Proposed rule change EXTENDS CLEO sign-off to trusts/corps

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Lex Armarum

    Ultimate Member
    Oct 19, 2009
    3,450
    Something isn't right here. I checked the Federal Register and there is no proposed rule on the books for this. I checked the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, nothing. The link posted in the OP's blog link (and reposted here) leads either to an employee access portal or leads to something unofficial. Since the proposed rule hasn't been posted to the federal register, I wouldn't get spun up just yet. I would WAIT for the posting the proposed official rule before going off the deep end BECAUSE this version, if it comes from an employee portal or other source, may be an unofficial draft - even an old draft.
     

    MJD438

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 28, 2012
    5,849
    Somewhere in MD
    Something isn't right here. I checked the Federal Register and there is no proposed rule on the books for this. I checked the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, nothing. The link posted in the OP's blog link (and reposted here) leads either to an employee access portal or leads to something unofficial. Since the proposed rule hasn't been posted to the federal register, I wouldn't get spun up just yet. I would WAIT for the posting the proposed official rule before going off the deep end BECAUSE this version, if it comes from an employee portal or other source, may be an unofficial draft - even an old draft.
    Not saying what you state is not true, just doing research.

    The first link is to a PDF stored at ATF in a folder with a date of 2013. The PDF appears to be signed/dated Aug. 29, 2013 by Eric H. Holder, Jr. Granted, the copy is a horrible scan job and not OCR'd. However, the RIN it references is the RIN that was posted in other threads previously, which the search tool on the RegInfo site shows: http://www.reginfo.gov/public/servlet/ForwardServlet?SearchTarget=RegReview&textfield=1140-aa43.
     

    Lex Armarum

    Ultimate Member
    Oct 19, 2009
    3,450
    Not saying what you state is not true, just doing research.

    The first link is to a PDF stored at ATF in a folder with a date of 2013. The PDF appears to be signed/dated Aug. 29, 2013 by Eric H. Holder, Jr. Granted, the copy is a horrible scan job and not OCR'd. However, the RIN it references is the RIN that was posted in other threads previously, which the search tool on the RegInfo site shows: http://www.reginfo.gov/public/servlet/ForwardServlet?SearchTarget=RegReview&textfield=1140-aa43.

    Maybe so but back off that link one hop and it gets you nowhere. Maybe this hasn't been posted to the federal register yet but I want to see the OFFICIAL PROPOSED RULE before I start setting my pants on fire and dancing around like a frog in a boiling pot.
     

    MJD438

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 28, 2012
    5,849
    Somewhere in MD
    Maybe so but back off that link one hop and it gets you nowhere. Maybe this hasn't been posted to the federal register yet but I want to see the OFFICIAL PROPOSED RULE before I start setting my pants on fire and dancing around like a frog in a boiling pot.
    Understand completely - was just looking into the data trail.
     

    SWO Daddy

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 18, 2011
    2,468
    Something isn't right here. I checked the Federal Register and there is no proposed rule on the books for this. I checked the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, nothing. The link posted in the OP's blog link (and reposted here) leads either to an employee access portal or leads to something unofficial. Since the proposed rule hasn't been posted to the federal register, I wouldn't get spun up just yet. I would WAIT for the posting the proposed official rule before going off the deep end BECAUSE this version, if it comes from an employee portal or other source, may be an unofficial draft - even an old draft.

    Interesting - I hope you're right. OTOH, it is (apparently) signed by Eric Holder and dated 29 August 2013.
     

    SWO Daddy

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 18, 2011
    2,468
    So, as we speculate, would this be for every pick up? The initial purchase / form filing?

    Nobody has any idea what's going to happen. In order of best to worst outcomes:

    1. Rule never gets beyond the proposal process.
    2. Any forms dated before the rule is in force are ok.
    3. Any application without a stamp on it gets kicked back. ATF asks for fingerprints from existing trustees.
    4. Congress gets involved.
     

    fightinbluhen51

    "Quack Pot Call Honker"
    Oct 31, 2008
    8,974
    Nobody has any idea what's going to happen. In order of best to worst outcomes:

    1. Rule never gets beyond the proposal process.
    2. Any forms dated before the rule is in force are ok.
    3. Any application without a stamp on it gets kicked back. ATF asks for fingerprints from existing trustees.
    4. Congress gets involved.
    You forgot 5, lawsuit.

    Lol.
     

    bobthefisher

    Durka ninja
    Aug 18, 2010
    1,214
    Definitely not where you are!
    I have this feeling of not being liked, as a gun owner, amongst our state and federal governments. This is like death by paper cuts. I keep wondering when enough is enough. Just ban all guns you assholes and get it over with!
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,916
    Messages
    7,258,559
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom