ATF-41P Final Rule

[Younggun]

Doubt it.


This "win" will only lead to more BS.


Sent from my HAL 9000

 

[Mreed911]

I would hope after the dust settles on this new rule that they see there is no need for prints/photos of everyone with every new item. Maybe if a new member to a Trust or such then a new set of prints/photos .

Not likely. That will require a rule change, with appropriate comment period, publication in federal register, etc.

 

[Shorts]

You wrote:

" the named person can safely inherit/take possession of the deceased NFA items "

Beneficiaries inherit.

Ah, copy, I see the confusion. Then Example 1 isn't inaccurate. ETA: The point, it's a total load of crap for Trusts.

 

[Renegade]

Ah, copy, I see the confusion. Then Example 1 isn't inaccurate.

Your understanding of the process is incorrect.

 

[Shorts]

Your understanding of the process is incorrect.

Eh? Ok.
I'll come back to this tonight. Gotta run out for a bit but I'm interested in understanding what you mean. Thanks.

 

[kozmic]

Pg 26: "More than a dozen commenters stated that they supported the proposed rule in its entirety." (Seriously? lol)

Sry... I just had to laugh at this one... what, like "13" commenters agreed with the rule change as written? Was that the authors, themselves?

At any rate, while I see the whole 41p effort/issue as a negative in general, elimination of the CLEO sign-off is a huge win - this clarifies the authority of CLEO's and removes ability for arbitrary denial of otherwise lawfully owned/possessed NFA weapons by those CLEO's with personal bias against such. This completely back-fired on the authors, whose originally proposed primary purpose for 41p was to add the CLEO sign-off to the trust process.

eta: Oh, and I cannot state how much I love seeing sections from my (non-form letter) submitted comment entered ("quoted") into the final rule document...

 

[Shady]

the nfa Item needs to be in control by the owner / allowed person on a trust. If it has a trigger lock then the person with the key to the lock is in control. If its a suppressor drop it in a cheep lockable "cash box" and drop it in your buds safe. Its not in his control because he does not have access without the key to the box.

A Trustee or CoTrustee, not a Bene.


An NFA item must stay with the registered owner or a person named on the trust, no?
Not about use, but possession. Even if the person is not prohibited from owning firearms, it still cannot be left behind in their control unless the registered owner is there. ETA: Well...if it's paranoia, good I guess that the scenario is unrealistic.

 

[SC-Texas]

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[SC-Texas]

Has the 180 day count down started on the new rule ?

Is my understanding the hundred eighty day period has not started. Unless it was recently published in the Federal Register

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[SC-Texas]

I would hope after the dust settles on this new rule that they see there is no need for prints/photos of everyone with every new item. Maybe if a new member to a Trust or such then a new set of prints/photos .

Has one reason we need to fight this role and get it defunded by Congress.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[SC-Texas]

Doubt it.


This "win" will only lead to more BS.


Sent from my HAL 9000

This was not a win in any way shape or form


I'm editing this to clarify that I understand that young gun is not calling this expanded intrusion by the government into everybody's personal lives a win

 

[SC-Texas]

My thoughts on what people are calling a win.



You do not negotiate with terrorist.

These people want 1 thing. They want to confiscate all firearms. Everytime you compromise you get one step closer their ultimate goal. They will never compromise with you.


Do blacks accept a little racism in government policies and attitudes? Is that alright?

Do women's equal rights people accept a little compromise on sexist policies?

Do the homosexuals accept a little homophobia is government policies? Is that acceptable?

Do any of these groups compromise when it comes to their rights?

Why are we willing to? Think about that.

The people that are calling this a win are the guys that get buttsekkxed and then after tell everyone it was as bad as they thought it would be.

Sure. Obunghole agreed to no cLeo notification. Because of the efforts and success of Todd Rathner in getting shall certify passed nationwide. We would have had shall certify next session.

So we essentially got nothing we wouldn't get anyway.

We did get more government. Intrusion. It is just now everybody's lives instead of a few hours. Thank you everyone. We also got more government intrusion and friction in the process for the vast majority of people when it statistically is not warranted





Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[SC-Texas]

This is like the guys who called the 1994 AWB a win because we had a 10 year sunset.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[tmperez]

We also got more government intrusion and friction in the process for the vast majority of people when it statistically is not warranted

This exactly

And I dont understand how anyone can think this is a win. IMO no one should be filing individually anyway, unless you live alone and have no family. I dont have much confidence that congress is going to de fund this. I have emailed John Cornyn many times and a few times I got a canned reply about the green tip ammo ban, really frustrating. I broke the bank a few weeks back because I knew this crap was going to pass, ended up buying 3 new cans, filed 2 stripped lowers and an SBS.

I just dont get it, its disingenuous to say this is about "gun safety" (to use the parlance of our times) its just a dig a the most responsible gun owners in the country, anyone that doesnt see that is naive.

 

[Tejano Scott]

I'm pretty sure YG is saying the same thing, hence the "quotation marks" around the word "win". Still very surprised to see Renegade, of all people, keep referring to a unilateral Obama issued executive order adding new requirements to the NFA process as a "win". It's like a rape victim who wasn't sodomized calling the experience a "win" cause it could have been worse.

 

[SC-Texas]

Agreed he is. I apologize if my post insinuated that yg believes that this is a win.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[SC-Texas]

Basically they threw the great majority of the NFA group under the bus to get rid of something that we were going to get rid of the next session anyway.



Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[SC-Texas]

I find it amazing that some members of our community are willing to compromise our rights and accept a little bit of discrimination against us when that would never happen in the black community, the womens equal rights community or the homosexual community.

Heck. Look at the abortion rights community. They accept us? Absolutely not. They are fighting tooth and nail and cord for the right to sell amputated baby parts.

If you think about it, and look at the actions of CAIR, this is an even accepted in the Islamic community.

But here we are, the gun and NFA community, and there's a group of us that are okay with it.

Go along to get along.

I kerp hesring "Let's compromise, give them a little bit. Then they'll leave us alone."

But that is not how it has ever worked.

As I said before, the only reason Obama gave in on the Cleo sign off was because Todd Ratner's group have been so successful in getting shot certify pass across the nation and Obama figured there would be a certain group in our community that would accept this and go along quietly with his long term plans.

 

[duckknot]

So what can we do SC? How do we change the way things are going?

I agree with you but I see so much division within the gun community that I am hesitant to say that anything will change!

sent from: wait, where am I!?

 

[seeker_two]

This was as much a win for gun owners the way the Mitt Romney nomination was a win for Constitutional conservatism.....