CLEO signoff elimination going forward - Page 4

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - CLEO signoff elimination going forward (Page 4 of 7)

Posted: 2/26/2013 4:59:13 AM EST

[#1]

People who go the individual route instead of making a trust are screwing it up for the guys who use a trust?

Could it be possible that you guys are actually posting an opinion that stupid and illogical?

How is that opinion stupid and illogical? I think a person who goes the individual route, then complains that people who go the trust route don't have to have finger prints, photos, or a CLEO sign off is not fair, but paint it in a light that felons could be on a trust and obtain NFA items, and use that excuse to some how remove their CLEO sign off, or get trustees to have the same requirements so its fair... That's stupid IMO.

Are you guys suffering from the delusion that the NFA-owning public is behind this push to get trustees photoed and fingerprinted?

Or could it possibly be the law enforcement body who is charged with regulating NFA stuff?

Ummm, wasn't the push behind this, from a NFA owning individual, who found an instance of a felon on a trust and brought it up to the BATFE, and proposed this great idea in hopes of getting the CLEO sign-off removed.

You know what these NFA trusts threads consist of?

A bunch of non-lawyers, with virtually no understanding of the law, passing legal-airplane-treadmill advice back and forth, back and forth, back and forth.

You happen to notice that there is virtually NEVER any actual lawyers offering advice or opinions in these threads?

I did not know you had to be a lawyer to have an opinion on a certain proposed law change. Since you seem to have the knowledge, could you please enlighten us as to the benefits to the NFA community that this change would have. Hopefully your'e a lawyer practicing law in a relevant field, so that your opinion would carry weight.

Posted: 2/26/2013 6:37:51 AM EST

[#2]

What's the deal with this - would it be retroactive and require existing trusts "responsible persons" to submit prints and photographs? Is this a done deal?

And, most importantly, how do we fight this?

Posted: 2/26/2013 6:31:27 PM EST

[#3]

ok so now i have to give the form 1 or 4 to my CLEO for him so sign saying he knows i have it?

i'm confused here

Posted: 2/27/2013 3:02:03 AM EST

[#4]

No one will have to sign anythng. Once this is in place.

You get your picture, fingerprints, then send off the form. There will be a duplicate page.

You fill it out with the Cleo info.

Drop in in the mail send it to the Cleo. That's it.

What I don't know is if everyone on a trust has to do this or not?

Or what about LLC's is this going to be handled the same as a trust?

Posted: 2/27/2013 3:18:10 AM EST

[#5]

Quoted:
No one will have to sign anythng. Once this is in place.

You get your picture, fingerprints, then send off the form. There will be a duplicate page.

You fill it out with the Cleo info.

Drop in in the mail send it to the Cleo. That's it.

What I don't know is if everyone on a trust has to do this or not?

Or what about LLC's is this going to be handled the same as a trust?

From the page that was posted earlier, this will apply to any 'entity' of more than an individual.
When corps (and all their variations, including llc's) and trusts start having to send in pics and prints of all employees listed, you will see an already overburdened, vastly understaffed, archaic system completely fail.

Posted: 2/27/2013 6:26:41 AM EST

[#6]

Quoted:

Quoted:
No one will have to sign anythng. Once this is in place.

You get your picture, fingerprints, then send off the form. There will be a duplicate page.

You fill it out with the Cleo info.

Drop in in the mail send it to the Cleo. That's it.

What I don't know is if everyone on a trust has to do this or not?

Or what about LLC's is this going to be handled the same as a trust?

From the page that was posted earlier, this will apply to any 'entity' of more than an individual.
When corps (and all their variations, including llc's) and trusts start having to send in pics and prints of all employees listed, you will see an already overburdened, vastly understaffed, archaic system completely fail.

The one perk here is that it might cause enough problems for the larger corp entities out west that supply to movie production studios to get this thing killed. Trusts just don't represent enough $ interest to move the issue one way or the other.

Posted: 2/27/2013 8:27:54 AM EST

[#7]

I'd love to see what's going to happen with Wackenhut & EG&G, etc.

Posted: 2/27/2013 10:16:25 AM EST

[#8]

Quoted:
No one will have to sign anythng. Once this is in place.

You get your picture, fingerprints, then send off the form. There will be a duplicate page.

You fill it out with the Cleo info.

Drop in in the mail send it to the Cleo. That's it.

What I don't know is if everyone on a trust has to do this or not?

Or what about LLC's is this going to be handled the same as a trust?

The plan, for now, is to submit fingerprints/photos for "designated persons" in the Trust or Corporation. This does not inherently mean every trustee or employee must submit, it means only that they must submit if they are to have access to or possession of the firearms. There is plenty of room for a trustee or employee to do their job without access or possession of the NFA firearm.

My guess is that, in the case of trusts, the regulation will be targeted at pre-distribution activity between the trustee and the NFA firearm. A trustee cannot be compelled to submit fingerprints or photos in order to conduct the actual business of estate distribution after the death of the Grantor. Even an individual with no trust has a designated person, like an attorney, who is in charge of estate distribution upon their death. The possession of NFA firearms by an individual's "designated person" in the normal course of estate distribution is not considered a transfer of the NFA firearm for obvious reasons.

