• Watch Out for Scammers!

    We've now added a color code for all accounts. Orange accounts are new members, Blue are full members, and Green are Supporters. If you get a message about a sale from an orange account, make sure you pay attention before sending any money!

Suppressors Today is Your Last Chance to comment on ATF41P!

TexasGunTrustLawyer

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Aug 11, 2011
630
47
57
Houston
www.texasguntrust.com
Good Morning,


Today is Your Last Chance to comment on ATF41P!

Comments MUST BE SUBMITTED by Dec 09, 2013 11:59 PM EASTERN STANDARD TIME. That is 11:00Pm in Texas!

I have been told that some of my friends, clients and fellow gun owners are not commenting because the comments are public record.

Please comment. Now is the time to stand up and be counted or risk losing more of your rights.

This is a back door defacto gun grab by the Obama administration. Make no mistake about it. IT is time to stand up and be counted!

If the Obama Administration was trying to take your modern Sporting rifles (what the liberal media has named "Assault Rifles") away, every one would be sending emails and commenting! When the Obama Administration tried to take the Saiga Semi automatic shotguns away a couple of years ago, there were over 78,000 comments by the end of the comment period! Why is there only 7,000 today for the defacto ban on silencers?

Every gun owner must stand up and be counted! Get with it citizens! Make your voice heard!

Comment here: Regulations.gov

And the direct link to the comment section: Regulations.gov


Here is a suggested comment:


Individual with "Corporations, LLC or Trust"
I am opposed to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives proposed rule, docket number ATF 41P, on transfers of NFA firearms to "legal entities" such as trusts and corporations. I have created a [TRUST - CORPORATION - LLC - Family Limited Partnership - ETC.] to make, receive and purchase Firearms and items that are regulated by the National Firearms Act. Based on my experience , the BATFE is wrong on MANY issues.

The BATFE is wrong in stating that law enforcement officials only refuse to sign off due to liability fears. That was not my experience. The refusal of CLEO's to sign forms is often politically motivated. In [NAME OF JURISDICTION], the [POLICE CHIEF/SHERIFF] refuses to sign off on these transfers because [EXPLAIN AND PROVIDE EVIDENCE SUCH AS STATEMENTS MADE TO APPLICANTS].

BATFE's estimate of the additional costs imposed by ATF41P are unrealistically low regarding the cost for photographs and fingerprints and fail to include the additional costs in fuel, wear and tear on my vehicles and the value of my time. BATFE's estimates that photographs would cost $8.00 and take an average of 50 minutes to obtain, and that fingerprints would cost $24.00 and take 60 minutes to obtain is also incorrect. In my experience, the costs and times are higher. It cost me [AMOUNT] to get photographs, which took [AMOUNT OF TIME]. And it cost me [AMOUNT] to get fingerprints, which took me [AMOUNT OF TIME]. BATFE considers the cost of providing documents to establish the existence of a "legal entity," based on an estimated average of 15 pages. My own [TRUST - CORPORATION - LLC - Family Limited Partnership - ETC] documents were [NUMBER] pages long.

These costs must be multiplied by the number of "responsible persons" on the application. The BATFE estimates only two responsible persons per legal entity. I believe that is a very low estimate. My own [TRUST - CORPORATION - LLC - Family Limited Partnership - ETC] includes [NUMBER] people who would qualify as "responsible persons" under ATF's definition.
The definition of "responsible person" is another issue of particular importance. The BATFE's wording is different for different types of entities. However, the BATFE's general definition would include anyone who "possesses, directly or indirectly, the power or authority ... to receive, possess, ship, transport, deliver, transfer, or otherwise dispose of a firearm for, or on behalf of" the entity. The laws on trusts and corporations are very complex. In my case, it would be very difficult for me to say accurately which of the parties in my [LEGAL ENTITY] fall under this definition. [EXPLAIN AND PROVIDE EVIDENCE SUCH AS CHILD TRUSTEES]. To get a clear answer on that, I would probably need to speak with a lawyer-another cost that ATF fails to consider.

I unequivocally oppose FINGERPRINTS and PHOTOGRAGHS for Responsible persons and the CLEO signoff requirements for any NFA transfer, and suggest the elimination of the CLEO signoff requirement in its entirety.
 
Thanks for taking the time to post up your sample above. I used part of it in my comments.

Pinged all my friends with NFA items and they said they are commenting. If they don't, they are dead to me!
 
Bumping this back to the top.



Just posted my comments.

If you haven't already done so do it now!!

If posting your name is causing you a problem... You CAN post anonymous comments. I have no idea if treated the same during the evaluation, but it is possible to post anonymously.
 
I've commented but am wondering what the status of the rule is once the comment period is over. I have a Trust and want to get an Octane and a Spectre II. However I don't want to start the paperwork for a Trust just to get it kicked back due to this BS rule/edict/jackassery.


Thanks
 
well it should be 8,125 but it hasn't updated since I posted mine.

spread this around people, post it to facebook with a link to Regulations.gov

all it takes for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.
 
I would really like to be optimistic about this but considering al the crap coming out of the white house, GOD could comment and it still would not matter.

Having said that, I think I was comment 3,089 so I do support the effort... I just think we are going to be screwed on this one.

My LGS told me today that "we" have until June to file any new form 4's using a trust, after that it will require LEO signature.

I'd sure like to know the truth about this before I shell out a couple more grand on cans I potentially will not receive. There is no way our LEO will sign off from what local deputies have told me.
 
A group that represents NFA rights said they submitted a 500 page document with supporting documents, pictures, testimonials, etc to support the DOWNFALL of this proposed change. They had to drive the documents there due to the size they could not send it electronically. (I saw their post on Facebook)

So, I hope they have fun reviewing that one! :D
 
Since the comment period is now over, when will we know more about the status of the proposed new regulations? Further, if the CLEO refuses to sign off on your paperwork (without cause) for items you have purchased isn't that depriving you of your property? Would the local sheriffs then be exposed to civil lawsuits? If purchase from another state and sent to a SOT would this not be a violation of interstate commerce?