Please list a source for all these incidents of a criminal using a trust to gain access to registered NFA items.

The fact of the matter is that there has only been ONE documented case of a violent crime committed with an NFA item, and it wasn't even committed by a person with a criminal history! It was a COP!

Simple fact of the matter is that if you believe it makes us 'safer' by going with this stupid change, then you concede that there is a legitimate reason to ban guns.

I have a better idea: let's just make it a crime to use ANY item as a weapon to facilitate a crime.

Oh... Wait.....


Try this on for size: No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms

I'll CLEARLY state my position:
If a person is not in jail, or on probation, then they have every right to possess a firearm.
Why? Because if they are not incarcerated, or on probation (conditional release), then they are freemen.
I don't care if a person WAS a criminal. People CAN change and be rehabilitated (except for child molesters).
And if they have served their sentence, when they walk out of prison, or are released from probation, they have the same rights as every other American, INCLUDING the right to keep and bear arms.
If they then committ another criminal act, then it is obvious that they cannot be rehabilitated and need to stay locked up, or be executed, depending on the crime.
But to say that because of the actions of 1 person, 10 who have never committed a crimnal act must suffer and have their rights infringed is bullshit.
And just to cover the next issue that will try to be thrown around, people who are so mentally ill that they cannot function in society because they are a threat to themselves or others need to be locked up unil they can be cured.
Adam Lanza had a lengthy mental health record and many violent episodes. His mother was not stupid for having guns, she was stupid for allowing Lanza access to her weapons. That kid should have been in a mental facility.
But the liberal feel good world wouldn't allow that.
As for the DV law that The shitbag Laughtenberg pushed through, the ex-post facto provision is CLEARLY unconstitutional.
Years ago, I heard a short about a man in Maryland, who actually was voted Maryland man of the year, got his firearms confiscated because he got into a bar fight when he was 18 or 19, and his sentence COULD have included more than 364 days of incarceration. It certainly wasn't a DV conviction, as he was in a fight with a stranger. And IIRC, he only got probation for it. But because the Laughtenberg Amendment was expanded to include any violent crime, he lost his guns. That was his ONLY criminal infraction, and it happened roughly 2 decades earlier.
And the guns were all bought legally prior to that piece of shit legislation.
As you clearly stated, there are so many ways to committ a felony now that most people are not even aware of.
And THAT is he problem. Yes, writing bad checks can reach that level, but the ones who do it KNOW its a felony.
But accidentally getting stuck on the NJTP when traveling with an AR-15 and not being able to get off before you cross into NJ is criminalizing actions that have no actual criminal intent.

To commit a crime requires mens rea. Getting lost or making a wrong turn hardly meets that very pillar of a crime.

We need just one law concerning any type of weapon, be it a machine gun, a knife or a rock: use a weapon in a crime, you will do time. Period.
Enforce that, and ditch all he others and do away with NFA '34 and the '86 MG ban, as we will already have a law to cover the illegal use of machine guns and other 'NFA' items.

I've clipped my original post for clarity.  As you can see, I fundamentally agreed with you in the first place, but via conjecture concede that there is an opportunity for shenanigans.  I made no absolute claim of a point which you have now requested me to substantiate.

I will make a very direct statement that I have no belief that this, or most any, firearm law will make us safer.  Feel better about from where I am coming?



I hear and understand your points and they are in general irrelevant to the issue at hand.  While you, I and numerous people on this forum would run the legal world of firearms differently, Congress has passed certain laws and handed them to the ATF to enforce.  Until those laws change, this is what we have.  The only point I was trying to make is that the very type of people you claim should be able to own guns are in fact presently prohibited from doing so, and I see an opportunity via trusts for them to access NFA items.  Apparently, so does the ATF.  Furthermore, the people most likely to do this (in my mind) would be the "soft" group of prohibited persons and likely not the hardened criminals.  Like you, my opinion towards the first group of people is different than the view taken by the ATF, but again that's not what the law says.

I generally have no interest in participating in "how the world should be" discussions, so I'll be dropping out of this one.

Just out of curiosity, is this amendment going through? The CLEO won't sign my form for an SBR or Suppressor and they are legal in my state and I can legally own/purchase them.

Thanks.

Not any time soon.

i have to agree too, people dont want other people to have what they cant. for whatever reason. Trust, LLC, etc have been
around longer then most of you been alive. if not all of you at this point. i can care either way... when i want it, ill buy it and go thru
whatever hoops are of the day.

