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

ATF sends NFA trust rule change proposal to Whitehouse

Discussion in 'NFA Firearms and Accessories' started by scndactive, Aug 26, 2013.

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

    wacki Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,693
    Location:
    Reminiscing the Rockies
    What are the odds this goes through? Arizona Mike says this is no big deal but there are many veterans on NFA centric forums that are saying otherwise. They are quite worried about this.
     
  2. Arizona_Mike

    Arizona_Mike Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2013
    Messages:
    3,283
    You have mischaracterized my assessment. I said it is very political and coming from the White House (as it flies against internal streamlining efforts the ATF has been making) not that it isn't a big threat.

    On the contrary, I am pulling the trigger on two more Form 1s because of these proposed changes!

    Mike
     
  3. Bubbles

    Bubbles Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2004
    Messages:
    3,152
    Location:
    Eastern Panhandle of West Virginia
    IMO very high, ATF has the power to draft and enforce its own regs as long as it follows the FedGov process for changing CFR's.
     
  4. Outlaw Man

    Outlaw Man Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2007
    Messages:
    1,870
    Location:
    Cleaning my guns.
    Have they addressed new trustees being added to a trust that already has transferred items? I have a child on the way that may or may not be born before this goes into effect. It would be nice to avoid yet another set of fingerprints and photographs by setting up the trust now and getting some transfers started.

    Which begs the question of what will happen to those already playing the waiting game. No way I'd get approval in time. Babies come faster!
     
  5. Arizona_Mike

    Arizona_Mike Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2013
    Messages:
    3,283
    My understanding is that they are only proposing to change the approval process and not asking Congress to chbange the law. State law governs changes to trusts. That said, if they want fingerprint cards for everyone named on a trust, I suspect people will start getting multiple trusts.

    Mike
     
  6. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    One of the issues the current proposal specifically asks for commentary on is the feasibility of requiring any new trustee added to a trust to be sent to ATF within 30 days on a new form that will require fingerprints, CLEO sign off, etc.
     
  7. Arizona_Mike

    Arizona_Mike Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2013
    Messages:
    3,283
    I don't think that they can require that as the weapon is owned by the trust. I think that would be making a new crime not in statute.

    What they are proposing is retroactively changing the meaning of the law (26 U.S.C. 5871) by amending the definition of a person in 27 CFR 479.11 to make something a crime that was not made a crime by Congress!

    Mike
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2013
  8. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    Well, the problem is the current Administration knows there is a split Congress that will not pass controversial laws. So they are just interpreting the authority delegated by Congress in whatever way pleases them knowing that it will be years until a challenge winds its way through court and that Congress will not clarify the authority delegated due to the split.

    Frankly, until Congress is willing to challenge the Executive on these extreme interpretations, this problem will continue regardless of who is in the White House.
     
  9. SharpsDressedMan

    SharpsDressedMan member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2007
    Messages:
    5,957
    Location:
    NE Ohio
    One of the reasons for the process of the trusts in gun purchases, and several other loopholes in the NFA procedures was to accommodate corporations in acquiring otherwise "regulated" machineguns, such as MP5's, etc. Would it surprise anyone that Blackwater (owned and operated by former Federal agents) managed to acquire MP5's, otherwise not available to anyone except machine gun dealers as samples, as did other elite bodyguard and security companies in and around Washington D.C. for high end, government related security work here stateside?
     
  10. Arizona_Mike

    Arizona_Mike Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2013
    Messages:
    3,283
    If Academi has newer MG's (and I have no doubt they do) this has nothing to do with trusts or corporations using the NFA transfer process. They probably have the rihgt kind of FFL and/or possess these weapons overseas.

    I could own a brand new MP5 too with no paperwork, I just could not bring it into the US.

    Mike
     
  11. Arbo

    Arbo Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2013
    Messages:
    290
    Location:
    Colorado
    Isn't this one one of Obama's recent EO's does?
     
  12. Aaron Baker

    Aaron Baker Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Messages:
    695
    Location:
    Lexington, KY
    No.

    No President, including this one, can change the ATF's regulations by executive order. There's a process that must be followed, and it is being followed.

    There were a number of misleading headlines in various news outlets that referred to "executive actions" that people misunderstood as referring to Executive Orders. The ATF's proposed rulemaking is an action by the executive branch, but it is not an Executive Order.

    Aaron
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page