Posted: 2/27/2013 6:10:18 PM EST

[#9]

Quoted:

Quoted:
No one will have to sign anythng. Once this is in place.

You get your picture, fingerprints, then send off the form. There will be a duplicate page.

You fill it out with the Cleo info.

Drop in in the mail send it to the Cleo. That's it.

What I don't know is if everyone on a trust has to do this or not?

Or what about LLC's is this going to be handled the same as a trust?

From the page that was posted earlier, this will apply to any 'entity' of more than an individual.
When corps (and all their variations, including llc's) and trusts start having to send in pics and prints of all employees listed, you will see an already overburdened, vastly understaffed, archaic system completely fail.

that's 100% of the reason the NFA system was created. to make shit as complicated and as hard as possible to follow the laws. also exactly how the USMC works.

Posted: 4/1/2013 4:48:49 PM EST

[#10]

Any update on the CLEO signoff elimination?

Thanks
Wes

Posted: 5/8/2013 5:15:18 PM EST

[#11]

Quoted:
Any update on the CLEO signoff elimination?

Thanks
Wes

Any one?

Wes

Posted: 5/8/2013 5:19:49 PM EST

[#12]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Any update on the CLEO signoff elimination?

Thanks
Wes

Any one?

Wes

Nothing has changed on the reg page so I don't think we'll see anything until July.

Posted: 5/10/2013 4:25:56 PM EST

[#13]

i can care less... i have a LLC... ill send a photo and prints... its no big fkn deal. i have never been or care to be a felon.
they can backround check me twice a day for all i care.

it beats having an anti gun Sheriff tell you fk off he isn't signing...

all you idiots bitching up a storm get your picture taken for a driver license ...lol.
we'll see what happens... one day at a time fellas.

Posted: 5/11/2013 6:44:54 PM EST

[#14]

Quoted:
i can care less... i have a LLC... ill send a photo and prints... its no big fkn deal. i have never been or care to be a felon.
they can backround check me twice a day for all i care.

it beats having an anti gun Sheriff tell you fk off he isn't signing...

all you idiots bitching up a storm get your picture taken for a driver license ...lol.
we'll see what happens... one day at a time fellas.

Wow! Good for you. But I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that there may be a few fairly intelligent people would prefer not to have to jump through additional hoops that currently do not exist in utilizing a trust in the NFA process.

Posted: 5/12/2013 5:39:33 AM EST

[#15]

well, everyone was crying to get rid of the signature, now half are whining its a bad idea...
i guess you can't please everyone. i like it as it is, but will roll with whatever.

Posted: 5/12/2013 8:09:08 AM EST

[#16]

Wait, it's been proposed that I'll have to take action to avoid being made a criminal for the ownership of items which has heretofore been lawful, and they intend to do this administratively?

Nope, not doing it. You don't change the rules on me midstream. I can think of a couple of ways they could handle this better.

Posted: 5/12/2013 8:35:27 AM EST

[#17]

then join the ATF/ NFA Branch. and Lobby for us.
change midstream ? not sure what that means.. but everyone was crying they wanted to get rid of CLEO ...
now ya's don't ? make up your minds.......
i say leave it all as is.... reapeal 86.... and everyone else shut the FK up and stop writing Clarification letters to ATF.
because they rarely rule in our favor anyway.

Quoted:
Wait, it's been proposed that I'll have to take action to avoid being made a criminal for the ownership of items which has heretofore been lawful, and they intend to do this administratively?

Nope, not doing it. You don't change the rules on me midstream. I can think of a couple of ways they could handle this better.

Posted: 5/12/2013 9:41:13 AM EST

[#18]

If they want to require photos and prints for trustees going forward, that's heavy handed but whatever. If they want, as some indicated here, the same from people who are not buying new items, as a condition of keeping things you already legally own, they can fuck themselves.

If they were smarter they would only require that a NICS check be run on trustees, and the approval number and FFL number be under the signature block on the trust with the date.

Posted: 5/12/2013 4:53:20 PM EST

[#19]

If anyone actually looks into what is happening here you will find that ATF didn't like the situation with trusts, they are relatively easy to get and there is little recourse to an otherwise restricted individual getting around the background check. BATFE set forth the motions to change how trusts and other non individual entities submitted forms. At this time NFATCA took the opportunity to discuss with BATFE the proposal of eliminating the CLEO signoff for individuals. The process of getting these changes would have to go through the same steps and NFATCA managed to get BATFE to approve their request. NFATCA, which is essentially the only organization looking out for NFA owner interests, has repeatedly stated that BATFE is the source for the changes to non individual entities. Getting the CLEO signoff removed has nothing to do with the other changes except that NFATCA saw an opportunity and acted on it. If you don't like the changes to non individual entities, that's fine, but they are coming none the less. I suspect since BATFE wants it to happen it will, no matter how many people bitch about it. I'm just glad the CLEO signoff will disapear as well.

Posted: 5/12/2013 5:02:45 PM EST

[#20]

I find it interesting that I gathered from this thread that I'm either "lazy, ignorant, and/or cheap" because I go the individual route...

