Warning

 

Close
Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Cancel Confirm
AR15.COM
Armory Sponsor
1/20/2010 5:04:13 PM EDT
Is there a real concern for constructive possession of a SBS.  I am asking because I am contemplating purchasing an SBS for home defense; however, my wife would technically also have access.  Other NFA items are in the safe which she does not have access to since she has never asked and doesn't care about what is inside.  With the SBS, it would be used for home defense and be located in the bedroom.  What if heaven forbid she used it for defense while I was not home or out of town?  What do you'll think?  Is this a valid concern and I should just go with a 18" barrel or am I worrying too much?
1/20/2010 5:14:14 PM EDT
[#1]
Your first problem is picking a bird gun over an AR for Defense.

But if you insist on this nonsense, I wouldn't give it a second thought... assuming the weapon is in the home.

The gun is there.  Some douche tried to harm her... not an issue.  ATF isn't going to break it off in your hind den unless you're asking for it.... i.e.... you're running a drug operation and someone tried to invade your home.

1/20/2010 5:19:37 PM EDT
[#2]
Trust or LLC. Problem Solved.
1/20/2010 5:29:35 PM EDT
[#3]
Already have the AR, just not something she is use to.  More technical than she wants to get into.

Not sure about the Trust.  Don't know any NFA lawyers and not sure about using Quicken WillMaker.  Seems to much room for error and legal issues.
1/20/2010 5:39:25 PM EDT
[#4]
Why not set her up with something just for her?
1/20/2010 6:12:07 PM EDT
[#5]
Depending on where you live and how the cops or "other powers to be" think of such things may depend on what result you may have. If its a legal SBR to start and your wife used it in a legal self defense shoot then the cops will prob not care if you live in a pro gun area. Like others have said, the cops will care if she used it in a bad shoot or there are other illegal factors going on or you live in an anti gun area. Something else to think about. Whatever gun she uses probally will end up in a police evidence room for days or even years depending on the factors involved. Do you really want your nice NFA SBR sitting in some police evidence room? Just a thought.
1/20/2010 7:59:32 PM EDT
[#6]
Quoted:
Already have the AR, just not something she is use to.  More technical than she wants to get into.

Not sure about the Trust.  Don't know any NFA lawyers and not sure about using Quicken WillMaker.  Seems to much room for error and legal issues.


Willmaker didn't become the best selling software of its kind by being full of errors.  Is is absolutely perfectly setup for NFA ownership, no.  Does it work and keep everything legal, yes.   Trust is so easy, just make you, your wife, your kids, your brothers, sisters, parents, friends all trustees and then possession won't be an issue.
1/21/2010 5:33:21 AM EDT
[#7]
Quoted:
Your first problem is picking a bird gun over an AR for Defense.


Uh, its only a bird gun if you're using "bird-shot". Put some nice, #4 buck in that and you'll have a perfect HD gun with little danger of penetration through walls risking the injury of others in the home. IMHO

Quoted:
Does it work and keep everything legal, yes.   Trust is so easy, just make you, your wife, your kids, your brothers, sisters, parents, friends all trustees and then possession won't be an issue.

Legality is debatable with the clause that says items cannot be used etc. unless you plan to store all your NFA items and don't ever use them.

Regarding additional trustees, how exactly do you add them with quicken? Pencil them in after it prints out?

That is the downfall of quicken, it doesn't give much freedom on changing the trust. Its a basic, cheap trust and its as simple as that.

1/21/2010 5:52:34 AM EDT
[#8]
I think I would buy a stamp to make a quieter HD gun opposed to the loudest weapon possible.
1/21/2010 7:34:10 AM EDT
[#9]

Legality is debatable with the clause that says items cannot be used etc. unless you plan to store all your NFA items and don't ever use them.

Regarding additional trustees, how exactly do you add them with quicken? Pencil them in after it prints out?

That is the downfall of quicken, it doesn't give much freedom on changing the trust. Its a basic, cheap trust and its as simple as that.



