Federal Court Strikes Down NFA Registration on "untaxed" firearms (Page 129 of 195)
|
Originally Posted By lil_Sig: The beginning of this thread was full of freedom starved Americans. Talking about hacksaws and midnight freedom. I was stoked to see posts showing off their new found freedom. But it was Clearly just a bunch of jive freedom talk. Cause I aint seen shit.  Originally Posted By lil_Sig: Originally Posted By wherewildthingsare: This thread reminds me of my elementary school heydays. https://media0.giphy.com/media/6WgPXAa0FfaLhxbRCK/200.webp?cid=8dc8958c25xmg3zsa22fpc2dct26r14bx0h4sntjzgfozfcs&ep=v1_gifs_search&rid=200.webp&ct=g The beginning of this thread was full of freedom starved Americans. Talking about hacksaws and midnight freedom. I was stoked to see posts showing off their new found freedom. But it was Clearly just a bunch of jive freedom talk. Cause I aint seen shit. There have been some photos posted from people who get it. |
Everything posted above is factual. Maybe.
Joined:
Jun 2025
Posts:
1170
EE: 0% (0)
AZ, USA
|
Originally Posted By bkpkr: Aw sweet we’re doing Waco again today. DOOOOOOOOOOOM Fear is the cheapest way to control people. The chance of getting Waco'd for your legally made formless goody likely approaches that of being bit by a rabid bat in your sleep and never knowing until you get an irrational fear of water. If that's your risk tolerance, better not drive to work in the morning either. If you've been waiting for a formless SBR/SBS/can and live in a free state but are still waiting for more risk mitigation you should probably go and get some precautionary rabies shots and buy more smoke detectors first, and maybe a new model of car. If you're watching lawyers fear monger over "what if your cousin bill comes over and accidently touches the safe, will he now be in constructive possession" you are better off spending that time going for a jog and eating less salt and fats. |
|
Originally Posted By Cypher214: Every time like clockwork. I'm glad I don't wet myself with fear over some shit that happened 30 years ago and had a whole fuckload of context that doesn't apply to me. What happened at Waco doesn't come close to the scenarios laid out by you or the doomer YouTuber, but that and Ruby Ridge are the only cards you folks have to play. Ever notice how both those incidents occurred within a year of each other, with a lot of the same assholes running things, and nothing similar has occurred since? That should be a clue. To be fair...Bryan Malinowski and Duncan Lemp... |
|
Originally Posted By bmarshall1: Didn't he lose some guns that were on loan, or something of that nature? I recall they just kind of disappeared and he wasn't able to get them back. Originally Posted By bmarshall1: Originally Posted By Coffin-Nail: Originally Posted By scuba_steve: Certainly could have impacted items not on display, and I can see why owners of items on loan may have wanted to retrieve them when the NRA announced restructuring plans and a plan to move to Texas, but I haven't noticed much impact to the items on display. BTW, I don't believe member rongorongo was ever the director. Phil Schreier was, who passed away last year. I believe rongo was a senior curator. And also very critical of Phil and how the artifacts were being maintained after rongo was terminated, but there are two sides to every story. That said, I would not be surprised if the collection was not being maintained as well as it was when they had a larger staff. That department was likely one of the first to see cuts. I keep recommending friends take the time to visit the museum while it is still there, because I would not be surprised to see it close. You are right, he was a curator, it's been a number of years. Didn't he lose some guns that were on loan, or something of that nature? I recall they just kind of disappeared and he wasn't able to get them back. I seem to recall it wasn’t necessarily guns but some other very rare items. |
|
Originally Posted By graysonp: A Form 4 suppressor registered to an individual is not registered to the spouse or children. That's the point. John Doe leaves his suppressed rifle on the dining room table and leaves for the week. Jane Doe has a suppressor that's not registered to her. She's not getting arrested for that because no court would ever agree that she took possession of it illegally. That's the exact same scenario as a wife having a suppressor that was transferred on a 4473. This lawsuit changes nothing in that regard. If you own a suppressor that's registered in someone else's name, that's exactly the same as owning one without registration at all. The point here is that a spouse will never be considered to have taken illegal possession simply because they have access to something their spouse legally owns. You are making up BS scenarios that have no legal precedent and will never be enforced in the way you're suggesting. It will never hold up in court that a spouse illegally