Posted: 5/12/2013 5:34:34 PM EST

[#21]

Quoted:
If anyone actually looks into what is happening here you will find that ATF didn't like the situation with trusts, they are relatively easy to get and there is little recourse to an otherwise restricted individual getting around the background check. BATFE set forth the motions to change how trusts and other non individual entities submitted forms. At this time NFATCA took the opportunity to discuss with BATFE the proposal of eliminating the CLEO signoff for individuals. The process of getting these changes would have to go through the same steps and NFATCA managed to get BATFE to approve their request. NFATCA, which is essentially the only organization looking out for NFA owner interests, has repeatedly stated that BATFE is the source for the changes to non individual entities. Getting the CLEO signoff removed has nothing to do with the other changes except that NFATCA saw an opportunity and acted on it. If you don't like the changes to non individual entities, that's fine, but they are coming none the less. I suspect since BATFE wants it to happen it will, no matter how many people bitch about it. I'm just glad the CLEO signoff will disapear as well.

The proposed change does not in any form impact the likelyhood of a prohibited person getting access to NFA weapons.

This is nothing other than an effort to increase the burden to excercise our civil rights.

Posted: 5/13/2013 3:48:15 PM EST

[#22]

Quoted:

Quoted:
If anyone actually looks into what is happening here you will find that ATF didn't like the situation with trusts, they are relatively easy to get and there is little recourse to an otherwise restricted individual getting around the background check. BATFE set forth the motions to change how trusts and other non individual entities submitted forms. At this time NFATCA took the opportunity to discuss with BATFE the proposal of eliminating the CLEO signoff for individuals. The process of getting these changes would have to go through the same steps and NFATCA managed to get BATFE to approve their request. NFATCA, which is essentially the only organization looking out for NFA owner interests, has repeatedly stated that BATFE is the source for the changes to non individual entities. Getting the CLEO signoff removed has nothing to do with the other changes except that NFATCA saw an opportunity and acted on it. If you don't like the changes to non individual entities, that's fine, but they are coming none the less. I suspect since BATFE wants it to happen it will, no matter how many people bitch about it. I'm just glad the CLEO signoff will disapear as well.

The proposed change does not in any form impact the likelyhood of a prohibited person getting access to NFA weapons.

This is nothing other than an effort to increase the burden to excercise our civil rights.

Yeah, that's why they want the finger print cards - to background check those that might go this route to get around it. And the NFA as a whole was created to make it a burden for criminals to obtain these weapons so what is your argument again??

Posted: 5/13/2013 4:28:58 PM EST

[#23]

Quoted:
I find it interesting that I gathered from this thread that I'm either "lazy, ignorant, and/or cheap" because I go the individual route...

I don't think any of the above about you. My dad went that route.

I just didnt feel I should have to "ask" permission from a CLEO to buy something that was legal. Plus with a trust I can allow close family members to use my, at this point, 2 cans without me being present.

Just my $0.02, I wish people would have just keep their mouths shut and left things the way they were.... Even if this does pass and in future purchases I have to include multiple pictures and fingerprint cards all of my stamps will be on my trust.

Posted: 5/14/2013 3:32:39 AM EST

[#24]

Yeah, that's why they want the finger print cards - to background check those that might go this route to get around it. And the NFA as a whole was created to make it a burden for criminals to obtain these weapons so what is your argument again??

They should just include all firearms in the NFA, require finger prints, photos, application, and $200 fee after all it would create a burden for criminals to obtain firearms. I think I'll write my congressman and recommend that. It won't be that big of a burden for me, sorry if it inconveniences you. There are many instances of criminals obtaining firearms that the NFA process would have prevented. So whats your argument.

ETA: If someone who isn't supposed to possess a machine gun for example is going to pay tens of thousands of dollars, and wait the many months to get the item rather than mod a $300 AK, well I find that laughable. But!! making all firearms title 1 would prevent a bad guy from getting the $300 AK to mod in the first place.

Bottom line, IMO, NFATCA did see an opportunity and at the expense of a certain group exploited ONE instance, (if there even was one) and intended or not used the trust (loophole

) as an example. Rather than prosecute a individual with laws already on the books, NFATCA used the turst loophole

to garner support from BATFE to add more regulations to a already backlogged process. For the individual route they support they threw trust under the bus. It all comes back to well this group doesn't have to do this, so it'll make it fair if we all have to be in-convinced. NFATCA will never get another penny from me.

I find it interesting that I gathered from this thread that I'm either "lazy, ignorant, and/or cheap" because I go the individual route...

I don't think so, I don't care how one legally obtains NFA items. I take issue with the ones that sought this change out knowing it would adversely impact a group of current and future NFA owners. Maybe I don't see the big picture, but I have yet to hear a good reason for this, other than to make it fair.....

Posted: 5/14/2013 3:53:31 AM EST

[#25]

It is all pointless because the day I get my stamp back after submitting finger print cards and photos for everyone in my trust I can amend it and add trustees whom I didn't submitted fingerprint and photos for.

Posted: 5/14/2013 2:26:03 PM EST

[#26]

Quoted:

Yeah, that's why they want the finger print cards - to background check those that might go this route to get around it. And the NFA as a whole was created to make it a burden for criminals to obtain these weapons so what is your argument again??

They should just include all firearms in the NFA, require finger prints, photos, application, and $200 fee after all it would create a burden for criminals to obtain firearms. I think I'll write my congressman and recommend that. It won't be that big of a burden for me, sorry if it inconveniences you. There are many instances of criminals obtaining firearms that the NFA process would have prevented. So whats your argument.