Please point me to any case or ATF ruling that says using it makes legality debateable.  If you have one, I would love to see it because neither I nor any other person I know of has ever seen such a thing.  That would be like saying if there is a peice of properrty held in a trust that doesn't havwe a "use" clause it would be illegal to use the land.  That is just nonsense legally.  If anything (and this is a strech) there might be civil implications if a trustee knowing lowered the value of a trust asset (such as by using it), but the only person who could bring this suit would be the grantor (i.e. you, the creator of the trust) and you wouldn't bring such a suit agaist yourself or your wife for using plus the civil penelty would only be the lowered value asset and there is little to know difference in the value of a new SBS and a used one.  Again this is civil not criminal and would NEVER happen in the situation he describes above.  

The grantor (sometimes called the settelor) is free to change and amend the trust as he likes.  That is the beauity of the revokable living trust.  Also here is how you add trustees to a Quicken trust, it is really hard, Open Word and type something like this this on a blank peice of paper (and this is a bit overly legal, but you get the idea):

"FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE MICKEY MOUSE TRUST

I Mickey Mouse, as grantor of the Mickey Mouse Trust, do hereby amend the Mickey Mouse Trust to allow the following person to serve as trustees of the Trust:

Donald Duck
Minnie Mouse
Pluto Dog

This amendment takes effect immeditaly and the trustees are granted all powers as set forth in the origional trust document."

/s/ Mickey Mouse
1/14/2010"

Some states might require you to notorize it, but many states (like Texas) don't.  The end, you have three new trustees and before you ask you do not have to notify the BATFE of the change.   Not that hard in my opinion.


1/21/2010 7:49:29 AM EDT
[#10]
Quoted:


Please point me to any case or ATF ruling that says using it makes legality debateable.  If you have one, I would love to see it because neither I nor any other person I know of has ever seen such a thing.



I'm no lawyer, but I think Minnesota prohibits the use of SBS according to this uses clause:

ATF P-5300-5
609.67. Machine guns and short-barreled
shotguns.
Subdivision 1. Definitions.
(a) "Machine gun" means any firearm designed
to discharge, or capable of discharging
automatically more than once by a single function
of the trigger.
(b) "Shotgun" means a weapon designed, redesigned,
made or remade which is intended to
be fired from the shoulder and uses the energy
of the explosive in a fixed shotgun shell to fire
through a smooth bore either a number of ball
shot or a single projectile for each single pull of
the trigger.
(c) "Short-barreled shotgun" means a shotgun
having one or more barrels less than 18 inches
in length and any weapon made from a shotgun
if such weapon as modified has an overall length
less than 26 inches.
(d) "Trigger activator" means a removable
manual or power driven trigger activating device
constructed and designed so that, when attached
to a firearm, the rate at which the trigger
may be pulled increases and the rate of fire of
the firearm increases to that of a machine gun.
(e) "Machine gun conversion kit" means any
part or combination of parts designed and intended
for use in converting a weapon into a
machine gun, and any combination of parts from
which a machine gun can be assembled, but
does not include a spare or replacement part for
a machine gun that is possessed lawfully under
section 609.67, subdivision 3.
Subd. 2. Acts prohibited. Except as otherwise
provided herein, whoever owns, possesses,
or operates a machine gun, any trigger activator
or machine gun conversion kit, or a shortbarreled
shotgun may be sentenced to imprisonment
for not more than five years or to payment
of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both.
Subd. 3. Uses permitted. The following persons
may own or possess a machine gun or
short-barreled shotgun provided the provisions
of subdivision 4 are complied with:

(1) law enforcement officers for use in the
course of their duties;
(2) chief executive officers of correctional
facilities and other personnel thereof authorized
by them and persons in charge of other institutions
for the retention of persons convicted or
accused of crime, for use in the course of their
duties;
(3) persons possessing machine guns or
short-barreled shotguns which, although designed
as weapons, have been determined by
the superintendent of the bureau of criminal apprehension
or the superintendent's delegate by
reason of the date of manufacture, value, design
or other characteristics to be primarily collector's
items, relics, museum pieces or objects of curiosity,
ornaments or keepsakes, and are not likely
to be used as weapons;
(4) manufacturers of ammunition who possess
and use machine guns for the sole purpose
of testing ammunition manufactured for sale to
federal and state agencies or political subdivisions;
(5) dealers and manufacturers who are federally
licensed to buy and sell, or manufacture machine
guns or short-barreled shotguns and who
either use the machine guns or short-barreled
shotguns in peace officer training under courses
approved by the board of peace officer standards
and training, or are engaged in the sale of
machine guns or short-barreled shotguns to federal
and state agencies or political subdivisions;
and
(6) persons employed by the Minnesota
National Guard as security guards, for use in
accordance with applicable federal military
regulations.
Subd. 4. Report
1/21/2010 8:33:39 AM EDT
[#11]
Quoted:

