Forget the proposal to add background checks to Trusts. It gets much WORSE

[batoncolle]

Two thoughts.

The changes effectively make a gun trust of no distinguishable value or advantage over an individual trying to acquire a NFA item.

Time to push for a state "must sign" law with regards to CLEO sign offs, similar to what TN has.

http://statutes.laws.com/tennessee/title-39/chapter-17/part-13/39-17-1361

A trust still has value in that other people (such as a relative) who is on the trust can also maintain possession of the items. In addition you can leave the trust items to a beneficiary such as your children. Of course if you are in an area where a CLEO won't sign-off, you are screwed.

Also good luck getting our useless GA Rhino legislature and governor to sign anything firearm related. No gun legislation has been passed in the last 3 years, and they also refuse to pass hunting with a suppressor. How is that even possible when Republicans control both houses and the office of governor??? I will answer. They are liberals. Until we throw the bums out of office and quit trying to place nice with them, we are screwed.

 

[Rob62]

From my reading of the proposed changes that may be true. However, ALL entities (persons) listed in a trust which has NFA items in it will have to be fingerprinted, pictures taken, background checks done, etc. How far does this go down the line ?? What about juveniles that may be listed for some reason ?

What if its a dual purpose trust and has property other than NFA items - and there is a prohibited person listed as some component of that trust ?

What if.....?? So many questions about all this and so many possibilities. All of which seem bad for NFA item owners.

This is bad all the way around.

Rob

A trust still has value in that other people (such as a relative) who is on the trust can also maintain possession of the items.

 

[spencer60]

What's really interesting is that there is existing case law from the US Court of Appeals saying a firearms trust is exactly what you need for a prohibited person to keep their property interest in a firearm, even though they can't legally posses it.

(http://www.guntrustlawyer.com/2009/12/united-states-court-of-appeals.html)

This would actually be a pretty good basis to sue, since ATF rules and executive orders certainly don't take precedence over established case law at the Appeals court level.

I'm hoping that one of the gun groups will sue, but it could turn into a PR nightmare. Imaging the headlines that the NRA is suing so felons can own machine guns.

The thing that really gets me is how petty this whole thing is. Both these actions (this and the ban on re importing the Garands) are really just retaliation for the humiliation the administration suffered this Spring in the Senate.

They know that they are going after the 'core' gun owners with this change, but they also know that there won't be a huge pushback because there just aren't that many of us who care.

 

[spencer60]

What if its a dual purpose trust and has property other than NFA items...

That's exactly why my lawyer had me do a separate trust, just for NFA items. The legal traps the ATF has set up around NFA items are so convoluted that you really have to keep these firewalled off from any other part of your life.

 

[batoncolle]

I'm hoping that one of the gun groups will sue, but it could turn into a PR nightmare. Imaging the headlines that the NRA is suing so felons can own machine guns.

The thing that really gets me is how petty this whole thing is. Both these actions (this and the ban on re importing the Garands) are really just retaliation for the humiliation the administration suffered this Spring in the Senate.

They know that they are going after the 'core' gun owners with this change, but they also know that there won't be a huge pushback because there just aren't that many of us who care.

Actually the NRA has already released a statement regarding the proposed NFA changes. Maybe they felt to compelled because of the re-importation issue, but either way it is good to see them get involved.

 

[No2sc2]

I hadn't been reading or searching this issue but what about Trust that is already approved with stamps? What if I decide I don't want to buy anymore NFA items?

The other person on my Trust doesn't live near me nor in same state. So getting him to do it is pain in the ass... I might end up removing him.

Heck that leads to my next question. What if people remove and add prohibited people inbetween transfers? How would ATF NFA stop that?

 

[batoncolle]

I hadn't been reading or searching this issue but what about Trust that is already approved with stamps? What if I decide I don't want to buy anymore NFA items?

The other person on my Trust doesn't live near me nor in same state. So getting him to do it is pain in the ass... I might end up removing him.

Heck that leads to my next question. What if people remove and add prohibited people inbetween transfers? How would ATF NFA stop that?

Nothing has been said about this, but personally I am not aware of any legal precedent in regards to retroactive type EOs, laws, etc - YMMV. I really do not see a legal way for them to go back and change something already approved - especially when they know this is BS anyway. In fact I if you are already in the pipeline for approval, I do not see how it can be changed. I have a long list of NFA items I want to buy, but right now a 308 suppressor is at the top. I am going 3 hours out of my way tomorrow just to get one going in the pipeline.

I said it before, and I will say it again...if this goes through I am done with NFA items. I am simply not going to beg some moron to exercise my Constitutional rights. Companies better take notice and start reacting to this issue because I doubt I am the only one... I know many individuals are already busting their butts on this, but I have seen very little from companies, gun rights groups, etc.

 

[dakota]

From what I've read these changes will come straight from the White House in the form of a presidential Executive Order:

One new policy will end a government practice that lets military weapons, sold or donated by the U.S. to allies, be reimported into the U.S. by private entities. The White House said the U.S. has approved 250,000 of those guns to be reimported since 2005; under the new policy, only museums and a few other entities like the government will be eligible to reimport military-grade firearms.

The Obama administration is also proposing a federal rule to stop those who would be ineligible to pass a background check from skirting the law by registering a gun to a corporation or trust. The new rule would require people associated with those entities, like beneficiaries and trustees, to undergo the same type of fingerprint-based background checks as individuals if they want to register guns.

He can't get his Gun Control legislation passed with Congress but apparently he has control over NFA items.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...rgets-military-surplus-imports/#ixzz2eM7wg7Tb

 

[Cobalt 60]

If only we could convince the dipwads in DC to repeal the NFA altogether. A man can dream, right?

 

[cullen1780]

He can't get his Gun Control legislation passed with Congress but apparently he has control over NFA items.

If only we could convince the dipwads in DC to repeal the NFA altogether. A man can dream, right?

And that's why the NFA items need to be reduced or, better, eliminated.