ETA: If someone who isn't supposed to possess a machine gun for example is going to pay tens of thousands of dollars, and wait the many months to get the item rather than mod a $300 AK, well I find that laughable. But!! making all firearms title 1 would prevent a bad guy from getting the $300 AK to mod in the first place.

Bottom line, IMO, NFATCA did see an opportunity and at the expense of a certain group exploited ONE instance, (if there even was one) and intended or not used the trust (loophole

) as an example. Rather than prosecute a individual with laws already on the books, NFATCA used the turst loophole

to garner support from BATFE to add more regulations to a already backlogged process. For the individual route they support they threw trust under the bus. It all comes back to well this group doesn't have to do this, so it'll make it fair if we all have to be in-convinced. NFATCA will never get another penny from me.

I find it interesting that I gathered from this thread that I'm either "lazy, ignorant, and/or cheap" because I go the individual route...

I don't think so, I don't care how one legally obtains NFA items. I take issue with the ones that sought this change out knowing it would adversely impact a group of current and future NFA owners. Maybe I don't see the big picture, but I have yet to hear a good reason for this, other than to make it fair.....

Reading comprehesion not your strongest skill I suspect. So I'll slow it down.

1) The nfa process was created in an attempt to make it hard if not impossible for anyone to own these weapons but truly impossible for anyone with a criminal record to get a hold of. Machineguns are in there own class as they have priced themselves out of reach.

2) BATFE never liked that individuals were using trusts to get around background checks, although originally used more for getting around CLEO issues. You think they don't troll the internet. look in any "why should I go the trust route" thread and you see multiple individuals empasise that fingerprints aren't required.

3) NFATCA took the oportunity to get a great benefit added at the same time BATFE was attempting to change the non individual process. This whole thing started with BATFE. It has nothing to do with the CLEO sig removal. It is just a beneficial change that was approved and thrown into the process at the same time. NFATCA didn't seize an opportunity at the expense of anyone. They seized an opportunity while the first was happening anyway. Get it yet, at no time did they throw trusts under the bus. If you were actually a member, you might have figured this out already. You can discuss it with actual NFATCA board members on their forum

Posted: 5/14/2013 4:55:21 PM EST

[#27]

Reading comprehesion not your strongest skill I suspect. So I'll slow it down.

1) The nfa process was created in an attempt to make it hard if not impossible for anyone to own these weapons but truly impossible for anyone with a criminal record to get a hold of. Machineguns are in there own class as they have priced themselves out of reach.

2) BATFE never liked that individuals were using trusts to get around background checks, although originally used more for getting around CLEO issues. You think they don't troll the internet. look in any "why should I go the trust route" thread and you see multiple individuals empasise that fingerprints aren't required.

3) NFATCA took the oportunity to get a great benefit added at the same time BATFE was attempting to change the non individual process. This whole thing started with BATFE. It has nothing to do with the CLEO sig removal. It is just a beneficial change that was approved and thrown into the process at the same time. NFATCA didn't seize an opportunity at the expense of anyone. They seized an opportunity while the first was happening anyway. Get it yet, at no time did they throw trusts under the bus. If you were actually a member, you might have figured this out already. You can discuss it with actual NFATCA board members on their forum

NFATCA fanboy,
Thank you for taking it slow for me, I appreciate that.

1. You should read my reply to your original comment again.

2. Where are the cases of individuals not allowed to possess a firearm using trust as a loophole to obtain one? If this was some sort of huge issue I think it would have been nixed a long time ago. I did not go the trust route because I didn't have to provide finger prints, but because it was more convenient, and beneficial to my family and me. I highly doubt the BATFE, through trolling AR15.COM came to the stunning revelation that hundreds of felons were running rampant in the streets of America with SBRs, MGs, SBSs and suppressors due to a lack of finger printing trustees. If this were the case I’d be all for some new regulation.

3. Good for NFATCA, one of their goals was to remove the CLEO requirement; any organization that doesn't try to promote their agenda is just wasting time. I was a paying member until they started inferring that prohibited persons were using trust to obtain NFA items to further their reasoning for the removal of the CLEO requirement. So no I won’t be going to their heavily populated forum to discuss anything, I’m sure they are members on AR15 but they probably don’t waste time on controversial subjects on the internet as they normally devolve into petty arguments like you calling me slow, and me trying to understand what you meant by, “empasise”, and the several other words you misspelled. I guess spelling and grammar weren't your strong point.

Anyway have a good night I'm done with this subject, I really hope everyone gets what they want, and the CLEO requirement does go away with no new NFA rules added. Maybe next we can debate the "gun-show loophole"

I wonder how many prohibited persons buy firearms with no such background check. In all seriousness I would be for free NICS checks at gun-shows. If me spending 40k on a machine gun using a trust is some loophole than John buying a high-point from Jack for $100 who then goes and commits several felonies to add to his collection felonies, well that loophole needs addressing if anything.

Posted: 5/22/2013 10:39:13 AM EST

[#28]

Wow the ignorance and asshattery in this thread is EPIC.

Posted: 5/23/2013 10:03:40 AM EST

[#29]

Quoted:

Wow the ignorance and asshattery in this thread is EPIC.