possesses a suppressor that her husband legally owns. If you can find a single court case in the history of the US that proves me wrong, go find it. Otherwise, stop fear mongering and spreading BS. Originally Posted By graysonp: Originally Posted By Zap_Rowsdower: Those millions of suppressors are in fact registered. Try this example. It's six months ago and someone is home brewing suppressors without a Form 1 and gets a visit form the ATF. If they can prove the spouse knew what was going on and had access to them then they can be charged as well. Constructive possession A 4473 suppressor is unregistered. The judges order just forbids the ATF from enforcing the law that says you can be prosecuted for violating the law if you are a party to the lawsuit. The lawsuit does not stop the ATF from proseccting someone who is not a party to Silencer Shop Foundation v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (consolidated with Jensen v. ATF) at this time. A Form 4 suppressor registered to an individual is not registered to the spouse or children. That's the point. John Doe leaves his suppressed rifle on the dining room table and leaves for the week. Jane Doe has a suppressor that's not registered to her. She's not getting arrested for that because no court would ever agree that she took possession of it illegally. That's the exact same scenario as a wife having a suppressor that was transferred on a 4473. This lawsuit changes nothing in that regard. If you own a suppressor that's registered in someone else's name, that's exactly the same as owning one without registration at all. The point here is that a spouse will never be considered to have taken illegal possession simply because they have access to something their spouse legally owns. You are making up BS scenarios that have no legal precedent and will never be enforced in the way you're suggesting. It will never hold up in court that a spouse illegally possesses a suppressor that her husband legally owns. If you can find a single court case in the history of the US that proves me wrong, go find it. Otherwise, stop fear mongering and spreading BS. |
Living in the free state of Texas
|
Originally Posted By Freyja_75: I know, and they've been on crack for years. HK thinks they build the best guns in the world, and I understand some of that, but, like Colt, they're screwing civilians. One of these years I'm going to build the MP5K I've always wanted, but it's going to have as few HK parts as possible. If it isn't 100% German with an H&K receiver, it is not an MP5K. H&K offers their MP5 line in a semi auto format to the public, and they are readily available. |
"If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." Romans 10:9 (ESV)
|
Originally Posted By st33ve0: To be fair...Bryan Malinowski and Duncan Lemp... Originally Posted By st33ve0: Originally Posted By Cypher214: Every time like clockwork. I'm glad I don't wet myself with fear over some shit that happened 30 years ago and had a whole fuckload of context that doesn't apply to me. What happened at Waco doesn't come close to the scenarios laid out by you or the doomer YouTuber, but that and Ruby Ridge are the only cards you folks have to play. Ever notice how both those incidents occurred within a year of each other, with a lot of the same assholes running things, and nothing similar has occurred since? That should be a clue. To be fair...Bryan Malinowski and Duncan Lemp... I sound like a broken record. Neither of those people just had a short barrel or suppressor. One was dealing without a license, multiple guns he sold showed up at crime scenes, and he shot at the ATF when they showed up, the other illegally owned firearms because of his criminal record and stupidly posted about it on militia boards. Neither of those things should be illegal, neither of those things meant they deserved to get raided, but again context matters. In this thread we are discussing actions that are legal, and the doomers are saying "don't do it, ATF will rape your dog and burn your house down". |
Everything posted above is factual. Maybe.
|
Originally Posted By MikeDeltaFoxtrot: If it isn't 100% German with an H&K receiver, it is not an MP5K. H&K offers their MP5 line in a semi auto format to the public, and they are readily available. Originally Posted By MikeDeltaFoxtrot: Originally Posted By Freyja_75: I know, and they've been on crack for years. HK thinks they build the best guns in the world, and I understand some of that, but, like Colt, they're screwing civilians. One of these years I'm going to build the MP5K I've always wanted, but it's going to have as few HK parts as possible. If it isn't 100% German with an H&K receiver, it is not an MP5K. H&K offers their MP5 line in a semi auto format to the public, and they are readily available. Not sure there is anything more German in a modern sense than something being done cheaply by the Turks. So MKE counts. I can't wait for MP5 SBR clones are as common as ARs. 
