Call to arms! Defund ATF 41P! It's coming

[Mike_from_Texas]

You really think the trust that Silencer Shop provides to their customers is something that could shrink their consumer demographic by risking them being put in jail?

Yes. Actually that trust SPECIFICALLY has been mentioned by ATF as "suspicious".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mike_from_Texas]

I bought peace of mind. I knew I was going to acquire enough of these things that I would want to take proper steps to protect my investment. If I was only buying 1 or 2 cans, then maybe the math doesn't work the same. With almost 20 items on my schedule A and $4000 in tax stamps, Sean's fee seems pretty small. Especially since I usually bug him with questions every time I see him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

^^^^^ Yep, this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[00ChevyScott]

Yes. Actually that trust SPECIFICALLY has been mentioned by ATF as "suspicious".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's probably marked as suspicious because it's the most popular one, and there are probably a bunch of idiots out there using someone elses trust that had their name on it because they copied it instead of paying for it to have their own information on it. I find it highly​ unlikely that the trust itself is suspect.

 

[35Remington]

I find it highly​ unlikely that the trust itself is suspect.

Thank you for showering us with your authoritative opinion. I will save this post for presentation in a courtroom. Please provide a name and address so those with shitt.y SilencerShop trusts can send you postcards from prison.

 

[Tejano Scott]

I don't think anyone is going to jail over the trust they used. I think the real bottom line is will your trust protect your, and your beneficiaries, right to possess these items when changes in the law occur.

 

[Tejano Scott]

But just to be safe, buy some soap on a rope.

 

[breakingcontact]

Yes. Actually that trust SPECIFICALLY has been mentioned by ATF as "suspicious".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Then why are they approving/allowing them?

I'd like to see a source where the ATF describes them as suspicious and to see their opinion on other trusts.

 

[Mike_from_Texas]

ATF doesn't approve trusts.

35 Remington posted what was said about them in this thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[breakingcontact]

ATF doesn't approve trusts.

35 Remington posted what was said about them in this thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From my *limited* understanding, the ATF can indeed reject (not approve) a trust and/or forms filed on their trust.

Somehow missed 35 Rems post.

Thanks.

I see disadvantages to both gun store trusts and custom trusts. Just different potential pitfalls.

It is good people are looking into the details of the trusts though I'd just recommend they do so either way.

 

[35Remington]

The problems with the SilencerShop and SilencerCo (I have not personally read the SiCo at length but understand it to be substantially similar) trusts have been posted here, and are discussed online at length.

The bottom line is this: they represent the low-hanging fruit. With one fell swoop, the ATF could affect thousands upon thousands of NFA owners by deciding these trusts are invalid. It would be a power play for the ATF, because they could jeopardize ownership of many people with comparatively little effort. Prior approval does not affirm the legitimacy of a trust. That's not how this works.

If long-term NFA ownership is something you're interested in, you'd be well served to buy the most bad ass, robust trust you can find, with an attorney to back it up. Fwiw, a competent lawyer can draft a trust amendment for anyone who already owns NFA items under one of these deficient trusts.

That's how I see it.

 

[breakingcontact]

The problems with the SilencerShop and SilencerCo (I have not personally read the SiCo at length but understand it to be substantially similar) trusts have been posted here, and are discussed online at length.

The bottom line is this: they represent the low-hanging fruit. With one fell swoop, the ATF could affect thousands upon thousands of NFA owners by deciding these trusts are invalid. It would be a power play for the ATF, because they could jeopardize ownership of many people with comparatively little effort. Prior approval does not affirm the legitimacy of a trust. That's not how this works.

If long-term NFA ownership is something you're interested in, you'd be well served to buy the most bad ass, robust trust you can find, with an attorney to back it up. Fwiw, a competent lawyer can draft a trust amendment for anyone who already owns NFA items under one of these deficient trusts.

That's how I see it.

Not refuting that and nothing wrong with seeing it that way.

I think that is the precise business model for those providing such trusts. They are entry level to get people access to NFA trust/items.

The business model for lawyers doing more customized trusts is different so I'm not surprised to hear the criticism of the simpler trusts. However those trusts were once written by a lawyer too and have been used successfully a very large amount of times.

ATF can do whatever they like. Good advice to consider having one of these trusts amended but I don't see how they are deficient by current standards and predicting the future capricious actions of ATF is anyone's guess.

Thanks for the info. Kind of a tricky issue to research. Gun trust lawyers say they are no good...partly because they sell a different product.

However, ATF lawyer states such trusts have issues...yet they allow/approve of them/purchases made with them.

I'll research elsewhere but thanks again.

I'm not hearing much push back from the NFA community on 41P. Not sure if people have just learned to accept it as an eventuality of if they think it will get kicked down the road again.

 

[SC-Texas]

So who has contacted their senators?

who has passed the info along to everyone they know and rallied them to contact their senators?

 

[35Remington]

Gun trust lawyers say they are no good...partly because they sell a different product.

While I do agree with you that there are certainly NFA lawyers criticizing weak trusts out of at least some desire to drum up business, it does not take a law degree to understand language like:

"[t]he trust permits any trustee to sell your guns without your consent" and

"[t]he Trust permits trustees to take away your gun rights, (from within the trust) if in their opinion you can’t handle your own affairs"

spells bad news.

 

[ScorpionHunter]

So who has contacted their senators?

who has passed the info along to everyone they know and rallied them to contact their senators?

I have. I need 41p pushed back long enough to get a Griffin Optimus and maybe a SiCo Hybrid.

 

[Mike_from_Texas]

The fact remains that NFA is not a cheap endeavor any way you look at it.

If you plan to stay in the game and acquire multiple items I thinks it's just asinine to be a cheap ass to try and save $100 on a potentially invalid trust.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[00ChevyScott]

While I do agree with you that there are certainly NFA lawyers criticizing weak trusts out of at least some desire to drum up business, it does not take a law degree to understand language like:

"[t]he trust permits any trustee to sell your guns without your consent" and

"[t]he Trust permits trustees to take away your gun rights, (from within the trust) if in their opinion you can’t handle your own affairs"

spells bad news.

And again, I fail to see how those shortcomings could ever affect someone who is the only trustee on the trust.

 

[Mreed911]

And again, I fail to see how those shortcomings could ever affect someone who is the only trustee on the trust.

So what's the plan for what happens to the weapons when you die?

 

[Shady]

If I am dead what do I care what happens to them ?

I guess if you had kids you might want to make sure they get them. I don't have a wife or kids.

 

[Tejano Scott]

That's Shady!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Pilgrim]

Done. Letter sent.