THIS

The removal of the CLEO sign off may end up being a good thing for a few,. the CLEO ass kiss was annoying.

IF the DOJ actually wanted to keep felons from owning NFA items, as well as streamline the NFA process they would shit can the 1930's system we have now. Without CLEO approval you should be able to do everything at your local gun store (provided they deal in C3) The F1's and F4's should go away completely and it should be nothing more than a extra box to check on the 4473's and an additional fee added to your purchase. This way everything and everyone goes thru NICS regardless if it is for a individual, trust, or corporation. If they still want finger prints and photos they can be done by the local shops too. In this day and age with the technology available to us we should only have to scan out pictures and finger print cards once.

Will they do this,.. NOPE!

I find it completely absurd I can store a entire Iraqi village worth of finger prints and other things in a single hand held device but the US government agency in charge of all of this shit still uses duplicate copies of paper cards? GET THE FUCK OUT OF THE LAST CENTURY!

But guess what? Nothing is going to change except making it more difficult for Law abiding citizens to get these items (the only real goal they have) criminals are still going to do criminal shit, no law, fingerprint card, passport photo or technological device will ever change that

This whole thing looks like it is designed to be the wrench in the gears of the NFA process. So cheer now for the change,. don't cry when it ends up being more than you bargained for.

Posted: 6/24/2013 8:26:48 AM EST

[#30]

Any word as to where this stands, and what the timeline is?

I recall hearing that it was slated to be sometime in the August time frame.

Posted: 6/24/2013 1:56:56 PM EST

[#31]

Maybe August for the ATF to release the proposed regulation for comments, but if the regulation actually changes within a year I'd be surprised.

Posted: 6/25/2013 5:52:03 PM EST

[#32]

Do you have something to support the August date or are you just guessing/hoping?

Posted: 6/26/2013 4:32:19 AM EST

[#33]

Quoted:
Do you have something to support the August date or are you just guessing/hoping?

Well from the government webpage that announced the rule change, has a date that is 7/00/2013 So I guess that is where people are assuming it will go into effect in August? But that is an assumption.
http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201210&RIN=1140-AA43

Posted: 6/26/2013 5:13:15 AM EST

[#34]

Quoted:

Wow the ignorance and asshattery in this thread is EPIC.

THIS

The removal of the CLEO sign off may end up being a good thing for a few,. the CLEO ass kiss was annoying.

IF the DOJ actually wanted to keep felons from owning NFA items, as well as streamline the NFA process they would shit can the 1930's system we have now. Without CLEO approval you should be able to do everything at your local gun store (provided they deal in C3) The F1's and F4's should go away completely and it should be nothing more than a extra box to check on the 4473's and an additional fee added to your purchase. This way everything and everyone goes thru NICS regardless if it is for a individual, trust, or corporation. If they still want finger prints and photos they can be done by the local shops too. In this day and age with the technology available to us we should only have to scan out pictures and finger print cards once.

Will they do this,.. NOPE!

I find it completely absurd I can store a entire Iraqi village worth of finger prints and other things in a single hand held device but the US government agency in charge of all of this shit still uses duplicate copies of paper cards? GET THE FUCK OUT OF THE LAST CENTURY!

But guess what? Nothing is going to change except making it more difficult for Law abiding citizens to get these items (the only real goal they have) criminals are still going to do criminal shit, no law, fingerprint card, passport photo or technological device will ever change that

This whole thing looks like it is designed to be the wrench in the gears of the NFA process. So cheer now for the change,. don't cry when it ends up being more than you bargained for.

you obviously don't ever work with any government agencies

the NFA process is a stunningly efficient gem compared to most government regulation

ask yourself: what possible motivation would the ATF have to change anything at all?

here's how it works: any public official will do anything he can to avoid change because change carries risk that it might not work out. plus, making the change requires actual effort.

there's no political power behind making any change, the amount of money being spent is microscopic, so why should they change?

they already admitted that the entire NFA registry is a zoo like disorganized mess

Having spent my life dealing with DOTs, I'm kind of stunned by how well the NFA branch works FOR A GOVERNMENT AGENCY.

I've waited over 7 years to see a bridge design approved and constructed already

Posted: 6/26/2013 5:31:35 AM EST

[#35]

Getting rid of the CLEO sign off is a huge plus because a lot of CLEOs are dickbags and are an impediment to the lawful process of owning a NFA item.

A lot of guys will hate this idea, but the requirement to submit prints for a trust is also a good thing in the long run.

The only reason that we can still own MGs is because the NFA made owning these guns airtight. That's a fact.

The US voting public are a pack of childlike morons and they want to see an airtight lid on MG ownership.

The average housewife at the supermarket will not tolerate a "loophole".

If there is a "loophole" that our communist blowjob of a president can cite, that is a political weak spot.

It shouldn't be needed, but the public is in favor of the government using the regulatory process as a preventative measure. That's the underlying mind set of the US public and we are presently at their mercy.

if you disagree with that, well, just go down to walmart and buy a brand new M16 for $1100.

because the world is perfect and the US public are experts on firearms and in love with small government

Posted: 6/26/2013 10:42:34 AM EST

[#36]

Edited...VA-gunnut

Posted: 6/26/2013 1:30:04 PM EST

[#37]

Quoted:

Edited...VA-gunnut

You know I'm 100% right.
In order to get anything done in the USA, you need to convince the gigantic wad of centrist voters that something is a real good idea.

