Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

after you get your stamp

Discussion in 'NFA Firearms and Accessories' started by OARNGESI, Dec 4, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. OARNGESI

    OARNGESI Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2011
    Messages:
    803
    hi i was just a little curious, i read that after you get a transfered machine gun the aft makes yearly visits to make sure you have it and its stored in a safe. are the same procedures followed with sbrs and supressors.
     
  2. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    3,176
    Location:
    Virginia
    That's just not true. I've owned MG's for over 35 years, and I've never had visits from the ATF (other than a few during the time I was a Class III SOT).
     
  3. rjrivero

    rjrivero Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2009
    Messages:
    1,064
    This is a rumor that just doesn't die. FFL's get visits from the ATF. No one else does.
     
  4. Aaron Baker

    Aaron Baker Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Messages:
    695
    Location:
    Lexington, KY
    They're a law enforcement branch of the federal government. No matter what kind of tax stamps you've got, they can't just come in your house without a warrant. The procedure, to the extent there is one, would be for them to call you and say they wanted to see your firearm and tax stamp. You'd have the option of bringing them to the local field office to show them. They never have the right to be inside your house without your permission unless a judge thinks you've done something wrong.

    And there's no legal requirement that you store anything in a safe. It's not a bad idea to have a safe, but it's not legally required. What is legally required is that you don't make an illegal transfer to another person. If you have a safe that only you know the combination to, you can leave other people alone in your house. But that's just a practical consideration--not a legal requirement.

    Aaron
     
  5. levsmith

    levsmith Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2009
    Messages:
    150
    Thanks for clearing that up guys. I've also heard the same thing but its good to know thats not the case
     
  6. OARNGESI

    OARNGESI Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2011
    Messages:
    803
    thanks for the truth guys sometimes you need first hand experience over just a internet search. i wasnt worried about having a safe but yearly visits would be a huge hassle and a deal breaker.
     
  7. thorazine

    thorazine Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2003
    Messages:
    791
    Common sense would dictate that with all the typical work load the ATF handles it would be quite the undertaking to arrange for a annual visit to private residences to inspect NFA items. They would probably have to hire an additional ten thousand agents.
     
  8. GoingQuiet

    GoingQuiet Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Messages:
    375
    Location:
    Melbourne, FL
    Whoever told you that or whoever wrote that was uninformed.
     
  9. MasterSergeantA

    MasterSergeantA Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    613
    Location:
    Arizona Territory
    As stated by rjrivero, only FFL licensees are subject to routine inspection. If the ATF contacted me and asked to see my firearm(s) and stamp(s), I would offer them a convenient time to stop by my house and I would make a fresh pot of coffee. I would put the items in question on my table and they would be welcome to fondle them all they like. Anything else would prompt me to ask for a warrant and immediately call my lawyer.
     
  10. dogrunner

    dogrunner Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,187
    Location:
    E/Cntrl Fla.
    You're a nicer guy than me, Sarge. I'd first query them as to just why they wanted to see my property as it's obvious that something other than just the registered pieces was at issue. If I got other than what I considered a reasonable and straightforward reply then they'd have to do what they have to do!

    Y'know, 1983 and 1984, USC, applies to them as well!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page