MASSIVE new ATF NFA Change

[stevenc23]

Did not see this posted elsewhere

It was noticed that the ATF has added to their FAQ section on their eforms website this:

Q. If I am the registered owner of a NFA item, can someone else shoot my item in my presence?

No. Only Responsible Person(s) listed on the approved registration may have physical or constructive possession of the NFA item.

 

[HOOFER]

Your 12 year old kid can’t drive your truck down a dirt road with you in the passenger seat either………

I’ve never seen an ATF agent at a range checking for felons I can’t see them doing much about this

Definatley Interesting though.

 

[smacha538]

@NFAJohn

 

[redneckbmxer24]

This shit is getting nuts. My brother or friend can’t shoot my rifle with my can on it while I’m standing right there? Get fucked. Nobody has taken possession of a damn thing.

 

[Rubicon Precision]

Your 12 year old kid can’t drive your truck down a dirt road with you in the passenger seat either………

On your own dirt road, you absolutely can.

 

[Lowlight]

 

[brazz04]

It's already been covered in a follow up email that this is not correct, but remains on the site. I'll try and find the email. @fromtheguncounter posted it earlier today on instagram.

 

[stefan73]

Well,doesn't this just suck.

 

[BurtG]

Good.

Make more people see all these laws are bs and more will ignore Mala Prohibitum laws

 

[BurtG]

Your 12 year old kid can’t drive your truck down a dirt road with you in the passenger seat either………

I’ve never seen an ATF agent at a range checking for felons I can’t see them doing much about this

Definatley Interesting though.

But I can let whoever I want borrow my vehicle

 

[Lowlight]

If it remains on their site, they will use it,

Even if they say, Oops, not correct, once they nail you for it they will say, see it says right here, you broke the law.

Until it's removed, it's the new rule cause someone will try enforcing it

When was the last time you moved through TSA they have no clue either doesn't mean I haven't been told, "That is a silencer; you can't have that."

 

[redneckbmxer24]

Good.

Make more people see all these laws are bs and more will ignore Mala Prohibitum laws

I wonder how long until they start drilling that third hole

 

[LRI]

View attachment 8057562

"Possession"

If the issue were pushed, the right amount of scheckels to a good lawyer ought to solve this. I'm sure we all have better things to spend our money on though.

We think of ourselves as free men. Remember that...

 

[Lowlight]

When was the last time these lawsuits actually worked on the individual level?

Sure the big groups that do this for a living are great, they fight and get injunctions, but the individual is often the first causality of these laws

 

[cas6969]

I’m not arguing one side or the other, but with something like that what law do they charge you with breaking?

Even as a more general broader question, all these ATF rulings that aren’t actually laws, is there some blanket catch all bullshit they charge you with?

(Yes, I know your life is ruined in the process either way)

 

[Lowlight]

trespassing

 

[FUNCTIONAL]

Can people stop asking fucking questions?

 

[BravoSector1]

Trust

 

[J. W.]

Can people stop asking fucking questions?

At least to the effing ATF, anyway. It's like the kids in school that said "teacher, aren't you going to give us any homework?"

 

[J. W.]

Trust

What about minors? Can you add a minor to a trust?

 

[stevenc23]

From the lawyer that posted video:

"There are only two possible explanations. One, whoever wrote this FAQ made a mistake or two that this is a massive new ruling from the ATF that we are going to be hearing about soon"

I am guessing it is explanation number 2

 

[BravoSector1]

Absolutely. Anyone can be a primary, or trustee, and co-trustee. Not a lawyer and not one in your state so they can provide better information. Any and all types of inanimate objects from firearms to thousands of acres of land are placed in trusts. There may be a state law regarding possession and or use (Idaho, 10 or older is GTG for hunting purposes). NFA items can be used by any member on your trust as long as they can legally possess and or handle (guardian/parent present) a firearm. A Form 5 tax free application can be completed to transfer NFA items to heirs. The trust streamlines this process.

I was on active duty for 22 years and had to legally store my NFA items with family members while stationed overseas. Naming them as co-trustees (ATF spells out this process) allowed me to do so. There may be other advantages to having the NFA items belong to a legal "entity" rather than an individual.