|
Don't let the join date fool you... here since '97
Joined:
May 2014
Posts:
7367
EE: 100% (24)
VA, USA
|
Originally Posted By graysonp: A Form 4 suppressor registered to an individual is not registered to the spouse or children. That's the point. John Doe leaves his suppressed rifle on the dining room table and leaves for the week. Jane Doe has a suppressor that's not registered to her. She's not getting arrested for that because no court would ever agree that she took possession of it illegally. That's the exact same scenario as a wife having a suppressor that was transferred on a 4473. This lawsuit changes nothing in that regard. If you own a suppressor that's registered in someone else's name, that's exactly the same as owning one without registration at all. The point here is that a spouse will never be considered to have taken illegal possession simply because they have access to something their spouse legally owns. You are making up BS scenarios that have no legal precedent and will never be enforced in the way you're suggesting. It will never hold up in court that a spouse illegally possesses a suppressor that her husband legally owns. If you can find a single court case in the history of the US that proves me wrong, go find it. Otherwise, stop fear mongering and spreading BS. 
|
www.HansohnBrothers.com
|
Originally Posted By Cypher214: *sigh* I sound like a broken record. Neither of those people just had a short barrel or suppressor. One was dealing without a license, multiple guns he sold showed up at crime scenes, and he shot at the ATF when they showed up, the other illegally owned firearms because of his criminal record and stupidly posted about it on militia boards. Neither of those things should be illegal, neither of those things meant they deserved to get raided, but again context matters. In this thread we are discussing actions that are legal, and the doomers are saying "don't do it, ATF will rape your dog and burn your house down". That's fair. Not trying to argue, just pointing out that ATF still needs to go even if they play nice on this issue. |
|
Originally Posted By broken_reticle: Not sure there is anything more German in a modern sense than something being done cheaply by the Turks. So MKE counts. I can't wait for MP5 SBR clones are as common as ARs. Originally Posted By broken_reticle: Originally Posted By MikeDeltaFoxtrot: Originally Posted By Freyja_75: I know, and they've been on crack for years. HK thinks they build the best guns in the world, and I understand some of that, but, like Colt, they're screwing civilians. One of these years I'm going to build the MP5K I've always wanted, but it's going to have as few HK parts as possible. If it isn't 100% German with an H&K receiver, it is not an MP5K. H&K offers their MP5 line in a semi auto format to the public, and they are readily available. Not sure there is anything more German in a modern sense than something being done cheaply by the Turks. So MKE counts. I can't wait for MP5 SBR clones are as common as ARs. I have an MKE. An multiple H&K's. Put them side by side. They are not the same. Fit and finish are night and day. And the Interwebs are full of people explaining the parts they had to swap to get their MKE to run. |
"If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." Romans 10:9 (ESV)
|
Originally Posted By Cypher214: Seconded.  This thread is turning into Groundhog Day. Originally Posted By Cypher214: Originally Posted By DD1801: I vote to remove pages 127 and 128, in their entirely, from this thread.  This thread is turning into Groundhog Day. Hey, does anyone know when the FFLs are getting guidance from the ATF?
|
|
Originally Posted By MikeDeltaFoxtrot: I have an MKE. A multiple H&K's. Put them side by side. They are not the same. Fit and finish are night and day. And the Interwebs are full of people explaining the parts they had to swap to get their MKE to run. Originally Posted By MikeDeltaFoxtrot: Originally Posted By broken_reticle: Originally Posted By MikeDeltaFoxtrot: Originally Posted By Freyja_75: I know, and they've been on crack for years. HK thinks they build the best guns in the world, and I understand some of that, but, like Colt, they're screwing civilians. One of these years I'm going to build the MP5K I've always wanted, but it's going to have as few HK parts as possible. If it isn't 100% German with an H&K receiver, it is not an MP5K. H&K offers their MP5 line in a semi auto format to the public, and they are readily available. Not sure there is anything more German in a modern sense than something being done cheaply by the Turks. So MKE counts. I can't wait for MP5 SBR clones are as common as ARs. I have an MKE. A multiple H&K's. Put them side by side. They are not the same. Fit and finish are night and day. And the Interwebs are full of people explaining the parts they had to swap to get their MKE to run. |
Everything posted above is factual. Maybe.
|
Originally Posted By Fourman: In Texas we don't need 4473 for private transactions so the suppressor is no longer "registered" after a private transaction. I just need to recommend the person I did the transaction to be a member of the list (TRSA, GOA, etc..). Correct? You don't need to ask him anything. Selling a firearm face to face in Tx has few rules, you cant knowingly sell to a prohibited person. So if you don't ask you don't know. Dont ask if they are a member of the group its the buyers responsibility to know if he can own the item |
|
Originally Posted By MikeDeltaFoxtrot: It's because there is no news. Originally Posted By MikeDeltaFoxtrot: Originally Posted By Cypher214: Originally Posted By DD1801: I vote to remove pages 127 and 128, in their entirely, from this thread. This thread is turning into Groundhog Day. It's because there is no news. Paranoid old ladies and conspiracy types need to continue to clutch their pearls. |
Not fly enough to be halal....