Legality is debatable with the clause that says items cannot be used etc. unless you plan to store all your NFA items and don't ever use them.

Regarding additional trustees, how exactly do you add them with quicken? Pencil them in after it prints out?

That is the downfall of quicken, it doesn't give much freedom on changing the trust. Its a basic, cheap trust and its as simple as that.



Please point me to any case or ATF ruling that says using it makes legality debateable.  If you have one, I would love to see it because neither I nor any other person I know of has ever seen such a thing.  That would be like saying if there is a peice of properrty held in a trust that doesn't havwe a "use" clause it would be illegal to use the land.  That is just nonsense legally.  If anything (and this is a strech) there might be civil implications if a trustee knowing lowered the value of a trust asset (such as by using it), but the only person who could bring this suit would be the grantor (i.e. you, the creator of the trust) and you wouldn't bring such a suit agaist yourself or your wife for using plus the civil penelty would only be the lowered value asset and there is little to know difference in the value of a new SBS and a used one.  Again this is civil not criminal and would NEVER happen in the situation he describes above.  

The grantor (sometimes called the settelor) is free to change and amend the trust as he likes.  That is the beauity of the revokable living trust.  Also here is how you add trustees to a Quicken trust, it is really hard, Open Word and type something like this this on a blank peice of paper (and this is a bit overly legal, but you get the idea):

"FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE MICKEY MOUSE TRUST

I Mickey Mouse, as grantor of the Mickey Mouse Trust, do hereby amend the Mickey Mouse Trust to allow the following person to serve as trustees of the Trust:

Donald Duck
Minnie Mouse
Pluto Dog

This amendment takes effect immeditaly and the trustees are granted all powers as set forth in the origional trust document."

/s/ Mickey Mouse
1/14/2010"

Some states might require you to notorize it, but many states (like Texas) don't.  The end, you have three new trustees and before you ask you do not have to notify the BATFE of the change.   Not that hard in my opinion.




I wasn't talking about the ATF. The ATF doesn't care what your trust says as long as it is a legal entity. As you said, it is a civil matter, but it isn't only the grantor that can bring suit. If the trust says that the trustees may not use items, or must not decrease their value etc. anybody related to the trust or its assets could file a civil suit. That means beneficiaries can file suit if they wish. Yes, it is a small detail, but that is just one example of how the quicken trusts fall short.

Personally, I don't care what you say about trusts. There is a very clear divided line along those that feel a lawyer is the best way to go, and those that only wish to spend $20 to protect assets worth thousands. You won't convince me and I won't convince you. I was only posting to inform the OP of the benefits and advantages.
1/21/2010 9:52:02 AM EDT
[#12]
Why are we talking about Minn?  But in any case, in Minn you can have C&R SBS's.  An excption to the law says:

persons possessing machine guns or short-barreled shotguns which, although designed as weapons, have been determined by the superintendent of the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension or the superintendent's delegate by reason of the date of manufacture, value, design or other characteristics to be primarily collector's items, relics, museum pieces or objects of curiosity, ornaments or keepsakes, and are not likely to be used as weapons;



I wasn't talking about the ATF. The ATF doesn't care what your trust says as long as it is a legal entity. As you said, it is a civil matter, but it isn't only the grantor that can bring suit. If the trust says that the trustees may not use items, or must not decrease their value etc. anybody related to the trust or its assets could file a civil suit. That means beneficiaries can file suit if they wish. Yes, it is a small detail, but that is just one example of how the quicken trusts fall short.

