M14 Forum banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,346 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
http://blog.princelaw.com/2014/05/1...or-manufacture-of-new-machineguns-for-trusts/

Cliffs:
-In order to buy restricted firearms in the US (short barreled shotguns/rifles, silencers, and machineguns) people will establish a trust to own the item.
-The ATF was asked to provide clarification on whether or not a background check was required on a trustee if taking possession of a restricted item which was owned by a trust.
-ATF said yes, because a trust is not a person
-But wait, the Hughes Amendment (1986) to the Gun Control Act (1968) states that new machine guns may not be transferred to or possessed by a person.


Subsequently, hundreds of registration forms have been submitted (http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1624460_.html, see page 9 for approval). These forms were APPROVED by the ATF, which is frantically trying to get the approved tax stamps back.








Update:

I've been informed that one of my gunsmith's customers (Mr Ground Zero) received his stamp and converted an AR in early August.

His lawyer has opined that the ATF is VERY CAREFULLY choosing their words as they contact those people that they have issued stamps to. His take is that they are trying to intimidate people into surrendering their stamps and any MGs that have been manufactured since those stamps were received. No words stating that the stamp holders MUST surrender were used in the audio recording posted here, it has merely been implied.

No certified letters have been received by Mr Ground Zero as is required by law when ATF ORDERS an FFL to surrender stamps or firearms. No other such official communications have taken place, either. Simply a phone call, which does not constitute an official communication. It sounds just like the telephone games IRS plays with people trying to entrap them into admitting to tax fraud.

This one individual has already contacted his congressman and is working to provide the information requested by the congressman's office to verify this complaint, which may be the prelude to congressional action on ATF making a policy change that required congressional action to be legal.

ATF is scurrying around trying to cover this mess up like a cat with diarrhea, and they are not doing a very good job of things as everything they've done has uncovered more **** they don't want exposed.
 

·
Cranky Old Vietnam Vet
Joined
·
10,663 Posts
Subsequently, hundreds of registration forms have been submitted (http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1624460_.html, see page 9 for approval). These forms were APPROVED by the ATF, which is frantically trying to get the approved tax stamps back.

I'm curious about the statement that 'hundreds of registration forms...were APPROVED by the ATF'?
What is the source of that statement?
An approval of any 'form' has been taking much longer than the time-frame here...
GI3

CAVman in WYoming
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,346 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I'm curious about the statement that 'hundreds of registration forms...were APPROVED by the ATF'?
What is the source of that statement?
An approval of any 'form' has been taking much longer than the time-frame here...
GI3

CAVman in WYoming
E-filed forms have been getting approved fairly quickly. The source was the AR15.com thread itself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,684 Posts
No. No. No. Only way a post '86 gun was approved in any way shape or form was as a post dealer sample. Trusts and corporations can posess a post '86 machine gun provided they have the requisite FFL and pay the Special Occupancy Tax and have the machine gun on a form 1. A form 1 is non-transferrable. And the machine gun must be destroyed or sold to another FFL when the Trusts or corporation is dissolved. This is not new. Hell this is common place. There was a video posted a week back with a li'l girl shooting a NFA Bushmaster ACR before running a shotgun quite well... how many ACR's were made before '86 do you think? None. Daddy has an FFL/SOT and pays a yearly tax to support her 3 gunning. This is not new. Idiots on ARF.Com think this is new?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,346 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 · (Edited)
No. No. No. Only way a post '86 gun was approved in any way shape or form was as a post dealer sample. Trusts and corporations can posess a post '86 machine gun provided they have the requisite FFL and pay the Special Occupancy Tax and have the machine gun on a form 1. A form 1 is non-transferrable. And the machine gun must be destroyed or sold to another FFL when the Trusts or corporation is dissolved. This is not new. Hell this is common place. There was a video posted a week back with a li'l girl shooting a NFA Bushmaster ACR before running a shotgun quite well... how many ACR's were made before '86 do you think? None. Daddy has an FFL/SOT and pays a yearly tax to support her 3 gunning. This is not new. Idiots on ARF.Com think this is new?
What's new is that the ATF provided clarification under the GCA that a trust is not a person, which is why an individual has to have a NICS check run when they accept an NFA item which is owned by a trust.

Because a trust is not a person (according to the GCA), and because a trust is not included on the list of prohibited entities on the Hughes amendment, but is included in the list of entities under the NFA, a trust should, according to the letter of the law, be approved for a post-86 manufacturable machine gun.

This is completely different from the situation you're talking about.
 

·
Cranky Old Vietnam Vet
Joined
·
10,663 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,346 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Update

Update on the ATF-approved POST-86 MG thread on ARFCOM.

Scroll all the way down in the OP and...

I've been informed that one of my gunsmith's customers (Mr Ground Zero) received his stamp and converted an AR in early August.

His lawyer has opined that the ATF is VERY CAREFULLY choosing their words as they contact those people that they have issued stamps to. His take is that they are trying to intimidate people into surrendering their stamps and any MGs that have been manufactured since those stamps were received. No words stating that the stamp holders MUST surrender were used in the audio recording posted here, it has merely been implied.

No certified letters have been received by Mr Ground Zero as is required by law when ATF ORDERS an FFL to surrender stamps or firearms. No other such official communications have taken place, either. Simply a phone call, which does not constitute an official communication. It sounds just like the telephone games IRS plays with people trying to entrap them into admitting to tax fraud.

This one individual has already contacted his congressman and is working to provide the information requested by the congressman's office to verify this complaint, which may be the prelude to congressional action on ATF making a policy change that required congressional action to be legal.

ATF is scurrying around trying to cover this mess up like a cat with diarrhea, and they are not doing a very good job of things as everything they've done has uncovered more **** they don't want exposed.
 

·
Cranky Old Vietnam Vet
Joined
·
10,663 Posts
Who voted for the ATF? Where do they get their authority from? How can a government agency make you a criminal by drafting a letter?
You Did!
(ok, maybe you personally did not...but somebody elected your Congress-person!)
It's not just the BATF(E)(M)...you apparently missed the E for Explosives and M for Marijuana!?
GI2
WE, WE---Have the Government WE Deserve!
How many guys here on the Forum...say something like: I don't vote, It only encourages them! (har-dee har har!)
It is Not just about Guns and the 'ATF'...
It's totally across the board!
We let Congress pass an extremely broad, feel-good federal law...that specifically states THE(alphabet)AGENCY gets to Fill-In-The Blanks!
'We Have Met The Enemy---And He Is Us!'
GI5

CAVman in WYoming
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top