Everything boils down to how you can present your case to the centrist earth-dog voters.
If you went into a supermarket and asked 100 people what they thought of private citizens owning machine guns, every last one of them would say it was a real bad idea.

But if you explained to them that it requires a drawn out airtight background check, and told them about the scarcity and high cost, then most of them would be OK with it.

Those people outnumber us 20,000 to one.
Making a giant mass of frightened childlike dunces feel happy is how our whole political system works and NFA ownership sits square on top of that foundation and nothing else.

The only thing that keeps mg ownership legal is the opinion of people who don't know a shotgun from a handgun.

That's the reality.
Everything boils down to public relations.

Posted: 6/26/2013 1:49:33 PM EST

[#38]

Edited...VA-gunnut

Posted: 6/26/2013 1:59:05 PM EST

[#39]

Quoted:

Edited...VA-gunnut

You know I'm 100% right.
In order to get anything done in the USA, you need to convince the gigantic wad of centrist voters that something is a real good idea.

Everything boils down to how you can present your case to the centrist earth-dog voters.
If you went into a supermarket and asked 100 people what they thought of private citizens owning machine guns, every last one of them would say it was a real bad idea.

But if you explained to them that it requires a drawn out airtight background check, and told them about the scarcity and high cost, then most of them would be OK with it.

Those people outnumber us 20,000 to one.
Making a giant mass of frightened childlike dunces feel happy is how our whole political system works and NFA ownership sits square on top of that foundation and nothing else.

The only thing that keeps mg ownership legal is the opinion of people who don't know a shotgun from a handgun.

That's the reality.
Everything boils down to public relations.

It doesn't matter what the mouth breathers think.

Because they DON'T. They 'feel'.

Sure, getting rid of the CLEO signature would be a great thing. But NOT at the expense of requiring every named member of a trust, LLC, or Corp to have to get printed and photographed.

We already live with more than enough infringements.

Posted: 6/26/2013 2:18:34 PM EST

[#40]

Edited...VA-gunnut

First of all you know I'm 100% right.

This is the way our country runs: a bunch of dangerously arbitrary dumbasses voting for slogans and bullshit and not caring about any facts or logic. it's all window dressing.

Play the hero all you like, but you cannot name any examples that contradict what I wrote.

Second, this isn't GD so grow up.

Posted: 6/26/2013 2:42:44 PM EST

[#41]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Edited...VA-gunnut

First of all you know I'm 100% right.

This is the way our country runs: a bunch of dangerously arbitrary dumbasses voting for slogans and bullshit and not caring about any facts or logic. it's all window dressing.

Play the hero all you like, but you cannot name any examples that contradict what I wrote.

Second, this isn't GD so grow up.

No... You are NOT 100% correct.

The majority of the populace doesn't know an MG from a Semi...

The majority of the populace thinks MG's are already completely illegal...

Finally... MG's make up a VERY small percentage of NFA Transfers.

And... The fact of the matter is... Requiring fingerprints on Trusts and Corps will do NOTHING but make it even more of a pain in the ass.

CRIMINALS ARE NOT PLAYING THE NFA GAME. That is the truth of the matter. So fingerprinting is a waste of time no matter how you slice it or how you file your forms.

A criminal wants an SBR... He busts out a hacksaw.

You being too cheap to spend the cash to setup a trust does not mean the rest of us should suffer.

Look at NFA Tracker... The majority of submissions are for Trusts... You guys who file individually are the minority.

You think some CLEO's are dicks now... Wait till they have to do prints on every single NFA purchase... You'll end up having to schedule appointments and deal with even MORE attitude.

Posted: 6/26/2013 2:43:42 PM EST

[#42]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Getting rid of the CLEO sign off is a huge plus because a lot of CLEOs are dickbags and are an impediment to the lawful process of owning a NFA item.

A lot of guys will hate this idea, but the requirement to submit prints for a trust is also a good thing in the long run.

Everything boils down to public relations.

It doesn't matter what the mouth breathers think.
Because they DON'T. They 'feel'.

Sure, getting rid of the CLEO signature would be a great thing. But NOT at the expense of requiring every named member of a trust, LLC, or Corp to have to get printed and photographed.

We already live with more than enough infringements.

I don't see any useful alternative.

If you have people getting NFA stuff without a background check, sooner or later it's going to jeopardize NFA ownership, I don't think the public will tolerate it.

Why do you think ATF is making this change? So they won't be criticised for letting people get NFA stuff with no background check.

Why else would they care? There's no actual crime or problem associated with NFA guns, it's all window dressing.

Mouth breathers don't think, but they do determine all of our laws.

They are the king of this country.

Posted: 6/26/2013 2:50:24 PM EST

[#43]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Getting rid of the CLEO sign off is a huge plus because a lot of CLEOs are dickbags and are an impediment to the lawful process of owning a NFA item.

Making a giant mass of frightened childlike dunces feel happy is how our whole political system works and NFA ownership sits square on top of that foundation and nothing else.

The only thing that keeps mg ownership legal is the opinion of people who don't know a shotgun from a handgun.

That's the reality.

Everything boils down to public relations.

