FN Herstal Firearms banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,531 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
We originally published this guest post by Kel Whelan in September. As we approach the closing date for public comments on this proposed rule change for the transfer NFA items, we felt it was important to revisit the story. Next, we are going to give you some points to consider if you are planning on commenting on the Federal Register site..



I’ve known Kel Whelan for almost as long as I’ve been active on the internet. Based on his background I asked him to write a guest post for SSD on the Obama administration’s recent announcement regarding a change in policy on NFA Trust and Corporate Transfers for NFA items. It’s gotten a lot of folks’ hackles up and by extension made the small industry of producers of these items a bit nervous. So why Kel? That’s simple. He shares his point of view freely and is honest about what he sees. Additionally, I don’t personally know anyone who is closer to the issue. He is really into this whole situation. For example, he once led a class-action lawsuit attempting for the removal of the CLEO signoff and has dealt with NFA firearms and the corresponding laws exclusively throughout his career. And finally, I see him on the road quite a bit and he has this uncanny ability to know at least one good restaurant in each of the 50 states as well as some foreign countries. That alone can be critical.
So, with no further ado, here are Kel Whelan’s thoughts on last week’s announcement.



First off: nothing yet. Because no law change has been enacted at this time.
But, this past Thursday morning, the Obama White House announced an executive action that they claim would close an alleged loophole that allows individuals to obtain items such as machineguns, short barreled rifles, and silencers (known as “Title II” or “NFA” firearms, as they fall under this part of the National Firearms Act) without submitting to any background check. What the President has really done is not any law change that goes into effect immediately, but has instead put pressure on the Department of Justice to write and accelerate a proposed rule change regarding how trusts and corporations are transferred NFA items.


If you’re not familiar with the process of buying, say, a short-barreled-rifle, and why someone would purchase them under the name of a corporation or trust instead of in their own name, a moment of history on the process. Ever since people have been legally buying and selling machineguns, silencers, and other NFA items in compliance with the transfer laws set in place since 1934, the process has traditionally been established and understood. To begin the transfer process, an individual pays the seller for the item, gets a Form 4 (the application to transfer the firearm from seller to buyer – think of it something akin to a car title change) from the seller, goes to the local Police Chief or Sheriff to get fingerprint cards done, staples passport photos to the form, pays a $200 transfer tax fee, and has a statement on the rear of the form signed by the Chief Law Enforcement Officer or “CLEO” with jurisdiction over the individual’s area of residence.

Read more: What The Recent ?Executive Action? on NFA Trust and Corporate Transfers Means To You - Soldier Systems
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,157 Posts
Every time I read an article about this proposed rule change it just pisses me off! I'm still waiting on 3 suppressors and a short barrel shotgun to arrive to my FFL via form 3 transfers.....that stuff better get here by Saturday or else.......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
980 Posts
Just ordered my third can this past week. I am glad I bought from an online store that had them in stock. Two of three checks have been cashed by the BATF.

I am on the fense about an SBR AR15 lower at a LGS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,238 Posts
Every time I read an article about this proposed rule change it just pisses me off! I'm still waiting on 3 suppressors and a short barrel shotgun to arrive to my FFL via form 3 transfers.....that stuff better get here by Saturday or else.......

Completely off-topic but your new avatar is awesome
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,024 Posts
Just ordered my third can this past week. I am glad I bought from an online store that had them in stock. Two of three checks have been cashed by the BATF.

I am on the fense about an SBR AR15 lower at a LGS.
Just buy a lower to Form 1 or Form 1 one of your rifles you already have. You can do it yourself online.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
980 Posts
Just buy a lower to Form 1 or Form 1 one of your rifles you already have. You can do it yourself online.
Ok, thanks for the advice.

Would there be an advantage if the LGS happens to be a Class 2 SOT and have them do the SBR on a lower and then have me do a form 4?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,521 Posts
Every time I read an article about this proposed rule change it just pisses me off! I'm still waiting on 3 suppressors and a short barrel shotgun to arrive to my FFL via form 3 transfers.....that stuff better get here by Saturday or else.......

Brother er I hear you-- I share this with you to encourage you, my 5 suppressor form 4- just arrived this week and my sbr ps90 form 1 will go out before dec 9. Just breath and wait. In the mean time do everything you can to get all the forms together and be ready to jump when they come in. Hang in there buddy. I was in your shoes just yesterday. Breath
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,625 Posts
The American Silencer Association has been very kind to share some points to consider when commenting on the so called 41P, a Notice of Action for Machine Guns, Destructive Devices and Certain Other Firearms; Background Checks for Responsible Persons of a Corporation, Trust or Other Legal Entity With Respect To Making or Transferring a Firearm,

· 41P does nothing to address crime
o NFA items rarely used in crime
· Increased wait times for gun owners
o NFA Branch already understaffed for current load
· In the original abstract, ATF published that they sought to “eliminate the requirement for a certification signed by the CLEO”
o Change in stance is politically motivated, not fact based
· CLEO signoffs:
o Subjective
o Often politically motivated
o Create de facto bans in areas across the country
· Undue burden on Law Enforcement
o Overworked and underfunded
o No compensation for processing forms
· Confusing definition and designation of RPs
o What if a beneficiary is a minor?
o What if a beneficiary lives in a restricted state or jurisdiction?
o What if a beneficiary lives in a legal state, but a jurisdiction where CLEOs refuse to sign?
· Inaccurate time and cost estimates
o Increased burden on individuals purchasing passport photos and fingerprints on trusts – surpassing ATF estimates
o Additionally, ATF estimates $8 and 50 minutes for passport photos and $24 and 60 minutes for fingerprints
· ATF underestimates number of individuals in trusts and legal entities
o They estimate two people per trust

Some additional resources from the American Silencer Association include their stance on 41P: americansilencerassociation.com/american-silencer-association-statement-on-atf-41p. They’ve also prepared a page on recommendations on how to comment against 41P: americansilencerassociation.com/how-to-comment-against-atf-41p.

SOURCE: Soldier Systems
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts
Yea I really gotta get that comment done this week.
Posted mine yesterday. Not sure if it will do any good other than made me feel better for a few minutes AND probably has me on one of THOSE lists. :icon_shh:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,238 Posts
Posted mine yesterday. Not sure if it will do any good other than made me feel better for a few minutes AND probably has me on one of THOSE lists. :icon_shh:

The CLEO sign-off requirement is infuriating especially considering that it is a completely unreasonable requirement for responsible persons in a trust/corp. document. Writing my comment will hopefully be a therapeutic experience as well.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top