Here's my situation as an example.

Former CLEO would only sign off for people he knew that grew up in the local area,. being I just got off active duty (OIF VET) and even though there was no reason not to sign he flatly refused to sign.

I open a trust,. well, originally I am not from PA,. all of my family is in other parts of the country ( the closest is over 800 miles away ) So making my trust I included my brother and father as they where the closest and would have the least amount of trouble getting my stuff if something happened to me.

Now with this change I am going to have to drive my ass down to Georgia to get their info EVERY TIME I want a new toy???

So change my trust so I don't have to go so far to get the forms and info they want? Who do I put in my trust now? Will they even allow me to change my trust?

So you say do individual transfers,.. OK, Am I going to be required to transfer everything out of my trust to me as an individual? who's going to pay for that? Send notification to your CLEO.... if we are taking the CLEO out of the process,.. WHY FUCKING NOTIFY THE C****UCKER ?


Is the NFA process ever going to get modernized? NO.

Do they want you to be able to legally obtain NFA item with out to much hassle? NO.

Getting a NFA stamp should not be any more difficult than getting a hunting licence regardless of if its individual, trust, or corp. you think they want that? NO.


EVERY item that is in my trust I had to fill out a 4473 to take possession from the dealer I got it from,. HOW the fuck are FELONS getting anything?

WHY,. WHY are there no examples or cases they can show us?

The simple answer is that all transfers have to have go thru a background check just like any other firearm purchase. Instead they want to restrict the alternate way to get a NFA if you have a shitbag CLEO that will not sign off on your forms,.. WHY?


Bottom line is this is just more BS to jump thru because they do not want us common folk to own any of this stuff,. just like the gun control crap,. its not about the guns,. its about control.

And there it is again!

I am very sympathetic to those who drafted a trust because it accommodated their situation more appropriately than filing individually and now, seemingly, are getting thrown under the bus, but all this crap about being cheap you can blow out your ass. I filed individually because there was no benefit a trust would have offered me. My CLEO signed without hesitation, got my prints for free and paid a pittance for the pictures. I am very much aware how fortunate my situation is compared to some of you who simply had no other alternative getting around a dickbag CLEO who wouldn't sign. I am the only one in my corner of the world who's into firearms so a trust for multiple users is also not a consideration. So why would I pay to have a trust drafted when I have no need for one?

As to why trusts are so popular these days well all you have to do is to pop into the next "Hey, want to get into NFA, need help" thread and see the legion of trust holders pushing their preferred method of NFA acquisition to get an idea. I see posters who are in situations just like mine who get convinced that a trust is the "superior" way of going about it; as if you aren't serious about NFA unless you join this special club.  

That's not to say I agree with what's been proposed; the additional paperwork required for trusts will certainly fuck things up even more than they already are, for ALL of us. I'm eagerly anticipating reading the full proposal once released.

While some people throw out the 'too cheap' line, I do think its a bit much.

But I honestly see ZERO reason to go the individual route when you can go the trust route, and have at least one person you trust to list as a trustee, provided they live in an NFA friendly state.

Yea, you might be able to get a CLEO sign off and all, but the nice thing about trusts is that you can amend a trust to add/remove trustees as the situation requires.

So for a single person, they can list their folks or a sibling, and then if they get married, add their spouse, and if kids come along, add them when they are of legal age, or stipulate that if you pass prior to their turning 18, the items be held until they do.
And maybe even have some protection in case of a divorce, as the items in trust are not 'owned' by the individuals.
If that happens to someone who has a bunch of stuff on individual forms, the NFA firearms, while not technically an item that can easily be taken in divorce, the VALUE most certainly can be used to determine division of assets, and be leveraged for a cash value settlement in lieu of the other party taking possession of the item. But I could be wrong, as I no longer have a wife to worry about. But when my daughter turns 18, I will be amending my trust to add her as a trustee, and remove my sister and B-I-L, as they will no longer be needed as trustees.

I don't see a single situation, outside of not having someone to list as a trustee living in a free state, where going he individual route makes more sense.

this thread has several concepts all mixed  together into a mess

lets see if we can fix it up a little by separating the various elements:


Do the NFA laws prevent crime?  NO, they are useless.  Unless criminals suddenly start obeying the law.  Which would seriously crimp their career as a criminal.


Will the NFA laws ever go away?  NO, it it is politically impossible to get the congress to repeal those laws.