 

[Skunk]

I’m not arguing one side or the other, but with something like that what law do they charge you with breaking?

Even as a more general broader question, all these ATF rulings that aren’t actually laws, is there some blanket catch all bullshit they charge you with?

(Yes, I know your life is ruined in the process either way)

Maybe 18 USC Sec 1001, if/after they've made it part of the tax stamp/approval process.

 

[HOOFER]

But I can let whoever I want borrow my vehicle

You can’t let someone without a license borrow it…. Your insurance company probably doesn’t agree with that.

You can’t let your buddy who has a felony you don’t know about handle your gun

you can’t do that with NFA items…never have been. been that way for a long time.

In your presence isn’t borrowing….

Show me someone getting prosecuted for this and I’ll get my tin foil out of the drawer.


People are getting gun shy. And that’s how these non legal “rules” are succeeding their intended purpose.

How many bump stock prosecutions went through?

On your own dirt road, you absolutely can.

Please show me that in writing on a federal level… you local LEO won’t be getting you for this either.

 

[Rubicon Precision]

Please show me that in writing on a federal level… you local LEO won’t be getting you for this either.

You’d need to show me a federal law that says it’s illegal to allow your 12 year old to drive your truck on your property.

 

[Conqueror]

It's already been covered in a follow up email that this is not correct, but remains on the site. I'll try and find the email. @fromtheguncounter posted it earlier today on instagram.

I just looked and they have nothing on their insta that this isn’t real or was a mistake.

 

[Sblzrd65]

Yeah, online trust PDFs go Brrrrr. Seemed like trusts went out of style recently, but this would be a solid reason to set up individual single shot trusts for each.

 

[Maxduty]

The bigger picture is that shops that rent them to the public can now no longer do that legally. IF the wording stands as it is.

 

[FuhQ]

Can people stop asking fucking questions?

Thank you!!! Ironically, someone just posted a thread asking this same question on here a few weeks ago... I think we have some undercover Feds running around... Or maybe just Undercover Fudds... *** Cue Twilight Zone music ***

Either way, you are correct, people need to stop asking questions, and stop asking for permission. THEY work for US, not the other way around. It's high-time the ATF, and the entire government at this point, got reminded of that.

 

[FuhQ]

From the lawyer that posted video:

"There are only two possible explanations. One, whoever wrote this FAQ made a mistake or two that this is a massive new ruling from the ATF that we are going to be hearing about soon"

I am guessing it is explanation number 2

Option 3... They were trying to sneak some shit over on all of us, because they know the Pistol Brace, Bumpstock, FRT, and Frame/Receiver rules are all fixing to eat shit in Federal court because they're unconstitutional at best (not to mention tyrannical and criminal according to the Constitution), and they're fixing to lose a TON of power because they will no longer be allowed to use Chevron Deference, so they were trying to pull some underhanded bullshit hoping nobody would notice while all this other crazy crap is going on, and they got fucking busted immediately!

 

[22lfb]

So if this goes trough i can't, as a foreigner, come to the US to shoot a machine gun at some rental range? Boooo...

 

[FuhQ]

So if this goes trough i can't, as a foreigner, come to the US to shoot a machine gun at some rental range? Boooo...

Basically… Because the machine gun ranges would have to stop allowing people to pay to shoot. It’s bullshit.

 

[jakelly]

You can’t let someone without a license borrow it…. Your insurance company probably doesn’t agree with that.

You can’t let your buddy who has a felony you don’t know about handle your gun

you can’t do that with NFA items…never have been. been that way for a long time.

In your presence isn’t borrowing….

Show me someone getting prosecuted for this and I’ll get my tin foil out of the drawer.


People are getting gun shy. And that’s how these non legal “rules” are succeeding their intended purpose.

How many bump stock prosecutions went through?



Please show me that in writing on a federal level… you local LEO won’t be getting you for this either.

This post sounds like that pen thing from MIB.

 

[HOOFER]

You’d need to show me a federal law that says it’s illegal to allow your 12 year old to drive your truck on your property.

Well feds don’t license you to drive so I guess that was a poor example…. Some states explicitly state it being illegal on private property some don’t. Insurance/ fatality’s. Would be an issue I assure you.

