User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 12:17:30 PM EDT
[#1]
I hit it. Will try to get others too.
Has anybody contacted their congress critter? Has anyone contacted 2A friendly congress critters outside of their own voting district??? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 12:20:22 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How do you figure? It will be more difficult but not impossible...unless I missed something?? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What about transfers to Corporations? Just wondering if that could be a work around if this is implemented. All fictitious entities. Trust, corporation, LLC, LLP, LP, you name it. CLEO signature required for all. It's buried somewhere in the language of the proposal, but it's there. If this thing gets implemented, say goodbye to anything NFA How do you figure? It will be more difficult but not impossible...unless I missed something?? It makes it impossible for those of us who live in jurisdictions where CLEOs will not sign off. The bad thing is, that's the majority of counties/ municipalities. Most CLEOs will simply refuse to sign off regardless of who you are, while some will only sign off if you have been vouched for, you know them personally, or you've made some sort of campaign contribution to them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 12:31:11 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
if this was 1774 we would cut our barrels down and say FU come and take them.. ...but unfortunately, times have changed. Does anyone know a moderator who can pin this? I've tried messaging a few, but I haven't heard anything yet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 12:37:26 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It makes it impossible for those of us who live in jurisdictions where CLEOs will not sign off. The bad thing is, that's the majority of counties/ municipalities. Most CLEOs will simply refuse to sign off regardless of who you are, while some will only sign off if you have been vouched for, you know them personally, or you've made some sort of campaign contribution to them. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What about transfers to Corporations? Just wondering if that could be a work around if this is implemented. All fictitious entities. Trust, corporation, LLC, LLP, LP, you name it. CLEO signature required for all. It's buried somewhere in the language of the proposal, but it's there. If this thing gets implemented, say goodbye to anything NFA How do you figure? It will be more difficult but not impossible...unless I missed something?? It makes it impossible for those of us who live in jurisdictions where CLEOs will not sign off. The bad thing is, that's the majority of counties/ municipalities. Most CLEOs will simply refuse to sign off regardless of who you are, while some will only sign off if you have been vouched for, you know them personally, or you've made some sort of campaign contribution to them. i thought there is more then just the CLEO? like DA's and other people that can sign off? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 12:44:35 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
i thought there is more then just the CLEO? like DA's and other people that can sign off? That's true, in some areas there are others who can sign. But typically if the CLEO won't do it, it's damn hard to find anyone else that will, because they are all typically on the same page. The bottom line is, this will make transfers that are legal and permissible in one county, illegal just across the county line. It also makes business for the silencer industry much, much more difficult. It's also worth noting that the CLEOs who simply sign off on transfers to people who are legally allowed to possess NFA items, are most definitely in the minority when you look at what segments of the population are effected. Either way, it's a bad policy and should have loud opposition. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 12:53:49 PM EDT
[#6]
For those of you looking for information and phrasing to use in your comments, Prince Law has been covering this topic extensively on their blog. They are going so far as to break down individual comments that have been submitted and provide suggestions for future contributors. The ATF 41P discussion starts here, but continues on if you flip between the days:
Prince Law Blog |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 12:53:53 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hit it. Will try to get others too. Has anybody contacted their congress critter? Has anyone contacted 2A friendly congress critters outside of their own voting district??? That's definitely a good idea. The first thing anyone should do is comment on regulations.gov ... again, we need a mod to tack this up! c'mon now, we need to get this word out! |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 12:58:58 PM EDT
[#8]
I tried to post a firemission on this before and it wouldn't stay up. People just don't seem to be outraged enough.
I will be submitting comments in the coming weeks. We all need to sit down and make sure we understand the proposal before commenting. It is also important to attack it from a legal and feasibility standpoint rather than simply arguing that it is an infringement on our rights. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 1:08:47 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I tried to post a firemission on this before and it wouldn't stay up. People just don't seem to be outraged enough.
I will be submitting comments in the coming weeks. We all need to sit down and make sure we understand the proposal before commenting. It is also important to attack it from a legal and feasibility standpoint rather than simply arguing that it is an infringement on our rights. That's a good point. I'll be collecting some of the good comments in the coming weeks and posting them back here. If they won't pin this up, I'll try to keep bumping and commenting as much as I can. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 1:19:54 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For those of you looking for information and phrasing to use in your comments, Prince Law has been covering this topic extensively on their blog. They are going so far as to break down individual comments that have been submitted and provide suggestions for future contributors. The ATF 41P discussion starts here, but continues on if you flip between the days: Prince Law Blog Another good suggestion. I have been following this blog and it definitely has some good info. Keep this thing going. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 1:20:25 PM EDT
[#11]
Done!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 1:35:26 PM EDT
[#12]
I've messaged all the moderators on GD, still no response.
Could some of you help me get their attention and get this pinned? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 1:37:21 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If they won't pin this up..... I'm not sure of this so don't take this as gospel, but I've gotten the hint from others who've tried advocating for suppressor stuff on this sight (outside the class III forum), have been ignored by the site owners and mods. There's a guy who was trying to get a thing like this going, his mission was getting the word out about the work they were doing to get rid of the CLEO sign off (before it came back). I don't know if they didn't want part of it because they felt it would bring undue attention or expose the trust process, or whether they consider us the black sheep of the gun community, I'm not sure. Just throwing it out there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 1:43:03 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've messaged all the moderators on GD, still no response. Could some of you help me get their attention and get this pinned? Relax. Tacks kill threads. Worry about the message, not the tacks. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 1:43:59 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm not sure of this so don't take this as gospel, but I've gotten the hint from others who've tried advocating for suppressor stuff on this sight (outside the class III forum), have been ignored by the site owners and mods. There's a guy who was trying to get a thing like this going, his mission was getting the word out about the work they were doing to get rid of the CLEO sign off (before it came back). I don't know if they didn't want part of it because they felt it would bring undue attention or expose the trust process, or whether they consider us the black sheep of the gun community, I'm not sure. Just throwing it out there. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If they won't pin this up..... I'm not sure of this so don't take this as gospel, but I've gotten the hint from others who've tried advocating for suppressor stuff on this sight (outside the class III forum), have been ignored by the site owners and mods. There's a guy who was trying to get a thing like this going, his mission was getting the word out about the work they were doing to get rid of the CLEO sign off (before it came back). I don't know if they didn't want part of it because they felt it would bring undue attention or expose the trust process, or whether they consider us the black sheep of the gun community, I'm not sure. Just throwing it out there. LOL No. The owners of this site love Class III stuff. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 1:45:41 PM EDT
[#16]
Still reading comments before I compose my own.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 1:46:10 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LOL No. The owners of this site love Class III stuff. OK thanks, that's good to know. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 1:47:12 PM EDT
[#18]
Signed.
What did you do for freedom today? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 1:48:27 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm not sure of this so don't take this as gospel, but I've gotten the hint from others who've tried advocating for suppressor stuff on this sight (outside the class III forum), have been ignored by the site owners and mods. There's a guy who was trying to get a thing like this going, his mission was getting the word out about the work they were doing to get rid of the CLEO sign off (before it came back). I don't know if they didn't want part of it because they felt it would bring undue attention or expose the trust process, or whether they consider us the black sheep of the gun community, I'm not sure. Just throwing it out there. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If they won't pin this up..... I'm not sure of this so don't take this as gospel, but I've gotten the hint from others who've tried advocating for suppressor stuff on this sight (outside the class III forum), have been ignored by the site owners and mods. There's a guy who was trying to get a thing like this going, his mission was getting the word out about the work they were doing to get rid of the CLEO sign off (before it came back). I don't know if they didn't want part of it because they felt it would bring undue attention or expose the trust process, or whether they consider us the black sheep of the gun community, I'm not sure. Just throwing it out there. That's a good point, and it definitely makes sense, but until one of them tells me otherwise, I'm going to try to keep spreading the word... and pray someone will see the light and pin it. I don't mean this as a "gotcha" but this proposal doesn't just pertain to suppressors. It's about SBRs and registered MGs too. I understand the MGs are prohibitively expensive for most, but I know plenty of people with plans to get SBRs and/or silencers in the future. Besides, if they are worried about drawing attention to the trust process, what would they be worried about at this point? ATF 41P is an indication that there is already attention on the trust process, and it's coming from people who are intent on making it go away. I'm going to keep going at it, hopefully I can make a difference. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 1:48:36 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Numbers are far more important than persuasive arguments in this case. A very simple "This is completely unnecessary and simply another example of overreaching to create solutions to problems that do not exist." is infinitely better than not doing something because of the lack of something elegant to say. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Like I said in the other thread about this.....someone write me up something halfway decent and I'll send it in. Numbers are far more important than persuasive arguments in this case. A very simple "This is completely unnecessary and simply another example of overreaching to create solutions to problems that do not exist." is infinitely better than not doing something because of the lack of something elegant to say. Agreed. I kept mine to 2 very concise sentences rejecting the proposals. Others have already covered the major points with more eloquence than I could. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 1:51:11 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Relax. Tacks kill threads. Worry about the message, not the tacks.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I've messaged all the moderators on GD, still no response. Could some of you help me get their attention and get this pinned? Relax. Tacks kill threads. Worry about the message, not the tacks.
I understand, and I appreciate the advice, but wouldn't it be helpful in spreading the word? I'm just doing my part to reach out to anyone willing to listen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 1:51:12 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm not sure of this so don't take this as gospel, but I've gotten the hint from others who've tried advocating for suppressor stuff on this sight (outside the class III forum), have been ignored by the site owners and mods. There's a guy who was trying to get a thing like this going, his mission was getting the word out about the work they were doing to get rid of the CLEO sign off (before it came back). I don't know if they didn't want part of it because they felt it would bring undue attention or expose the trust process, or whether they consider us the black sheep of the gun community, I'm not sure. Just throwing it out there. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: If they won't pin this up..... I'm not sure of this so don't take this as gospel, but I've gotten the hint from others who've tried advocating for suppressor stuff on this sight (outside the class III forum), have been ignored by the site owners and mods. There's a guy who was trying to get a thing like this going, his mission was getting the word out about the work they were doing to get rid of the CLEO sign off (before it came back). I don't know if they didn't want part of it because they felt it would bring undue attention or expose the trust process, or whether they consider us the black sheep of the gun community, I'm not sure. Just throwing it out there. Nolo's thread is still active. This site loves suppressors. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 1:56:20 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm just doing my part to reach out to anyone willing to listen. Too many people completely ignore tacked threads. You're to new to know that even you will ignore them after a while. The best way to kill an active thread is to tack it. Tack them after they fall off of the first 10 pages. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 2:00:52 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Too many people completely ignore tacked threads. You're to new to know that even you will ignore them after a while. The best way to kill an active thread is to tack it. Tack them after they fall off of the first 10 pages. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'm just doing my part to reach out to anyone willing to listen. Too many people completely ignore tacked threads. You're to new to know that even you will ignore them after a while. The best way to kill an active thread is to tack it. Tack them after they fall off of the first 10 pages. Gotcha. Appreciate it, guess I'll be back to pleading for tacks in about a week...  
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 2:02:15 PM EDT
[#25]
Wow, the more I read about this proposal the more fucked-up it sounds.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 2:17:48 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wow, the more I read about this proposal the more fucked-up it sounds. To anyone with half a brain, it's blatantly clear that this is a case of we won, they lost, now they are going to use any obscure procedure they can to stick a thumb in our eye. It won't prevent crime. It won't curb gun violence. It's just going to kick around they NFA crowd because they think they can get away with it. But sadly, those details are lost on the minds of the Average American. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 2:19:16 PM EDT
[#27]
Pin
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 2:21:38 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Agreed. I kept mine to 2 very concise sentences rejecting the proposals. Others have already covered the major points with more eloquence than I could. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Numbers are far more important than persuasive arguments in this case. Agreed. I kept mine to 2 very concise sentences rejecting the proposals. Others have already covered the major points with more eloquence than I could. In that case: The NFA approval process is already onerous and expensive, and the proposed rules changes will make it more so. I use a trust so that my wife can legally have access to my NFA items. We took this extra step to ensure that we are in full compliance with the law. Trusts are not a loophole being used by criminals, they are a tool used by law-abiding families and estate planners. I'll get my wife to post a comment as well, since she is the other half of my trust. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 2:27:15 PM EDT
[#29]
Hit. Fuck this bullshit.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 2:28:23 PM EDT
[#30]
Hit
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 2:34:49 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Here's a quick flyer I threw together if you guys want to print it out and ask to hang it at your local range or gun shop. Please, spread the word far and wide! This cannot go unchallenged! http://<a href=http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/1623/h21v.jpg This is beautiful, and exactly what we need. Thank you. I have posted this to facebook and tagged it with everyone I know who will sign it, and am encouraging them to share it as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 2:39:23 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Pin Thank you, I respectfully request that the leadership of this site keeps this topic up at least until the December 9th deadline. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 2:45:15 PM EDT
[#33]
Done
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 2:51:41 PM EDT
[#34]
done
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 3:11:43 PM EDT
[#35]
Just left my two cents. Enough is enough.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 3:32:49 PM EDT
[#36]
i posted my disdain for our atf. thanks for the link.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 3:35:40 PM EDT
[#37]
Fuck that noise. http://list.dickmorris.com/t/534244/2420741/4883/8/
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 3:35:54 PM EDT
[#38]
There are only 732 comments. A few on the first page were against our cause. The first one I clicked said trusts themselves should not be allowed.
ARF can do better than that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 3:36:48 PM EDT
[#39]
If the rich lose their loophole, we stand a better chance of undoing the illegal hughes amendment within a generation.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 3:40:47 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There are only 732 comments. A few on the first page were against our cause. The first one I clicked said trusts themselves should not be allowed. ARF can do better than that. The number of comments are updated once a day, at 11:59PM I will be curious to see how many there are tomorrow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 3:45:58 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If the rich lose their loophole, we stand a better chance of undoing the illegal hughes amendment within a generation. Fat chance. While I wish that were the case, but once a right is taken away by the government, it is RARELY taken back. I'd rather have SBRs and silencers on a trust than not at all. Besides, with how castrated our society is nowadays, I highly doubt that the abomination referred to as the Hughes Amendment will ever be rolled back... Oh well, here's to hoping... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 3:47:11 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If the rich lose their loophole, we stand a better chance of undoing the illegal hughes amendment within a generation.  out of
How the hell is this a rich person loophole? Everyone I know who is into NFA, of all economic means, use trusts or LLC's to better manage their collection. Take that class-warfare segregationist, 2A-undermining misinformation back to DU. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 3:49:53 PM EDT
[#43]
Added my comments, emailed a link to it to guys at work.
Hope our comments do some good. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 3:50:53 PM EDT
[#44]
I am far from rich and I have a trust.
Hell, most people on here get them written for free. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 3:53:04 PM EDT
[#45]
President Obama wants to prevent gun crime. The types of devices and weapons that are covered by these trusts are simply not statistically relevant when talking about gun crime. Their usage in gun crimes is so close to zero, that it might as well be zero. All these proposed changes do, is put burdens on law-abiding gun owners, and in some areas will place de-facto bans on NFA items, due to the reluctance of CLEOs to sign the forms.
I am opposed to this rule-making endeavor, as it will in no way help reduce violent gun crime. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 4:09:53 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If the rich lose their loophole, we stand a better chance of undoing the illegal hughes amendment within a generation. You have no idea what you're talking about.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 4:10:58 PM EDT
[#47]
"Statistically indistinguishable from zero" is the line I like to use.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 4:11:33 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yep. The good ole BATFE pricks changed that part so that everything needs the CLEO/Fingerprint bullshit. What, you thought they'd actually make something better for us???? hahahahahahahahahahah Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I thought the CLEO signature requirement was going away? Did something change? Yep. The good ole BATFE pricks changed that part so that everything needs the CLEO/Fingerprint bullshit. What, you thought they'd actually make something better for us???? hahahahahahahahahahah This. As much as I dislike his delivery, he is correct. This is a de-facto ban on all NFA items as the very next thing Zer0 will do is find a way to force all CLEO's to say no to transfers. No transfers, eventual loss through attrition. This is the first chip off the 2nd Amendment because it is far and away the easiest. The NFA community is the smallest niche of shooting, so is the lowest hanging fruit. If *EVERYONE* doesn't stand up against this, the very next thing they're going to try to do is stop imports or re-evaluate the "Sporting Use' clause. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 4:23:48 PM EDT
[#49]
It wouldn't hurt to push the point that using cans do in fact an add to a gun owners safety by reducing the risk of hearing damage.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/25/2013 4:53:26 PM EDT
[#50]
Keep in mind that anyone that doesn't want to comment on this and doesn't give a shit about NFA. They tried to get semi autos onto the nfa list via Feinstein. Get your comments on.
Sneak in the back door, change things to make it harder to register stuff, then bulldoze the front door so that its in the corner... |
|
|
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
