Armory Sponsor
Posted: 9/6/2006 6:58:32 AM EDT
|
How often does the BATF visit your house for weapons inspections? Once very several years? 5 years? 10 years? I've been thinking of a class III item but don't want one if there's somebody constantly comming over and bothering me. Please fill me in on this, thanks! |
And that is really only with MGs and some DDs. SBR/SBS and suppressor's really aren't that expensive. There is now no reason for you to not go NFA. 
|
|
I would really LOVE to know who in the HELL started that old wive's tale about surrendering 4th Amendment rights. That's one of the biggest misconceptions I hear from people. That and the obvious "Oh, those are illegal, aren't they?" comments. Another is the need for a special license just to own one (obviously confused with an FFL/SOT, versus Tax Stamp). Oh, and the "Don't ya have to pay like $500 per year in order to own one." And the "You've gotta pay $200 per gun that you want to put that silencer on, right?" The miseducation that has occured over the last 72 years is certainly the biggest hurdle to overcome in the push to bring NFA weapons into the mainstream. Of course, for those of you with Transferable MG's, bringing about a change in thinking could result in losses of many thousands of dollars for you. But, if we can manage to change the minds of our Countrymen, maybe we can eventually repeal the NFA34, much in the same way Prohibition was repealed. (Yeah, I know, it's a pipe dream.) |
I think this is where it comes from. The issue is people think you need a "Class III Licence" and when they look into that they find the info for the Class III SOT which you need the 01 FFL to go with. If you get an 01/C3 FFL/SOT , Then the ATF DOES inspect your business. Edited to correct my stupid mistakes that Tony_K got to point out. |
You're probably right about where it comes from. However, there's no such thing as an 07/03 FFL/SOT: --A licensed dealer in NFA items is an 01/03 FFL/SOT. The Type 01 FFL and the Class 3 SOT are required for dealers. --A licensed manufacturer of NFA items is an 07/02 FFL/SOT. The Type 07 FFL and Class 2 SOT are required for manufacturers. Someone holding an 07/03 FFL/SOT would legally be neither a dealer in nor manufacturer of NFA items. They would be lacking the correct licenses for either business.
|
duh, I knew that  There I go typing without thinking and proof reading 01/C3 and 07/C2 .... And I am just a lowly Type 03 Now I had trouble convincing a fairly "well known" dealer in my area that he could sell a Reising to me from out of state (he was in PA) and not have to ship it to a 01/C3 in my state VA . I told him once the form 4 was approved he could ship it to me on my 03 FFL , but he said that I needed an SOT . |
|
Never say never when it comes to ATF and their thinking with this licensing stuff. There were 01 FFL paying 02 SOT until the mid 80s when they changed their thinking and only allowed the 01/03 and 07/02 combo. As for the original question on ATF visits. I know of two instances where ATF visited private citizens to ask to see the paperwork and the MG in question. Both were pre-arranged meetings; no guys in camo or swat teams. |
Sweet! I have no idea where I heard it but I recall many years ago hearing that every year the ATF showed up at your house and inspected your Class III firearms. |
That rumor pops up now and then. Urban myth. |
This rumor started because some private NFA owners did get a call from ATF asking for permission to inspect their machinegun(s) and papers. According to what was posted (either on Subguns or Sturm), the owners granted permission. Two agents came, verified info on the registration, and then left. The individual reported that they were very polite/professional and it was a 5-10 min meeting. Nothing further ever came of it. Now, internet talk is just that-- internet talk. But reading that in conjunction with other SOT's reports of the nature of their compliance audits (all but ignoring 4473s and concentrating on checking printed logs of NFA transfers against the dealer's bound books) makes me wonder... Is the NFA branch finally (but quietly) trying to fix accuracy issues in the registry? That other folks haven't gotten similar calls makes me wonder if a compliance audit at the dealer/registry level relealed discrepencies that be best resolved by checking the individual's paperwork. Generally speaking, though-- a private individual (or corporation) gives up no rights whatsoever by purchasing a NFA weapon. Even in the case above, you'll note that the ATF still had to ask permission. I'll close by adding it's the first time I've heard of any such thing, and internet talk is still just internet talk. FWIW, Mike |
I miss the old AOW-dealer only license.  In terms of the two instances, may I ask where you heard of those? I remember reading of one such instance on Subguns or Sturm, and it sounded like more like a "our paperwork is balled up, so let's see what's on the registrant's papers" scenario. Thanks, Mike |
Armory Sponsor