My point Was if they posted on the DMV Q and A page kids couldn't drive motor vehicles without a license.. would it stop you from taking your kid down a dirt road… same choice is yours here.

when they start busting down helicopter hunting businesses for people using their suppressors and rifles and MG/suppressor gun ranges doors. Or require background checks on gun rental ranges ( yes I’m aware some do). Then I’d say be worried

Until then it’s just fear mongering… asking for permission to exercise your freedoms; clarifying to make sure you are in the right. And being tried and found guilty of a crime are all very different things. Is my point.

This post sounds like that pen thing from MIB.

If the MIB are the ATF. And their Q and A on their page is the pen. And the public acting reset/brand new after seeing it is what you mean…. I agree.

Otherwise I missed it.


These posts are why I laugh at most gun owners citing the 2nd amendment and what it’s for… like they were going to do something anyway.

If a Q and A response sets you straight and into their compliance…. What would a police tank patrolling to confiscate or martial law do to you…..

You’d be taking your guns out to your chop saw and turning it into your local office in the morning to not have your way of life interfered with.

That is the real problem.

 

[BurtG]

think we have some undercover Feds running around... Or maybe just Undercover Fudds...

There’s all kinds of feds and paid people like sharia blue on this site.


The feds have no honor. They are praetorian guard / organized crime enforcers

 

[BurtG]

That is the real problem.

Smart people don’t talk about things like that. What they would do how they would do it

Ask some forum or current members how their visits from the feds went

Nail that sticks up gets hammered down

Seems at bundys they backed down idk

 

[J. W.]

So if this goes trough i can't, as a foreigner, come to the US to shoot a machine gun at some rental range? Boooo...

Maybe you and the owner can Ghost the trigger together?

 

[HOOFER]

Smart people don’t talk about things like that. What they would do how they would do it

Ask some forum or current members how their visits from the feds went

Nail that sticks up gets hammered down

Seems at bundys they backed down idk

I’ve seen enough men given the chance to fight, and not.

I’m not naive enough to believe people who have never known it or wanted to would in the masses we think they would.

 

[fdkay]

"Possession"

View attachment 8057568


If the issue were pushed, the right amount of scheckels to a good lawyer ought to solve this. I'm sure we all have better things to spend our money on though.

We think of ourselves as free men. Remember that...

There are other words in that definition that you seemed to have skipped over.
"The state of having, owning, or controlling something"
Per the Texas Penal code:
(39) "Possession" means actual care, custody, control, or management.

Per Black's Law Dictionary:
Having physical control of an object or real property.
There's going to be many other definitions of possession, but they all say, generally the same thing.
Per New York:
POSSESS means to have physical possession or otherwise to exercise dominion or control over tangible property. Thus a person may possess property in either of two ways: First, the person may have physical possession of property by holding it in his or her hand, or by carrying it in or on his or her body or person.

Is it bullshit? Of course it is. There are ranges where you can rent full auto weapons, the ATF has not shut them down (yet).

 

[Tx_Aggie]

There are ranges where you can rent full auto weapons, the ATF has not shut them down (yet).

I think you're right, and this will tell the tale. If the new wording in the FAQ is a mistake, ATF will eventually change it and things will be business as usual with machinegun rental ranges and with dealers who sell NFA items like suppressors.

If the FAQ is indicative of an actual change by ATF it's likely at least partly aimed at the machine gun rental business, and we'll know soon enough when they begin going after these businesses.

 

[fdkay]

I think you're right, and this will tell the tale. If the new wording in the FAQ is a mistake, ATF will eventually change it and things will be business as usual with machinegun rental ranges and with dealers who sell NFA items like suppressors.

If the FAQ is indicative of an actual change by ATF it's likely at least partly aimed at the machine gun rental business, and we'll know soon enough when they begin going after these businesses.

I you were to take this to the extreme, going in to your local retailer and asking to look at an NFA item, as soon as they hand it to you, it is a federal offense.
"Hey, can I take a look at the suppressor in the display case", the only answer they could give would be "look with you eyes, not your hands"

 

[jakelly]

If the MIB are the ATF. And their Q and A on their page is the pen. And the public acting reset/brand new after seeing it is what you mean…. I agree.