Will the NFA registry ever open up to new guns?  NO, it is politically impossible to get the congress to repeal the amendment.


Is the CLEO signoff elimination a good thing?   YES, the signoff is completely and totally pointless and many CLEOs are dickbags who refuse to sign to amuse themselves and for no other reason.


Is making trustees get a background check going to keep people from using trusts?  NO, it will have no effect all other than being an additonal nuisance.


Is making trustees get a background check going to affect MG prices?  NO, for fucks sake why would it.


Is there any actual difference in buying a gun with an idividual transfer or a trust?  NO, there is no difference as far as the transaction is concerned.


Are people who use the individual route too cheap to get a trust?  NO, people who burn $200 worth of ammo in a half hour are generally not the penny pincher type.


Should people who have trusts hate people who use the individual route?   YES, hating other people for literally no reason whatsoever is fun and makes the internet a lively place of screeching.


I think that about covers it.

I only have one NFA item, just got it in fact, and as it stands I don't have anyone else to list as a trustee. I'm not opposed to the trust route if the situation demands it, and if my situation changes I'd surely consider it for all future purchases. I just don't like being considered part of an NFA fifth column whose laziness and cheapness is subverting the trust method of doing things.

Before making the purchase I was convinced that I would have no way of passing on my stuff after I die if I went the individual route, which is of course bogus, that's what a F5 is for. Didn't stop a bunch of trust holders from telling me that who were equally convinced of the same thing. I also appreciate the fact that I don't have to worry about the validity of my document if I move to another state that allows NFA items.

For me, the individual route just made sense. As far as I can tell the only lazy element of the bunch are the CLEOs who feel they can simply ignore the request of a member of the community in which they serve.

The second from above post makes no sense.

The only NFA item with any collectors value are full auto items.  SBR and cans you can make and buy wihout limits.

For full autos, think about it.  You have an item.  If there is more demand for it (ie more people can buy it via trusts) then the price would go up, not down.

Limiting the amount of people who could buy something lowers the price, not increases it.

Yeah, I thought of that too.

If you were a buyer, you'd want the prices held lower by limiting the number of new buyers.

If you were already an owner, you'd want as many new buyers as possible.

So if a guy already owned a million dollars worth of guns, he'd want to keep as many new buyers in the market as possible.

Heck, if I owned $1,000,000 worth of MGs, I'd have a daily thread started in all the gun websites showing how awesome MG ownership is.

Further if you had a million to blow on guns I would think setting up a pet company and getting the appropriate FFL/SOT for newly manufactured MG dealer samples would be the better option.

not really

believe it or not, buying NFA registered guns is cheaper than rolling your own in the long run

A guy could maintain an 07 w/ SOT and pay ITAR for quite some time with a cool million... And have some toys (errr ahem... Dealer samples...) that weren't ever in the registry!

...provided that they show that they are an actual business, right? The way I understand it, the ATF is pretty stern when it comes to these licenses being for business ONLY and anyone found to have applied for them with the sole intent of bolstering their collection get their shit taken pretty quickly. I wonder what the bear minimum would be for proof of an "actual business?"

Correct.

As for bare minimum... I'm sure that'd be up to your particular visiting agent.

I've heard of some guys who do just a few sales a year though and they are still keeping their 7 w/ SOT...

I also hear a lot of guys don't pay ITAR... But supposedly that's being cracked down upon.

I've been SERIOUSLY considering going this route myself... I've even talked to a few of the local PD's and SWAT team procurement people... I have a couple firm statements that they'd buy from me if I did... But this is a small rural area and I'm worried about just how much business I'd have to do to keep the ATF happy.

Tony explained pretty convincingly that the average guy would be better off scrounging up $50K for NFA registered toys than going the SOT route.

it's in one of these threads, made perfect sense the way he explained it


probably would hold just as true for a millionaire or i imagine they would be doing the SOT thing already

Forgive my ignorance, but what is stopping the ATF from simply requiring NICS checks upon receipt of the item? To my understanding, this is currently "advised" for trust transfers, but not required.

Why can't the ATF simply do an NICS check on all members of the trust? This doesn't require prints and a photo to do in the gun store, so why would they need them?

Maybe I am missing something, but if they are trying to avoid prohibited persons from obtaining an NFA item, there seem to be easier ways.

I'll just leave this here!

Good afternoon,

You are receiving this email because you are a registered ATF eForms user.

