvious gaslighting. Have a great day!

 

[wired]

I'm done wasting my time responding to obvious gaslighting. Have a great day!

So you don't have any cites? I mean if you find some please come back and enlighten us with your wealth of first hand knowledge on the subject.

 

[User 1234]

I'm not arguing for or against anyone. I did, out of curiosity, do a quick search. There were criminal convictions for interstate transportation of NFA items without approval, but only a few and only combined with additional wrongdoing. One was a Chinese Glock switch where he could not have obtained permission anyway. For whatever it's worth.

 

[wired]

I'm not arguing for or against anyone. I did, out of curiosity, do a quick search. There were criminal convictions for interstate transportation of NFA items without approval, but only a few and only combined with additional wrongdoing. One was a Chinese Glock switch where he could not have obtained permission anyway. For whatever it's worth.

Yes that would be a violation of the law. Transportation across state lines without an approved 5320.20 is illegal by non FFL holders even if the item is not on the registry and unlawfully owned.

. Once inside the state with an approved 5320.20 though. That's a different topic. Find a conviction for that and I will video myself eating my own , or anyone else's, shorts.

 

[PiratePast40]

Yes that would be a violation of the law. Transportation across state lines without an approved 5320.20 is illegal by non FFL holders even if the item is not on the registry and unlawfully owned.

. Once inside the state with an approved 5320.20 though. That's a different topic. Find a conviction for that and I will video myself eating my own , or anyone else's, shorts.

Starts searching the internet for edible underwear

 

[Yarome]

Find a conviction for that and I will video myself eating my own , or anyone else's, shorts.

A great example of the well known Schrodinger legal doctrine, right!

All personal interpretations of any law are valid... both "Legal" and "Illegal"... until enough people are convicted.





Here's a good read. See, "Infinite Goal Posts"

Three Common Tactics of Cranks, Liars, and Trolls • Richard Carrier Blogs

You might have noticed a shift over the past few years in how I address apologists, propagandists, kooks, and various disinformation scoundrels, toward laying out not just that they are wrong (their facts are bogus; their logic is hosed), but the underlying methodologies they are using that...

www.richardcarrier.info

 

[wired]

A great example of the well known Schrodinger legal doctrine, right!

All personal interpretations of any law are valid... both "Legal" and "Illegal"... until enough people are convicted.

One's fine . One citation of one conviction in 90 years . That would be sufficient

 

[Yarome]

One's fine . One citation of one conviction in 90 years . That would be sufficient

If we're going to set goal posts.... here's one for you.

I provided a direct quote from an actual alphabet agent responding to the very question if a state may be used in the "transporting to" field or if a specific location is required.

["It must be a specific location within the state."]

You show me a direct response from an alphabet agent saying that a state is sufficient for "transporting to" on a dot20 and I'll be happy to revise my understanding of the law. I'm not too old to learn new tricks.



(I won't eat my own shorts though. They've already been turned inside out once this month and I know where they've been.)

 

[wired]

If we're going to set goal posts.... here's one for you.

I provided a direct quote from an actual alphabet agent responding to the very question if a state may be used in the "transporting to" field or if a specific location is required.

["It must be a specific location within the state."]

You show me a direct response from an alphabet agent saying that a state is sufficient for "transporting to" on a dot20 and I'll be happy to revise my understanding of the law. I'm not too old to learn new tricks.

Ok , you start. Show me one conviction for moving an NFA regulated item that you legally brought in state on a 5320.20 to another non listed location in the same state in the 90 years the National Firearms Act has been in place. Then we will play your game. I mean it's only fair . I asked first.