Personally, I don't care what you say about trusts. There is a very clear divided line along those that feel a lawyer is the best way to go, and those that only wish to spend $20 to protect assets worth thousands. You won't convince me and I won't convince you. I was only posting to inform the OP of the benefits and advantages.


You say you were"t talking about the ATF but your quote about says "legality is debatable."  Legality is not debatable.  They are 100% legal and using and possessing them is legal from a criminal standpoint.   And benefitaries can't file a suit unless the trust is paying out.  In a revokable trust the grantor can change the benefitary at any time for any reason.  And even assuming they could sue in a civil suit how much would be at stake $100 bucks?  I mean the difference in value or an unfired SBS and one with 100 rounds through it is maybe $100.  And again this would be such a rare occurance it is hardly worth mentioning.    I am not saving Willmaker is perfectly suited for NFA, but it works just fine in 99.99999% of situations, especally those were a husband just wants his wife or kids to be able to possess the NFA item.

Using a lawyer is great it you truely have "thousands" in assets.  But with a silencer, SBS or SBR that are only worth $1000 (give or take) it is just not that worth the cost.
1/21/2010 10:13:15 AM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:

You say you were"t talking about the ATF but your quote about says "legality is debatable."  Legality is not debatable.  They are 100% legal and using and possessing them is legal from a criminal standpoint.   And benefitaries can't file a suit unless the trust is paying out.  In a revokable trust the grantor can change the benefitary at any time for any reason.  And even assuming they could sue in a civil suit how much would be at stake $100 bucks?  I mean the difference in value or an unfired SBS and one with 100 rounds through it is maybe $100.  And again this would be such a rare occurance it is hardly worth mentioning.    I am not saving Willmaker is perfectly suited for NFA, but it works just fine in 99.99999% of situations, especally those were a husband just wants his wife or kids to be able to possess the NFA item.

Using a lawyer is great it you truely have "thousands" in assets.  But with a silencer, SBS or SBR that are only worth $1000 (give or take) it is just not that worth the cost.


That all depends on state law. I'm not going to turn this thread into an argument for the OP's sake, but you can't possibly know the trust laws of every state, and if you did, you wouldn't be here arguing for the use of a quicken trust because you would know better.

99.99999% of the times? That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
1/21/2010 10:38:47 AM EDT
[#14]
I went the trust route for this EXACT reason, my wife and I both have access to our guns, she has an AR she wants SBR'd and of course i'll be doing any work on it...

as such i paid an attorney to draft the trust, it cost me around $300, and was well worth it. From what I've heard, the NFA branch has found issues with trusts (from willmaker or that bubba's gun shop drafted up) and is now looking more deeply into the trust documentation before approving the tax stamp. If the ATF found an issue with my trust, i have an attorney that will back the documentation and make sure that the document is correct. With Quicken WillMaker, I have no one to fall back on...
1/21/2010 11:12:47 AM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:
Why are we talking about Minn?  But in any case, in Minn you can have C&R SBS's.


I brought up Minnesota because you asked for an example of a law that says items cannot be used.  Just like it says in the Minnesota law, if you're not using it for one of the reasons listed then you are forbidden from possessing it.


But getting back on topic, I would either setup a trust and include your wife, or purchase a title 1 shotgun.  That's just what I would do, because as far as I know if you own the SBS as an individual, its supposed to be locked up so no one else has access to it.
1/21/2010 2:34:42 PM EDT
[#16]
For the price of the SBS tax stamp alone, you could pick up a used 870 (a Wingmaster if you shop around/ex-Police), cut the barrel to 18.5" with a pipe cutter, tap the barrel for a bead, and have a nice shotgun without any of the NFA headaches.

Just a thought.
1/21/2010 5:16:45 PM EDT
[#17]
One other factor to consider:

I don't know what the laws are like in SC, but in Florida the Castle Doctrine is supported by a bunch of laws that, among other things, bars individuals or survivors from suing, in civil court, anyone who has used a firearm to legally defend themself.

That is not true in all states. In some places, you can be cleared of criminal charges, yet still sued in civil court by the person you shot, or his survivors. And civil court has a whole different set of rules –– lower burden of proof, and plaintiff's attorneys can get away with many things not allowed in criminal court.

