Could NFA transfers become may-issue?

[Telperion]

18 USC 922(b)
It shall be unlawful for any licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector to sell or deliver—
(4) to any person any destructive device, machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986), short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, except as specifically authorized by the Attorney General consistent with public safety and necessity

27 CFR 478.98
The sale or delivery by a licensee of any destructive device, machine gun, short-barreled shotgun, or short-barreled rifle, to any person other than another licensee who is licensed under this part to deal in such device or firearm, is prohibited unless the person to receive such device or firearm furnishes to the licensee a sworn statement setting forth
(a) The reasons why there is a reasonable necessity for such person to purchase or otherwise acquire the device or weapon; and
(b) That such person's receipt or possession of the device or weapon would be consistent with public safety. Such sworn statement shall be made on the application to transfer and register the firearm required by Part 479 of this chapter. The sale or delivery of the device or weapon shall not be made until the application for transfer is approved by the Director and returned to the licensee (transferor) as provided in Part 479 of this chapter.

This part of the law is why you have to state a reason on form 4 transfers. The "reasonable necessity" and "consistent with public safety" language sounds a lot like the language used in may-issue CCW laws. Could the ATF or the attorney general someday interpret the law to restrict NFA transfers by narrowing the view of what is consistent with public safety and necessity?

 

[rocinante]

I hate to see a thread unanswered. The answer to your question is obviously YES.

What makes all this stuff nuts is the alphabet boys and the other federal agencies have the power to cook up regulations without new legislation being written. Probably most recently the biggest hoopla was the regulation change that would of put such restrictions on gunpowder as a haz mat it would of made reloading a thing of the past or sale of gunpowder by joe blow gunstore impossible. I have a saiga 12 and over on the saiga board there is angst when a higher capacity magazine or drum are introduced that the agency would just declare the whole system a DD.

That language "reasonable necessity", "consistent with public safety" will eventually leave us with foam tipped nerf guns at regulated nonexistent gun range. Plain and simple english that will ends up producing regulations like no all knives have to have blunt points.

 

[LAR-15]

No

Haven't done it so far and prolly wont

Don't want to upset Congress and gun owners

Congress wrote that law and they can darn sure change it