With milk. And drink it out of the bowl afterwards.

First of all you know I'm 100% right.

This is the way our country runs: a bunch of dangerously arbitrary dumbasses voting for slogans and bullshit and not caring about any facts or logic. it's all window dressing.

Play the hero all you like, but you cannot name any examples that contradict what I wrote.

Second, this isn't GD so grow up.

Look at NFA Tracker... The majority of submissions are for Trusts... You guys who file individually are the minority.

You think some CLEO's are dicks now... Wait till they have to do prints on every single NFA purchase... You'll end up having to schedule appointments and deal with even MORE attitude.

I'm not talking about facts, I'm talking about public opinion.

Why do you think this change is being made by ATF in the face of no crime at all?

it's being done for window dressing, to save face

None of this has anything to do with actual gun crime, it's all just a puppet show.

always was, for the exact reasons you cited

Posted: 6/26/2013 2:59:08 PM EST

[#44]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Getting rid of the CLEO sign off is a huge plus because a lot of CLEOs are dickbags and are an impediment to the lawful process of owning a NFA item.

Making a giant mass of frightened childlike dunces feel happy is how our whole political system works and NFA ownership sits square on top of that foundation and nothing else.

The only thing that keeps mg ownership legal is the opinion of people who don't know a shotgun from a handgun.

That's the reality.

Everything boils down to public relations.

With milk. And drink it out of the bowl afterwards.

First of all you know I'm 100% right.

This is the way our country runs: a bunch of dangerously arbitrary dumbasses voting for slogans and bullshit and not caring about any facts or logic. it's all window dressing.

Play the hero all you like, but you cannot name any examples that contradict what I wrote.

Second, this isn't GD so grow up.

Look at NFA Tracker... The majority of submissions are for Trusts... You guys who file individually are the minority.

You think some CLEO's are dicks now... Wait till they have to do prints on every single NFA purchase... You'll end up having to schedule appointments and deal with even MORE attitude.

I'm not talking about facts, I'm talking about public opinion.

Why do you think this change is being made by ATF in the face of no crime at all?

it's being done for window dressing, to save face

None of this has anything to do with actual gun crime, it's all just a puppet show.

always was, for the exact reasons you cited

I don't think that's it...

I think it's one more step trying to make NFA even more prohibitive via more pain in the ass and more time consumption.

Seriously... The general populace has NO idea how the NFA process works... Or that said process even exists.

They aren't calling up the BATFE and demanding this.

Posted: 6/26/2013 5:27:46 PM EST

[#45]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Do you have something to support the August date or are you just guessing/hoping?

Well from the government webpage that announced the rule change, has a date that is 7/00/2013 So I guess that is where people are assuming it will go into effect in August? But that is an assumption.
http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201210&RIN=1140-AA43

It won't go into effect in August. That page appears to say that there may be an NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking) in July. Whenever the NPRM is released it'll include the actual text of the proposed changes to the CFR (not just the overview we have currently). Then we'll have 60 days for public comments and 30 days for reply comments. Then after all that if they still decide to go forward with the proposed changes it still may not be awhile before they take effect.

Posted: 6/26/2013 10:54:45 PM EST

[#46]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Getting rid of the CLEO sign off is a huge plus because a lot of CLEOs are dickbags and are an impediment to the lawful process of owning a NFA item.

A lot of guys will hate this idea, but the requirement to submit prints for a trust is also a good thing in the long run.

Everything boils down to public relations.

It doesn't matter what the mouth breathers think.
Because they DON'T. They 'feel'.

Sure, getting rid of the CLEO signature would be a great thing. But NOT at the expense of requiring every named member of a trust, LLC, or Corp to have to get printed and photographed.

We already live with more than enough infringements.

I don't see any useful alternative.

If you have people getting NFA stuff without a background check, sooner or later it's going to jeopardize NFA ownership, I don't think the public will tolerate it. PLEASE tell me how a CRIMINAL will be affected by this asinine proposed change? You think a criminal, who can't be bothered to actually follow the law, is going to pony up the money for a good trust, then pony up the money for a transferable item, and THEN pay for the stamp? You HONESTLY think that is what tjey are going to do?

Why do you think ATF is making this change? So they won't be criticised for letting people get NFA stuff with no background check. Because, as usual, some people in the NFA game don't like others getting into it, or having an easier time than they do. Hence the whining about trusts.

Why else would they care?See above There's no actual crime or problem associated with NFA guns, it's all window dressing.

Mouth breathers don't think, but they do determine all of our laws.

They are the king of this country.

Posted: 6/27/2013 3:24:56 AM EST

[#47]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Getting rid of the CLEO sign off is a huge plus because a lot of CLEOs are dickbags and are an impediment to the lawful process of owning a NFA item.

A lot of guys will hate this idea, but the requirement to submit prints for a trust is also a good thing in the long run.

Everything boils down to public relations.

It doesn't matter what the mouth breathers think.
Because they DON'T. They 'feel'.

Sure, getting rid of the CLEO signature would be a great thing. But NOT at the expense of requiring every named member of a trust, LLC, or Corp to have to get printed and photographed.

We already live with more than enough infringements.

I don't see any useful alternative.

