Re: Full auto glock, legally.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: timelinex</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: savage168USAF</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> after research i can see its really not worth the hassle by any means. </div></div>
You must not have done much research. It's not just "not worth the hassle," it's also a very serious crime. There are NO full auto, transferable Glocks. </div></div>
So out of curiosity I just looked into this and it seems like the application is much less serious than I thought. It seems like you can pay 150 for 3 years to become a ffl and 500 a year for your SOT. Add in another 200 and you now have rights to manufacture all the above. I know the major stipulation is you have intent to sell, but that isn't specific to how many you have to sell. As long as you do something like sell a suppressor or something once a year( even if you sell it at your dealer price just to sell it) your fully legal?
For anyone that thinks this isn't allowed because its not the 'honest' reason for the licensing....This is just as deceiving as using a trust for a suppressor to bypass the individual hassles... The ability to use a trust is a loophole, and is just as deceptive in what your actual plans are for the suppressor. As long as you follow the letter of the law, you are not at risk.
That almost sounds too good to be true..... I'm sure the amount of $$ saved from dealer pricing on everything from reloading supplies to guns and ammo... it would more than pay for all the fees for many people.
Many people get hung up on the $2700 state department fee. The caveat to the fee ]is that you only need to pay that fee if you sell to the military/government or export..... Obviously you will not be. Some people like to feel extra safe and get this certification, but many legitimate companies have confirmed with the ATF that it is not needed if your product doesn't get exported.
Too much of a hassle for me, but interesting nonetheless. </div></div>
It is certainly not the same thing as using a trust, which is expressly provided for in the NFA.
Becoming an FFL without having a legitimate intent to engage in business is not the same thing. If you are not in the business of selling/manufacturing firearms for livelihood and profit, you are not eligible to have that type of FFL under the law.
What that would mean is that if your FFL were revoked, you'd be in possession of contraband. What would you do with it then?
If paying the $$$ was all that I had to do to have an FFL (even if not the SOT), I would have done it a long time ago, and so would a lot of other firearms enthusiasts. Unfortunately, there is no "hobbyist" FFL. I wish there were--it'd be a great idea. But there isn't. </div></div>
What proof is there that the purpose of the FFL is not for profit? Once again, you would indeed have to sell something here or there. But I'm sure many people, sell off parts of their gun collection every year anyways, to make room for other stuff. Spend a couple hours making a website with a couple items and thats all the proof you need. I fully understand that you might lose your boys scouts badge of honesty, since in reality your purpose is to add to your personal collection. However the point is that if someone wanted to, they could, and without you telling the ATF that that is your purpose, they would never know.
The trust option is provided as you said, but its not provided to be used to get around the fingerprinting/CLEO sign off. However thats what people use it for, hence deceiving. A trust generally has the purpose of passing items/money on to benificiaries... most commonly associated with when you pass way. It is NOT made for the purpose that people use it to acquire ATF items. It is a 'loophole' sort of speak.
