Good to see. I missed that but will be waiting to see what their 'more detailed response is...
I understand your feelings, but that of course is just what they are hoping for...
Forget the proposal to add background checks to Trusts. It gets much WORSE
- Thread starter batoncolle
- Start date
Good to see. I missed that but will be waiting to see what their 'more detailed response is...
I understand your feelings, but that of course is just what they are hoping for...
All that will really depend on how they define 'responsible person'. Is that limited to just the executor, or do the beneficiaries and trustees also count? If you add someone to your Schedule B, but remove them before you apply for another stamp, do you still have to supply their background data?
This could get so convoluted it's ridiculous, and that's just simple gun trusts.
Imagine if you were a firearms prop company for movies, and you had a couple of hundred NFA firearms registered to your corporation. Does this mean that everyone in the corporation now needs a background check? Just the firearms techs who touch them? Just the board of directors and CEO?
It'll be interesting. Hopefully they will be forced to realize what a problem this is and quietly back off.
"They" is Obama and his Executive Order and he could care less if this causes any problems, he can control NFA regulations without any approval from congress or asking for your opinion, my opinion and anyone working for the NFA and it looks like Obama is not backing off his stance on this issue.
There is also a DOD appropriation Bill in Congress right now with language that will potentially put every "Private" college in the country out of business. Why would language against private colleges reside in a DOD appropriation bill, good question, it shows the depth of their efforts to close Private colleges and they are trying to slide this past Congress.
Proposed Rule change is up.
https://www.federalregister.gov/art...er-firearms-background-checks-for-responsible
https://www.federalregister.gov/art...er-firearms-background-checks-for-responsible
Well, dammit. So what are the chances that wording gets softened up a little bit?
IF this goes through with a CLEO requirement for trusts, and if NFA friendly states do not pass a shall sign requirement for CLEOs, then I do not see how this would not kill the NFA industry. First you would have people that can't get a CLEO signoff in the first place. Then you will have a certain % of CLEOs who sign now, but who will not understand a trust so will probably refuse to sign as well.
They do not need to hope for it because they will get it. We just have to fight hard right now.
Well, if you remove them and add them between transfer, how would ATF know about the person? How would they make you submit fingerprints and photos if they don't even know about the person? Get it?
- - - Updated - - -
Please support NRA and ASA!
Depends how they treat it after the 90 days for review. I see some issues I suspect will be changed.
Silencers and short barrels are not specifically listed. Just sayin.
