Will AR's Become NFA Weapons?

[FarmerTed1971]

I see the NFA tax as the route they will try to take on ALL semi auto rifles on their list. I don't see it passing congress though, but one more school shooting could turn the tide.

IF this happens I suppose I would register everything I have to as a SBR.

 

[chariot13]

The thing with laws like this is their enforce-ability. (Is that a word?). Anyway, if a million of us decide that we simply aren't going to pay a $200 tax stamp for a weapon we already own, what exactly is the government going to do about it? Put us in jail? Good luck with that one. The quickest way to a second American revolution would be to start with onerous laws that the masses of people do not want. Those a**hats in Washington DC are supposed to be working for us. Not that other way around.

Very true. Look at the latest uprising in Egypt when their 'president' decided to give sweeping powers to himself. Only they all are unarmed. I can't imagine any other outcome than a bunch of un needed bloodshed from all sides once they start claiming tens of millions of people must register their certain guns 'or else'. Some will comply i know but i also know with something as basic & rudimentary as a semi-auto when its compared to what the Government (police, federal law enforcement etc..) allows itself to carry & use against Americans, millions will not comply.

 

[freestoneangler]

My point was, isn't this $200 tax how it started in Great Britain' Australia........ Then they GOT'em all
WWW (dot) info wars (dot) com. Everyone has to understand, if we don't confront and call all these "politicians" out Peacefully! we will loose these rights.

You are spot on... history is a powerful tool and one that can be used to our advantage but only if we choose to study it. This is how the they started the march towards a gun free (neutered) society.

 

[locobob]

I see the NFA tax as the route they will try to take on ALL semi auto rifles on their list. I don't see it passing congress though, but one more school shooting could turn the tide.

IF this happens I suppose I would register everything I have to as a SBR.

I was thinking the same thing, if I have to register with NFA then might as well go SBR, at least with the one AR I have left... my other receivers were lost in a boating accident.

Another thought to protect yourself long term: Create a Corporation and register a receiver as an SBR with the corporation as the owner, corporations are legal persons and they don't die so long as they are maintained. Would be more expensive as you'd have to file tax returns and such but theoretically your heirs could be corporate officers and thus be entitled to possession for eternity.

Of course realistically I don't think Feinsteins bill has a chance in hell of becoming law in its current form.

 

[Stomper]

A revocable living trust will accomplish the same thing, complete with the ability to add trustees (that can be in possession of the NFA item by themselves), and lines of succession for the executor instead of "inheritence". This can be done legally, and in perpetuity. This is how I did my NFA registered AK SBR.

 

[Nwcid]

Stomper that is true CURRENTLY. IF there is a new law that can all be changed depending on the wording of the law(s).

 

[TonsOfOregonBrass]

A revocable living trust will accomplish the same thing, complete with the ability to add trustees (that can be in possession of the NFA item by themselves), and lines of succession for the executor instead of "inheritence". This can be done legally, and in perpetuity. This is how I did my NFA registered AK SBR.

This is not true. only the person who filled out the 4473, when the gun was picked up can posses the firearm. You cannot just add people to the trust and allow them to be in possession. This was addressed by the ATF in response to a felon who had become a member of an NFA trust.

 

[Nwcid]

This is not true. only the person who filled out the 4473, when the gun was picked up can posses the firearm. You cannot just add people to the trust and allow them to be in possession. This was addressed by the ATF in response to a felon who had become a member of an NFA trust.

Got a link?

What about NFA items that do not complete a 4473?

 

[chariot13]

This is not true. only the person who filled out the 4473, when the gun was picked up can posses the firearm. You cannot just add people to the trust and allow them to be in possession. This was addressed by the ATF in response to a felon who had become a member of an NFA trust.

Thats not true either, otherwise all the people at machine gun shoots would be breaking that law when they possess & shoot those weapons. Also many police officers show their friends their firearms (full auto AR's etc..) Possession defined by law is "own, possess, or control any firearm". It's legal to possess (handle) any weapon as long as you are not a felon or someone deemed not legally allowed to possess that weapon. Although there are exceptions to this, such as some people in the Military that have been given waivers to be accepted in after having been found to have a felony conviction on their records. They are 'trusted' to possess (handle & use firearms the same as anyone else in their unit). The NFA deals with full transfers not simple possession & from what i know Stomper is right when dealing with Trusts. The part you mentioned about the felon, that would be left up to the felon (Trustee) to do whats right not the Trustor.