Joined:
Mar 2024
Posts:
1
EE: 0% (0)
FL, USA
| In further good news, I'm not sure who Brown v ATF is under, but Roberts v ATF is under Judge Chad Meredith who appears to be a Trump appointee. Still keeping my fingers crossed that this continues to move in a favorable direction long-term that applies to all Americans. |
|
Originally Posted By Ljmrrsn18: Can we just start creating a list by state on which dealers are selling cans on 4473 so we can maximize our freedoms ? I’m trying to find private party sales as well Uh, yeah, I’ll get right on that fellow Patriot 
|
|
Originally Posted By Cypher214: I'm sure it's happening but most people are scared to post publicly until ATF gives them permission. There have been some photos posted from people who get it. Amazon has it, will post pictures tomorrow. The irony is that the lower receiver is 1 of 7 free stamps I requested, and this one was denied. This is my  to the ATF. (It is really just a home to my SB .300 AAC that I will no longer be swapping between my stamped lowers. ) |
Preferred pronoun: MARINE
|
Originally Posted By Ljmrrsn18: Can we just start creating a list by state on which dealers are selling cans on 4473 so we can maximize our freedoms ? I'm trying to find private party sales as well It seems the companies that were part of the lawsuit are indicating which dealers are selling on 4473's if you check their site. |
Everything posted above is factual. Maybe.
Joined:
Mar 2024
Posts:
2
EE: 0% (0)
FL, USA
|
Originally Posted By 4FishLimit: Uh, yeah, I’ll get right on that fellow Patriot https://media3.giphy.com/media/ANbD1CCdA3iI8/200.webp?cid=8dc8958cnq124ekvy9j9zwjfgih7eey3e83zb0dscymp7dlv&ep=v1_gifs_search&rid=200.webp&ct=g  ?
|
|
Originally Posted By 4FishLimit: Uh, yeah, I'll get right on that fellow Patriot https://media3.giphy.com/media/ANbD1CCdA3iI8/200.webp?cid=8dc8958cnq124ekvy9j9zwjfgih7eey3e83zb0dscymp7dlv&ep=v1_gifs_search&rid=200.webp&ct=g Originally Posted By 4FishLimit: Originally Posted By Ljmrrsn18: Can we just start creating a list by state on which dealers are selling cans on 4473 so we can maximize our freedoms ? I'm trying to find private party sales as well Uh, yeah, I'll get right on that fellow Patriot https://media3.giphy.com/media/ANbD1CCdA3iI8/200.webp?cid=8dc8958cnq124ekvy9j9zwjfgih7eey3e83zb0dscymp7dlv&ep=v1_gifs_search&rid=200.webp&ct=g Oh, just more of that fear talk. |
Everything posted above is factual. Maybe.
|
Originally Posted By Ljmrrsn18: Can we just start creating a list by state on which dealers are selling cans on 4473 so we can maximize our freedoms ? I’m trying to find private party sales as well 
|
"Sometimes, the grass is greener because it's on a septic system."