Otherwise I missed it.


These posts are why I laugh at most gun owners citing the 2nd amendment and what it’s for… like they were going to do something anyway.

If a Q and A response sets you straight and into their compliance…. What would a police tank patrolling to confiscate or martial law do to you…..

You’d be taking your guns out to your chop saw and turning it into your local office in the morning to not have your way of life interfered with.

That is the real problem.

I probably didn’t paint the picture well enough. I’ll clarify. Your post:

Gives a little context to the discussion.
Lowers my anxiety about the change.
Opens the conversation to different perspectives.
Wears down some alleged “constitutional” ideas.
Seems pretty fair and reasonable.

 

[redhooker]

Not to mention every actor that has fired a full auto or suppressed pistol would have committed a felony, on camera with time stamp.

 

[CoryT]

OK, relax. This stands exactly zero chance of being anything other than a clerical error by some staff weenie. This would shut down about 40% of existing Hollywood movie/tv productions in the US, given the multi-billion dollar size of the industry, there is no way this will work. If this standard of possession/transfer were to be applied to NFA items, it would have to apply to EVERYTHING. Use your imagination to see how totally unworkable that would be.

 

[Aftermath]

OK, relax. This stands exactly zero chance of being anything other than a clerical error by some staff weenie.

But this is EXACTLY the problem with bureaucratic rule. Some staff weenie is making up rules and regulations that will send you to the pokey.

 

[CoryT]

But this is EXACTLY the problem with bureaucratic rule. Some staff weenie is making up rules and regulations that will send you to the pokey.

Well in this case it's not even a rule. It's a bad answer to a question asked that got posted to a Web site that has no more legal authority than this site does.

 

[Aftermath]

Well in this case it's not even a rule. It's a bad answer to a question asked that got posted to a Web site that has no more legal authority than this site does.

I'm with @Lowlight on this one

If it remains on their site, they will use it,

Even if they say, Oops, not correct, once they nail you for it they will say, see it says right here, you broke the law.

Until it's removed, it's the new rule cause someone will try enforcing it

When was the last time you moved through TSA they have no clue either doesn't mean I haven't been told, "That is a silencer; you can't have that."

 

[Fig]

If it remains on their site, they will use it,

Even if they say, Oops, not correct, once they nail you for it they will say, see it says right here, you broke the law.

Until it's removed, it's the new rule cause someone will try enforcing it

When was the last time you moved through TSA they have no clue either doesn't mean I haven't been told, "That is a silencer; you can't have that."

Only it's not a law, and is not even a regulation. It's a bureaucrat's interpretation only, and the bump stock ruling makes that interpretation, unsupported by actual law, illegal. Not saying that the ATF won't arrest you and charge you for committing a non-crime causing you massive inconvenience and stealing your money into their legal system, but you cannot be charged with a crime for doing something that is not specifically prohibited by law, QED.

 

[FUNCTIONAL]

Only it's not a law, and is not even a regulation. It's a bureaucrat's interpretation only, and the bump stock ruling makes that interpretation, unsupported by actual law, illegal. Not saying that the ATF won't arrest you and charge you for committing a non-crime causing you massive inconvenience and stealing your money into their legal system, but you cannot be charged with a crime for doing something that is not specifically prohibited by law, QED.

And this right here is the BS blue states use to push gun control without making it a law. They make people fearful enough of potential consequences that it's "just not worth it". Sure you can go ahead and have your buddy use your suppressor or sbr but who is willing to potentially dish out hundreds of thousands of dollars on legal fees because someone "accidentally " answered a question wrong. IF it wasn't done intentionally there are plenty of interns that could make that correction in 5 minutes, yet it's still up there.

Not attacking you, just the situation. Mistake or not this could fuck over people really easily and if it's "law" or not those people will have their life changed one way or another.

 

[southernpew]

And this right here is the BS blue states use to push gun control without making it a law

Not attacking you, just the situation. Mistake or not this could fuck over people really easily and if it's "law" or not those people will have their life changed one way or another.

The process is the punishment. You cant afford it