If you have people getting NFA stuff without a background check, sooner or later it's going to jeopardize NFA ownership, I don't think the public will tolerate it. PLEASE tell me how a CRIMINAL will be affected by this asinine proposed change? You think a criminal, who can't be bothered to actually follow the law, is going to pony up the money for a good trust, then pony up the money for a transferable item, and THEN pay for the stamp? You HONESTLY think that is what tjey are going to do?

Why do you think ATF is making this change? So they won't be criticised for letting people get NFA stuff with no background check. Because, as usual, some people in the NFA game don't like others getting into it, or having an easier time than they do. Hence the whining about trusts.

Why else would they care?See above There's no actual crime or problem associated with NFA guns, it's all window dressing.

Mouth breathers don't think, but they do determine all of our laws.

They are the king of this country.

Very well said

Posted: 6/27/2013 4:57:45 AM EST

[#48]

Quoted:
PLEASE tell me how a CRIMINAL will be affected by this asinine proposed change? You think a criminal, who can't be bothered to actually follow the law, is going to pony up the money for a good trust, then pony up the money for a transferable item, and THEN pay for the stamp? You HONESTLY think that is what tjey are going to do?

Keep in mind that the NFA process does result in the applicant having a very official looking form that gives them the air of legality. While I think it highly unlikely that a common street thug will use a trust obtain NFA items, I do see an opportunity for an otherwise prohibited person. It is quite easy in this country to end up with a felony on one's record. Writing bad checks in some circumstances can do it as can a tax dispute with a government agency that ends in an evasion conviction. How about someone that got caught up in that retroactive domestic violence rule change? While you and I probably perceive a huge difference between a street thug and some of these felons, the ATF does not. They are all prohibited people.

I don't think this change is coming out of the blue. I'd be willing to bet that something has happened to provoke this and people otherwise prohibited from owning these items have access to them and a "get out of jail free" Form 4 to go with.

Posted: 6/27/2013 7:35:05 AM EST

[#49]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Getting rid of the CLEO sign off is a huge plus because a lot of CLEOs are dickbags and are an impediment to the lawful process of owning a NFA item.

A lot of guys will hate this idea, but the requirement to submit prints for a trust is also a good thing in the long run.

Everything boils down to public relations.

It doesn't matter what the mouth breathers think.
Because they DON'T. They 'feel'.

Sure, getting rid of the CLEO signature would be a great thing. But NOT at the expense of requiring every named member of a trust, LLC, or Corp to have to get printed and photographed.

We already live with more than enough infringements.

Why else would they care?See above There's no actual crime or problem associated with NFA guns, it's all window dressing.

Mouth breathers don't think, but they do determine all of our laws.

They are the king of this country.

Very well said

It is basically impossible for you guys to miss the point of what I wrote more than you did.

1. Like any gun law, the NFA laws are basically useless to prevent crime because as you noted, they assume the existence of law-abiding criminals.

2. The only real actual purpose the NFA laws serve is to make the public feel OK about private ownership of MGs.

3. Machine guns are a political radioactive dog turd that no politican will touch. You will never in your lifetime hear a politician say, "We need more machine guns for private ownership."

4. The world is how it is, not how you want it to be.

So basically, the NFA laws serve no useful purpose for preventing crime.

But they do serve the useful purpose of making the average supermarket shopper feel OK about you owning a machine gun.

I honestly think that without the NFA laws making MG ownership an expensive pain in the ass, they would have been outlawed a long time ago.

Because the public votes for window dressing and slogans, not facts and logic.

Posted: 6/27/2013 8:18:16 AM EST

[#50]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Getting rid of the CLEO sign off is a huge plus because a lot of CLEOs are dickbags and are an impediment to the lawful process of owning a NFA item.

A lot of guys will hate this idea, but the requirement to submit prints for a trust is also a good thing in the long run.

Everything boils down to public relations.

It doesn't matter what the mouth breathers think.
Because they DON'T. They 'feel'.

Sure, getting rid of the CLEO signature would be a great thing. But NOT at the expense of requiring every named member of a trust, LLC, or Corp to have to get printed and photographed.

We already live with more than enough infringements.

Why else would they care?See above There's no actual crime or problem associated with NFA guns, it's all window dressing.

Mouth breathers don't think, but they do determine all of our laws.

They are the king of this country.

Very well said

It is basically impossible for you guys to miss the point of what I wrote more than you did.

1. Like any gun law, the NFA laws are basically useless to prevent crime because as you noted, they assume the existence of law-abiding criminals.

2. The only real actual purpose the NFA laws serve is to make the public feel OK about private ownership of MGs.

3. Machine guns are a political radioactive dog turd that no politican will touch. You will never in your lifetime hear a politician say, "We need more machine guns for private ownership."

4. The world is how it is, not how you want it to be.

So basically, the NFA laws serve no useful purpose for preventing crime.

But they do serve the useful purpose of making the average supermarket shopper feel OK about you owning a machine gun.

I honestly think that without the NFA laws making MG ownership an expensive pain in the ass, they would have been outlawed a long time ago.

Because the public votes for window dressing and slogans, not facts and logic.

The point we are making though is...

The public doesn't know SHIT about the NFA Process as is...

So these changes do nothing to appease anybody.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - CLEO signoff elimination going forward (Page 4 of 7)

Armory » General NFA Questions

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us