 

[Stomper]

You are correct on one thing, anyone prohibited from being in possession of a firearm i.e. a convicted felon, or under a court order restricting them from possessing a firearm, or an under age person listed in the trust are indeed excluded until they are otherwise made legally able to be in possession of said firearm(s) listed in the trust.

Where you are wrong is that the NFA firearm is owned by the trust once it has been transfered to the trust, not the individual who filled out the Form4473 at the original purchase. Anyone listed in the trust as a trustee and is not legally precluded from possessing a firearm for some other reason CAN be in possession and use that NFA firearm as they are a listed "agent" of that trust listing THAT NFA firearm. Anyone who is in possession of that NFA item would be wise to have a copy of the NFA tax stamp, and a copy of the trust showing them listed as a trustee.

 

[SCARed]

This is not true. only the person who filled out the 4473, when the gun was picked up can posses the firearm. You cannot just add people to the trust and allow them to be in possession.

WRONG!!! Anyone within your trust can posess the item provided they are not a prohibited person. You can add and subtract people from your trust at will.

 

[nubus]

Exactly why I did a trust. And because the Sheriff said "No."

 

[retiredgal]

$200 TAX for every Grandfathered AR-15?

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/pub...?File_id=10993387-5d4d-4680-a872-ac8ca4359119

YOW !!!!!

 

[mattdomes]

They would all go into the trust...

 

[Jamie6.5]

The rules for an NFA trust are about to change.
View Rule

Title: Background Checks for Principal Officers of Corporations, Trusts, and Other Legal Entities With Respect to the Making or Transferring of a National Firearms Act Firearm
Abstract: The Department of Justice is proposing to amend the regulations of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) regarding the making or transferring of a firearm under the National Firearms Act. The proposed regulations would (1) add a definition for the term "responsible person"; (2) require each responsible person of a corporation, trust or legal entity to complete a specified form, and to submit photographs and fingerprints; (3) require that a copy of all applications to make or transfer a firearm be forwarded to the chief law enforcement officer (CLEO) of the locality in which the maker or transferee is located; and (4) eliminate the requirement for a certification signed by the CLEO.

So everyone listed down the line in your revocable trust will have to submit photos and fingerprints to be eligible to qualify for the "responsible person" designation.

And let's not forget the definition of "revocable":
Definition of REVOCABLE
: capable of being revoked <a revocable privilege>

Then there's the definition of revoke:
1re·voke
verb \ri-&#712;v&#333;k\
transitive verb
1
: to annul by recalling or taking back : rescind <revoke a will>
2
: to bring or call back


The Lord (Holder) giveth, and the Lord (Holder) taketh away.

 

[Nwcid]

^ IF they just did "(4) eliminate the requirement for a certification signed by the CLEO. " the number of new trusts would fall drastically. That is the main reason people went trust/LLC route was LEO's that refused to sign.

 

[Stomper]

My main reason was to only pay for one $200 tax stamp, and my "heirs/descendants" could utilize the Trust's property in perpetuity. Even if they all had to submit for a "responsible person" background check... its still just one tax stamp. (from what I gather from your post)

 

[chariot13]

The rules for an NFA trust are about to change.
View Rule

So everyone listed down the line in your revocable trust will have to submit photos and fingerprints to be eligible to qualify for the "responsible person" designation.

And let's not forget the definition of "revocable":
Definition of REVOCABLE
: capable of being revoked <a revocable privilege>

Then there's the definition of revoke:
1re·voke
verb \ri-&#712;v&#333;k\
transitive verb
1
: to annul by recalling or taking back : rescind <revoke a will>
2
: to bring or call back


The Lord (Holder) giveth, and the Lord (Holder) taketh away.

Never registering is the safer bet to retain freedom. As long as you never use it except for its intended purpose (keeping a tyrannical government in check) well then you likely will never use it, except when (if) you need to.