We're Updating Our eForms Systems

On Wednesday, July 31st, starting at 6:00 PM, ATF’s eForms systems will be undergoing maintenance as part of an ongoing process to enhance our services. During this time, eForms will not be available. These systems are expected to return to full service by 2:00 AM on Thursday, August 1, 2013.

The enhancements to the system will be as follows:

· The eForm 6A has been modified to display the “Number and Kind of Package Information” on a separate overflow page. “See overflow page for number and kind of packages” will be displayed in block 9(b) of the form and descriptive information that would normally be displayed in block 9(b) will be displayed on the overflow page. This change was made at the request of industry members who discovered that there was not enough room on the form to put all the information that was necessary in that block. This is another example of where we were able to make a change based on your recommendation.

· NFA eForms are finally here!!!! ATF is pleased to announce the implementation of the NFA forms into ATF’s eForms system. ATF Forms 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9 and 10 are currently available for eForms submission.

The submission of Forms 2, 3, 4, 5 and 9 can only be done by a Federal firearms licensee who has paid the special (occupational) tax for the current Tax Year.

If the submission of the form requires fingerprints, photographs, and the Law Enforcement Certification, the submission cannot be done using eForms – the application must be submitted on paper to the NFA Branch. Accordingly, Forms 1, 4 and 5 may be submitted using eForms if the applicant maker or transferee is a legal entity, such as a corporation, trust, or LLC. The submission of the application will require that the documents establishing the legal entity be attached electronically to the application.

For Forms 1 or 4 that are submitted with making or transfer tax due, the tax payment will be made through Pay.Gov, just prior to the submission of the application. Pay.Gov is a system, of the US Treasury’s Financial Management, that allows the submitter to pay the tax by credit/debit card or from a bank account. For detailed information on Pay.gov you can visit their website at www.pay.gov.

Holy cow!  I'll submit a Form 1 right now.  What is the link?

Link:

https://www.atfonline.gov/EForms/

I'll be submitting a Form 1 this weekend.

So... if they're making it so trusts require pictures and prints, why did they JUST implement this thing letting those with trusts file electronically by just attaching a digital copy of their trust? Am I reading it wrong?

It appears that if someone dies, and they want to transfer NFA firearms to a beneficiary, the beneficiary will still have to mail in the Form 5?

Please post an update when you get your eForm 1 submitted. Maybe a new thread tracking the times would be appropriate.

This will only speed up the process the 1 or 2 days it takes for your mailed in form to reach them LOL

Yep.  I have no insight in the matter, but it wouldn't surprise me if these eForms were printed out at the NFA office and processed just as before.

The site doesn't work!!!! I can't even register.

It is a valid link from the ATF's main site so I hope I didn't get tricked into providing info to someone in China

It works.  I submitted 2 Form 1's today with zero issues.  Try a different web browser.  I used Chrome.

Now if they would only allow individuals to submit eForms.

Maybe someday.

I think it'll happen the same day they no longer require a CLEO sign off.  I can't wait for that, because my CLEO in my town is a royal dick.  I'll be VERY happy when I get to send him copies of my Form 1 and 4's.  He'll be pissed.

No kidding.

WTF is taking them so long?   How hard is it?

you don't really think the CLEO actualy looks at the forms you send in do you ? at best its one of his detectives at worst his secretary will look at them and file them in the oval file bin.

Just trying to ruin your fun thoughts :)

I have tried Firefox, Chrome (just update to 28.x), and IE9 with and without compatibility.  Piece of crap website!!!  Can you even find an IE8 browser anymore?  I tried IE7 too and it failed miserably.

I am a computer programmer so fairly tech savvy.

ETA: This has been on 3 different computers too.

Maybe update Java and/or Flash? I think it uses one of those.

Thanks for the idea but after updating both to the latest version it still fails with a Java null reference exception.  Also, I tried in Opera.  I stand by my piece of crap website statement.  I also hate Java with a passion.

I guess I just won't bother with it for now.  Maybe in a few months I will try again when they actually update support to a browser that is newer than 4 or 5 years old.

Go the trust route.
No contact with the sheriff, or prints, or pics required.

Little confused here. Are they eliminating NFA trusts essentially?

NO!

And gosh...while your info was being processed retroactively you probably shouldn't have the NFA item either....knock knock

Not for long apparently.

Seems to be the case...how do you print a corporation?

Trusts and corps will have to designate a "responsible person"