A registered SBS will suddenly become "a sawed-off shotgun that she used to deprive my client's children of their father. Why couldn't she use a handgun or rifle? Was she so determined to maim or kill that she had to use this deadly sawed-off shotgun?" And yeah, he will be waving it around, terrifying jurors, while saying these words.

If you've spent any time in civil court –– and I have spent many years there –– this is exactly the sort of stuff civil lawyers win huge judgements on. Convincing a jury that the defendant is a bloodthirsty savage is worth at least an extra $100k in damages.

Check your state laws. Or else stick to Title 1 firearms, like an 18"-barrelled shotty.

Yeah, I know it's better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. That's little solace when even though you are cleared of criminal charges, the civil courts take away your home, your savings and your retirement fund, if you still have one.

Your Mileage May Vary.
1/21/2010 7:29:41 PM EDT
[#18]
From what I've heard, the NFA branch has found issues with trusts (from willmaker or that bubba's gun shop drafted up) and is now looking more deeply into the trust documentation before approving the tax stamp. If the ATF found an issue with my trust, i have an attorney that will back the documentation and make sure that the document is correct. With Quicken WillMaker, I have no one to fall back on...


Can you point me to a source that says this?  I know about 10 people that have got Willmaker trust approved in the post 6 months with no issues.
1/21/2010 7:30:50 PM EDT
[#19]


99.99999% of the times? That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.


Please point me to a real world situation where it hasn't been sufficient.
1/21/2010 7:37:40 PM EDT
[#20]
I keep my NFA weapons locked in safes which only I have access. I don't want the trouble and even possable illegal transfer charges.

I do know some people who own NFA weapons and dont even own a safe.... I coulden't leave the house without worrying about the shit if it wasent locked up.

Do a form4 or form1 in her name for the gun if its mostly for her.
1/22/2010 3:27:29 AM EDT
[#21]
I see my NFA items as very expensive toys, the social work stuff I can replace in any gun store worth its salt with minimal waiting.

Kharn
1/22/2010 4:56:53 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted:


99.99999% of the times? That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.


Please point me to a real world situation where it hasn't been sufficient.


I'll be honest, I can't. But my rebuttal is, that is always the defense of the proponents of quicken. But I don't think it proves anything. Trusts being relatively new to the NFA game (see Tony's explanation in this thread) they really haven't been "tested" yet. I think in about 30 years, when a lot of NFA owners that have their items in a trust start keeling over, we'll start seeing issues.

Just because something hasn't gone wrong doesn't mean it can't. Just because a poorly designed bridge hasn't collapsed yet doesn't mean that is won't. The same goes for a trust, just because a cheap, poorly written trust hasn't had problems yet doesn't mean that it won't.

As of right now there is NO hard evidence to support either side, but there are a lot of people that have one opinion and a lot of other people that have another opinion.

ETA Oh yeah, forgot about the 99.99999% thing. Just so you know that is means out of 10 million trusts, only 1 will have problems. So do you know 9,999,999 people that have quicken trusts that have been "tested" in a court that haven't had a single problem whatsoever with them? Just what I thought, you don't even know a fraction of that many so please stop posting made up statistics.
1/22/2010 6:54:45 PM EDT
[#23]
In my opinion, if a HD shotgun is what you want, I would stick to an 18" barrel and a youth sized stock to keep the length down...

It is just cleaner to deal with than the NFA stuff.......I mean, lets say you and your spouse are out of town for a day trip, but you have a car accident, so now the neigh or has to go over and let the dogs out...uh oh, now you have to wonder if that puts them in possesion of a SBS since you left you HD shotgun accessible....or quick run and add the mto your trust.....whatever.....I think the reality is most people here worry too mutch about that, but if you are a worrier it might affect you.

Then, should you us it for  HD, and overzealous proscuter who civil liability lawyer will love pointing out how "you keep a sawed off shotgun under your bed" just looking for a reason to sue it...


Just my opinion....

Oh, and I own 2 SBS, but I have a 870 Youth 20 Ga. for me, my wife and my kids for HD (oh yeah...my kids are 20 & 18 in case you need to know.....)
Armory Sponsor