"Sporterizing: The art of spending $700 on a $300 gun to make it worth $200." -GTwannabe
"Sporterizing: The art of spending $700 on a $300 gun to make it worth $200." -GTwannabe
Joined:
Mar 2024
Posts:
3
EE: 0% (0)
FL, USA
|
Originally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: https://img.ifunny.co/images/22b0bf7a46baeac8454bd2f3732a500d37cb73078a226b920039c0d133e261c2_1.jpg Originally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Originally Posted By Ljmrrsn18: Can we just start creating a list by state on which dealers are selling cans on 4473 so we can maximize our freedoms ? I’m trying to find private party sales as well https://img.ifunny.co/images/22b0bf7a46baeac8454bd2f3732a500d37cb73078a226b920039c0d133e261c2_1.jpg lol don’t think a fed would have his name as his username homie |
|
Originally Posted By vaughn4380: I hear this all the time at the local gun club. It was almost 100 years ago, the leadership at the NRA has drastically changed their position in that time. Get over it. If you say so. Long time member here. |
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
|
Originally Posted By Fourman: In Texas we don't need 4473 for private transactions so the suppressor is no longer "registered" after a private transaction. I just need to recommend the person I did the transaction to be a member of the list (TRSA, GOA, etc..). Correct? If I had a stamped NFA item I'd not attempt to sell it outside that system until some officially blessed process is in place to transfer it off the NFRTR. Too much room for that to go very sideways for you until we're a little further on the path to crushing the NFA. More power to people who are comfortable with that level of risk, but that's above my threshold and I don't want to be that guy telling anyone to go do something I'm not willing to do. For a 4473 can, I'd verify both parties are plaintiffs under the injunction but otherwise treat it like a private sale. Frankly, I hope as many people as possible transfer stuff that way so we can well and truly screw up any hope of their stupid-ass registry being worth anything going forward. I'm not selling my 4473 can though... I only have the one, I just got the damn thing, and I'm having tooo much fun to part with it 
|
|
Originally Posted By lil_Sig: The beginning of this thread was full of freedom starved Americans. Talking about hacksaws and midnight freedom. I was stoked to see posts showing off their new found freedom. But it was Clearly just a bunch of jive freedom talk. Cause I aint seen shit. 
|
"Fully-loaded, safety off. This here is a recipe for unpleasantness." - Malcom Reynolds
"He's a precision-guided asshole who only deploys on deserving targets." - Grok
"He's a precision-guided asshole who only deploys on deserving targets." - Grok
|
Originally Posted By SturmgeschutzIII: Is 18 your badge number? Originally Posted By SturmgeschutzIII: Originally Posted By Ljmrrsn18: lol don't think a fed would have his name as his username homie Is 18 your badge number? I get it but this change is going to bring a lot of new people into the fold who are genuinely curious and uninformed. ATF has way better methods to find out what they need than pretending to be a noob in a massive discussion thread. |
Everything posted above is factual. Maybe.
|
Originally Posted By Ljmrrsn18: lol don’t think a fed would have his name as his username homie Originally Posted By Ljmrrsn18: Originally Posted By GenYRevolverGuy: Originally Posted By Ljmrrsn18: Can we just start creating a list by state on which dealers are selling cans on 4473 so we can maximize our freedoms ? I’m trying to find private party sales as well https://img.ifunny.co/images/22b0bf7a46baeac8454bd2f3732a500d37cb73078a226b920039c0d133e261c2_1.jpg lol don’t think a fed would have his name as his username homie Agreed. What kind of Fed would be so silly? |
Twitter/Instagram: benunsuppressed
https://americanpioneercorps.org
https://americanpioneercorps.org
|
Originally Posted By M855Bukkake: There has been one major change, if Silencer Shop is to be believed, ATF will be implementing a process to remove 4473 transferred silencers (and I would assume SBRs and SBSs) from an FFLs NFA inventory. While we don't have a drop of details yet, and I guess it is theoretically possible SS made it up, if it is true, it means ATF will be voluntarily complying with the injunction, eventually. Non-FFLs need this too. I'm a GOA member and if I transfer an NFA-registered silencer directly to another Texas resident who's also a GOA member, then the transfer would be legal but it would still be listed in the NFRTR as in my possession. |
|
Originally Posted By VacaDuck: Will printed suppressors suffice? https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/102931/3737-3813065.jpg Originally Posted By VacaDuck: Originally Posted By lil_Sig: The beginning of this thread was full of freedom starved Americans. Talking about hacksaws and midnight freedom. I was stoked to see posts showing off their new found freedom. But it was Clearly just a bunch of jive freedom talk. Cause I aint seen shit. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/102931/3737-3813065.jpg That’s cool. Have you shot any of them yet? How are the holding up? What cartridges can they handle? |
Life member of CRPA. FPC contributor.
