bobthefisher
Durka ninja
That's cool, thanks. Any good base drawings would help, even just 1D, but of all sides of the trigger pack.
Post-86 Machineguns legal for Trusts?
- Thread starter NateIU10
- Start date
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!
Member Benefits:
That's cool, thanks. Any good base drawings would help, even just 1D, but of all sides of the trigger pack.
Kingjamez
Gun Builder
As you probably know, you have to provide drawings/schematics for a new homemade NFA firearm, plus I'm an HK9x fanboy
I've done several Form 1's for SBR's and Suppressors that are of my own design and have never submitted any schematics. All have been approved.
-Jim
bobthefisher
Durka ninja
Huh?!? Really? I've only done one homemade AK-47 and the examiner wanted pictures. Anyway, being that this would be something ridiculously unusual for them (registering a new machinegun), I'm guessing they would want to see specific schematics... just before they deny you
DaemonAssassin
Why should we Free BSD?
If this opens up the registry for new MG's, I might have to have a long chat with a family member... NFA trust and a ton of stripped lowers that get registered. Might have to ask a buddy of mine with a SOT to make some things for me.
Dogabutila
Ultimate Member
- Dec 21, 2010
- 2,359
I am watching this carefully. BGOS rears it's ugly head. That being said, I don't have too much money and IDK FA is great either. I would like a 3rd though.
So this would play out very well. Think this way. Forged lower $100 + $200 stamp. Since it would be an MG the Freedom Suppression Act of 2013 wouldn't apply. And you could finish manufacturing it later. Not to mention if built properly the safety will have three positions. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. (Safe, semi, auto) and you wouldn't need to always use FA.
bobthefisher
Durka ninja
I'm just making sure I have all plans and schematics in place, with a full explanation of my intentions. I might have to talk to that Blog author and see if I can cite some of his article, or at least use excerpts for justification. As we all know the NFA examiners usually are very friendly people, but can also be just as confused as ourselves. I have no doubt they will balk at this request on the initial review. I'm drafting my cover letter now.
Kingjamez
Gun Builder
I really wouldn't get too excited about this.
The letter from the ATF about the "personhood" of a trust is just an opinion and not law. The ATF has a long and storied history of changing their opinion when it has unintended consequences. The ATF lawyers will reconvene and massage the language until a solution is found that doesn't allow new MG's.
Even looking at the ATF letter itself. It says that since a real person must pickup the NFA item being transferred to the trust, then a NICS check has to be done on that person. The same logic (??) could be used to say that a real person has to manufacture the MG since the trust cannot, and thus that manufacturing person would be breaking the law.
It's certainly an interesting find, but it's not going to result in more MG's.
-Jim
The letter from the ATF about the "personhood" of a trust is just an opinion and not law. The ATF has a long and storied history of changing their opinion when it has unintended consequences. The ATF lawyers will reconvene and massage the language until a solution is found that doesn't allow new MG's.
Even looking at the ATF letter itself. It says that since a real person must pickup the NFA item being transferred to the trust, then a NICS check has to be done on that person. The same logic (??) could be used to say that a real person has to manufacture the MG since the trust cannot, and thus that manufacturing person would be breaking the law.
It's certainly an interesting find, but it's not going to result in more MG's.
-Jim
Kingjamez
Gun Builder
Huh?!? Really? I've only done one homemade AK-47 and the examiner wanted pictures. Anyway, being that this would be something ridiculously unusual for them (registering a new machinegun), I'm guessing they would want to see specific schematics... just before they deny you
You made a homemade AK-47 that was under the NFA? Was it a short barreled rifle, or was this 28+ years ago to make a machine gun?
The examiner wanted pictures.... of your AK? How could you give pictures of something you hadn't made yet?
I'm really confused.
I just got a stamp back for a SBR AK a couple months back, no pictures required.
-Jim
Chad, Are you asking for more clarification again ????
Also, I give THE FINGER to the ******* who sent the ATF a letter asking for “clarification” in the first damn place! Item 22 of the 4473 has always applied until some dickhead wants “clarification”. It’s the way it was always done before some busybody needed “helping” and of course the baby-burners at the the ATF are always willing “help” find new ways to apply the law to us.
Also, I give THE FINGER to the ******* who sent the ATF a letter asking for “clarification” in the first damn place! Item 22 of the 4473 has always applied until some dickhead wants “clarification”. It’s the way it was always done before some busybody needed “helping” and of course the baby-burners at the the ATF are always willing “help” find new ways to apply the law to us.
I'll have Wes drop off the container.
This is great. I think I might send some paperwork to covert one of my lowers to a MG. Once the paperwork is back I can have a smith drill the hole for the sear.
IMBLITZVT
Ultimate Member
1D... man you Smiths only need one dimension to make stuff, now thats skill!
Jim, I agree, on a FA gun... never heard of it. On a semi auto, if you want an approved semi auto design for resale, yeah they want a gun to test/schematics. However thats not required for home built semis either. SBRs nope... Other than serial number info, I have never heard of the ATF requiring pictures of anything. On one of my MGs, they had the serial improperly marked, so I sent in pictures when I changed the serial number listed on the Form.
I also agree, while this is a great little knife in the side of the ATF, it will not result in anything. As you stated they will play with the wording to get the answer they want.
I would lose about $20K or more in value in my gun collection... however I would want it hands down... Loss of value for your freedom back is not a hard choice.
clandestine
AR-15 Savant
clandestine
AR-15 Savant
1D... man you Smiths only need one dimension to make stuff, now thats skill!
Jim, I agree, on a FA gun... never heard of it. On a semi auto, if you want an approved semi auto design for resale, yeah they want a gun to test/schematics. However thats not required for home built semis either. SBRs nope... Other than serial number info, I have never heard of the ATF requiring pictures of anything. On one of my MGs, they had the serial improperly marked, so I sent in pictures when I changed the serial number listed on the Form.
I also agree, while this is a great little knife in the side of the ATF, it will not result in anything. As you stated they will play with the wording to get the answer they want.
I would lose about $20K or more in value in my gun collection... however I would want it hands down... Loss of value for your freedom back is not a hard choice.
I'm going to fill out a Form 1 for a M.G. tonight for one of my PSA Lowers. I'm not worried about the rejection.
bobthefisher
Durka ninja
It was for an AK SBR a couple years ago. They just wanted pictures of my bent receiver flat with my info engraved. They said they needed it to identify what "kind" of firearm it was going to be. I've only heard of a couple people having similar issues... lucky me I guess. The examiner was Santamaria.
IMBLITZVT
Ultimate Member
Sounds good to me! I am sure they will turn it down but we have nothing left to lose in this area...
anil
Active Member
When they reverse their opinion, any new MG will be in violation of the GCA which has its 1986 date written into the law, I believe.
I wonder if the ATF will just approve some if these form 1s out if spite. Just so they could destroy a pile of guns after their arbitrary ruling is fixed.
I wonder if the ATF will just approve some if these form 1s out if spite. Just so they could destroy a pile of guns after their arbitrary ruling is fixed.
It would have been legal to build when they approved them. I would imagine it would be hard to justify confiscating/destroying private property that was approved by the ATF. They would probably grandfather them.
Not what they did with the Akins Accelerator...
Users who are viewing this thread
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
Just want to thank the extremely awesome folks at Tyler Firearms- Started by GenoBluzGtr
- Replies: 4
-
-
Clearance Liqui Moly Motorbike 4T SAE 15W-50 Street | Full Synthetic Motor Oil | 4 Liter- Started by mpollan1
- Replies: 3
-