NFA Proposed Changes

[AdamJ1555]

GT Distributors just posted this message on their Facebook page:

URGENT ACTION NEEDED-
Summary -
Recently the US Department of Justice proposed specific regulatory changes that, among other restrictions, would virtually ban the possession of otherwise legal National Firearms Act (NFA) products for many law-abiding citizens. Specifically, the proposal targets NFA Trusts – a common way for Americans to legally obtain NFA items. Many of us live in counties where the Chief Law Enforcement Officer (Sheriff) refuses to process individual applications for NFA transfers leaving trusts, LLCs, and corporations the only options to obtain legal NFA products.
Action item #1 - The comment period on this proposal ends December 9th. It is urgent you take action now. Be respectful but get you point across. Go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDe ... -0001-0001" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Action item #2 - Alert you friends and family to do the same.
Action item #3 - Silencerco and the American Silencer Association have a link to send an email to your US Senators and US Representative. http://www.silencerco.com/?section=Educ ... e%20action" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[jmra]

IIRC, the proposed change requires everyone listed in the trust be fingerprinted and undergo a background check. Did something change?

[K.Mooneyham]

Saw this story from the NRA on my FB page. So I went to the link they provided and added the following comment:

I fail to understand why there needs to be a rule-change regarding NFA weapons. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but crimes committed with NFA weapons are almost zero. Therefore, the NFA system in place obviously works. It will cost the government money to make the changes; aren't there continuing budget issues? It will also cost employees of the BATFE to divert their work hours to a seeming non-issue at a time when the BATFE is already very busy (unless I am mistaken in that regard). Why waste resources on this?

[The Annoyed Man]

My comment:

I oppose these proposed regulation changes (docket ATF 41P) for the following reasons:

1. I do not need to prove my citizenship to vote or to obtain and file a federal tax return. Any standard of identification good enough for voting and tax filing should be good enough for obtaining an NFA item. Voting improperly is as dangerous an activity as any, and if the federal standards already in place for the exercise of my voting rights are sufficient, then they should be sufficient for the NFA process.

2. The Chief Law Enforcement Officer (CLEO) certification goes back to before the existence of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). It creates a totally arbitrary system under which the local CLEO can prevent NFA purchases based on his/her own personal political agenda. Political bias should NEVER be the deciding factor in determining who gets to exercise their rights, and who does not. The only rule change which makes sense—both in regulatory terms, law-enforcement terms, and in fiscal terms—is to place NICS in charge of approving NFA purchases.

3. Until BATFE can prove that criminal elements are already using trusts and LLCs to obtain NFA items, requiring fingerprints and photographs of every “responsible person” on an NFA trust, or part of a corporation or LLC carrying NFA items, is an unacceptable invasion of privacy. Federal databases are already notoriously porous. Even national security agencies are unable to prevent malicious hacking from accessing their information. If the personal information contained in the NFA database was ever compromised illegally, or obtained by the local, state, or federal government inappropriately, it could be abused. These rule changes presume guilt and leave it to the applicant to prove innocence. That is fundamentally UNAMERICAN! If a person is criminal suspect, then their information should remain private and it should not be forcibly taken from them during the exercise of a constitutional right.

4. NFA trusts are used to secure the inheritance process, so that a child may inherit the assets of the trust from a deceased parent. They are invaluable tools for estate planning, and their beneficiaries should not have to submit to these violations of their civil liberties simply because they have inherited private property.

5. These proposals will have absolutely no impact on crime. Only TWO murders have been committed with legally obtained and registered NFA items since the National Firearms Act was passed in 1934. This is simply NOT a problem. Criminal do not spend the $300 to $1000 to form an NFA trust, and then pay the ATF $200 for a tax stamp for each NFA transfer, and then submit a Form 1 or Form 4, and then wait 6 to 12 months for approval. Nor do they pay the $10,000 or more for a machine gun, nor the upwards of $2000 for a suppressor. And finally, neither do they complete the transfer with a local SOT Federal Firearms License holder before committing a crime. The already existing regulations provide layers and layers of barriers for law-abiding citizens to navigate, which criminals simply not going to attempt.

These proposals have nothing to do with curbing gun violence and have everything to do with forcing law abiding citizens to navigate a byzantine bureaucracy to obtain NFA items or surrender their right to possess them. There are already numerous laws regulating the transfer and possession of NFA items. We simply do not want or need more. I oppose these proposed regulation changes in their entirety and I ask the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives to retract this proposal completely and indefinitely.

It is a ridiculous proposal on its face, and it is an insult to liberty, personal security, and above all, the trustworthiness with which you view the american citizenry.

[sjfcontrol]

My comment:

I oppose these proposed regulation changes (docket ATF 41P) for the following reasons:

1. I do not need to prove my citizenship to vote or to obtain and file a federal tax return. Any standard of identification good enough for voting and tax filing should be good enough for obtaining an NFA item. Voting improperly is as dangerous an activity as any, and if the federal standards already in place for the exercise of my voting rights are sufficient, then they should be sufficient for the NFA process.

2. The Chief Law Enforcement Officer (CLEO) certification goes back to before the existence of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). It creates a totally arbitrary system under which the local CLEO can prevent NFA purchases based on his/her own personal political agenda. Political bias should NEVER be the deciding factor in determining who gets to exercise their rights, and who does not. The only rule change which makes sense—both in regulatory terms, law-enforcement terms, and in fiscal terms—is to place NICS in charge of approving NFA purchases.

3. Until BATFE can prove that criminal elements are already using trusts and LLCs to obtain NFA items, requiring fingerprints and photographs of every “responsible person” on an NFA trust, or part of a corporation or LLC carrying NFA items, is an unacceptable invasion of privacy. Federal databases are already notoriously porous. Even national security agencies are unable to prevent malicious hacking from accessing their information. If the personal information contained in the NFA database was ever compromised illegally, or obtained by the local, state, or federal government inappropriately, it could be abused. These rule changes presume guilt and leave it to the applicant to prove innocence. That is fundamentally UNAMERICAN! If a person is criminal suspect, then their information should remain private and it should not be forcibly taken from them during the exercise of a constitutional right.

4. NFA trusts are used to secure the inheritance process, so that a child may inherit the assets of the trust from a deceased parent. They are invaluable tools for estate planning, and their beneficiaries should not have to submit to these violations of their civil liberties simply because they have inherited private property.

5. These proposals will have absolutely no impact on crime. Only TWO murders have been committed with legally obtained and registered NFA items since the National Firearms Act was passed in 1934. This is simply NOT a problem. Criminal do not spend the $300 to $1000 to form an NFA trust, and then pay the ATF $200 for a tax stamp for each NFA transfer, and then submit a Form 1 or Form 4, and then wait 6 to 12 months for approval. Nor do they pay the $10,000 or more for a machine gun, nor the upwards of $2000 for a suppressor. And finally, neither do they complete the transfer with a local SOT Federal Firearms License holder before committing a crime. The already existing regulations provide layers and layers of barriers for law-abiding citizens to navigate, which criminals simply not going to attempt.

These proposals have nothing to do with curbing gun violence and have everything to do with forcing law abiding citizens to navigate a byzantine bureaucracy to obtain NFA items or surrender their right to possess them. There are already numerous laws regulating the transfer and possession of NFA items. We simply do not want or need more. I oppose these proposed regulation changes in their entirety and I ask the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives to retract this proposal completely and indefinitely.

It is a ridiculous proposal on its face, and it is an insult to liberty, personal security, and above all, the trustworthiness with which you view the american citizenry.

Don't you mean if he's NOT a suspect?

[The Annoyed Man]

Don't you mean if he's NOT a suspect?

yes, and that is a typo.

[locke_n_load]

Implementation delayed at least a year, great job for those who submitted comments!

http://americansilencerassociation.com/ ... te-on-41p/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


"In all, there were 9,504 comments received on the Federal Register. Of those, around 1,000 were disqualified for vulgarity, anonymity, or non-applicability. As you know, the overwhelming majority of comments were in opposition to the proposed CLEO signoff requirement. The ASA comment can be viewed here: ASA Comment

The standard timeframe for a final ruling is generally six months after the close of the comment period. However, because of the overwhelming amount of comments submitted, the final ruling will likely take at least a year to be issued. This is because each qualified comment must be responded to by the ATF in writing. With nearly 8,500 qualified comments, this will take quite some time."

[TheDude]

Implementation delayed at least a year, great job for those who submitted comments!

http://americansilencerassociation.com/ ... te-on-41p/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That is awesome news. I need to do a Form 1 for a SBR now that Eforms is working and this is delayed. My friend just got a Form 1 and Form 4 back in 4 months using the Eforms method. Paper is still running around a year.