|
Originally Posted By MikeDeltaFoxtrot: I have an MKE. A multiple H&K's. Put them side by side. They are not the same. Fit and finish are night and day. And the Interwebs are full of people explaining the parts they had to swap to get their MKE to run. Yep. I have a lot of HK and even a few MKE’s. I like them both but I can’t stand when mouth breathing retards try and tell everyone” iTs JuSt As GuD” |
|
Originally Posted By StevenH: That's cool. Have you shot any of them yet? How are the holding up? What cartridges can they handle? The big one is a pcc can for 9mm. The other 6 are 9mm pistol cans. |
"Fully-loaded, safety off. This here is a recipe for unpleasantness." - Malcom Reynolds
"He's a precision-guided asshole who only deploys on deserving targets." - Grok
"He's a precision-guided asshole who only deploys on deserving targets." - Grok
Member
Joined:
Aug 2025
Posts:
1217
EE: 0% (0)
GA, USA
|
Originally Posted By MJL99: Lol I'm sure it's nothing but that post with that join date and post count looks fishy. Originally Posted By MJL99: Originally Posted By Cypher214: Why wouldn't you? Oh, just more of that fear talk. Lol I'm sure it's nothing but that post with that join date and post count looks fishy. |
Everything posted above is factual. Maybe.
Joined:
Mar 2025
Posts:
21
EE: 0% (0)
TX, USA
|
Originally Posted By MikeDeltaFoxtrot: If it isn't 100% German with an H&K receiver, it is not an MP5K. H&K offers their MP5 line in a semi auto format to the public, and they are readily available. One of these years I'm going to build the "MP5K" I've always wanted, but it's going to have as few HK parts as possible. Better? 
|
|
Originally Posted By VacaDuck: Still have to anneal and moisture condition them. Probably won't get to the range until labor day weekend. The big one is a pcc can for 9mm. The other 6 are 9mm pistol cans. Can you explain the moisture conditioning? Coat it in something? |
"My battery is low and it's getting dark."
Joined:
Mar 2025
Posts:
1093
EE: 100% (30)
USA
|
Originally Posted By CleverNickname: Non-FFLs need this too. I'm a GOA member and if I transfer an NFA-registered silencer directly to another Texas resident who's also a GOA member, then the transfer would be legal but it would still be listed in the NFRTR as in my possession. Originally Posted By CleverNickname: Originally Posted By M855Bukkake: There has been one major change, if Silencer Shop is to be believed, ATF will be implementing a process to remove 4473 transferred silencers (and I would assume SBRs and SBSs) from an FFLs NFA inventory. While we don't have a drop of details yet, and I guess it is theoretically possible SS made it up, if it is true, it means ATF will be voluntarily complying with the injunction, eventually. Non-FFLs need this too. I'm a GOA member and if I transfer an NFA-registered silencer directly to another Texas resident who's also a GOA member, then the transfer would be legal but it would still be listed in the NFRTR as in my possession. The ATF will have to develop a form to remove registered cans from the registry. Although after the injunction, their registry will be broken. |
|
Originally Posted By Cypher214: Lol I get it but this change is going to bring a lot of new people into the fold who are genuinely curious and uninformed. ATF has way better methods to find out what they need than pretending to be a noob in a massive discussion thread. Probably. But it's funnier to think they're here hangin out with us.  And first post being here from a 2024 account is pretty funny |
Joined:
Mar 2024
Posts:
4
EE: 0% (0)
FL, USA
|
Originally Posted By wherewildthingsare: The ATF will have to develop a form to remove registered cans from the registry. Although after the injunction, their registry will be broken. Originally Posted By wherewildthingsare: Originally Posted By CleverNickname: Originally Posted By M855Bukkake: There has been one major change, if Silencer Shop is to be believed, ATF will be implementing a process to remove 4473 transferred silencers (and I would assume SBRs and SBSs) from an FFLs NFA inventory. While we don't have a drop of details yet, and I guess it is theoretically possible SS made it up, if it is true, it means ATF will be voluntarily complying with the injunction, eventually. Non-FFLs need this too. I'm a GOA member and if I transfer an NFA-registered silencer directly to another Texas resident who's also a GOA member, then the transfer would be legal but it would still be listed in the NFRTR as in my possession. The ATF will have to develop a form to remove registered cans from the registry. Although after the injunction, their registry will be broken. |
Everything posted above is factual. Maybe.
Joined:
Mar 2025
Posts:
1094
EE: 100% (30)
USA
