User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/30/2005 6:45:47 AM EDT
[#1]
I just read this thread. Very Interesting reading. Would BATFE waive the signature by any chance since no one will sign ? There needs to be an option available for people in Columbus. Or are we all screwed ? I did the LLC route since it is my only way to get suppressors.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2005 12:31:32 PM EDT
[#2]
Soon, the chief or sheriff will be able to say truthfully "I can't sign that because they are illegal in Columbus".
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2005 3:16:44 PM EDT
[#3]
The last law had a grandfather clause. Let's keep our fingers crossed for another.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2005 3:37:21 PM EDT
[#4]
Would somebody please tell me what this LLC thing is? I'm a columbus native, as well, and I already have an 11.5 bushmaster that I need to SBR, but I was turned down by everybody. Sons of bitches. Does LLC apply to suppressors, too?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2005 3:44:11 PM EDT
[#5]
I think the proposed assault rifle ban only affects semiauto rifles. I don't think it addresses suppressors or machineguns. It might restrict magazines. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2005 3:57:20 PM EDT
[#6]
Nobody really knows because the legislation hasn't been made available for comment yet. The previous law regarding assault weapons is still on the books here:
municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/columbus/_DATA/TITLE23/Chapter_2323__ATTEMPT__COMPLICITY_/2323_31__Unlawful_possession_o.html with the magazine ban here: municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/columbus/_DATA/TITLE23/Chapter_2323__ATTEMPT__COMPLICITY_/2323_32__Unlawful_possession_o.html (note the NFA exemption) and the definition of "assault weapon" and "large capacity magazine" here: municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/columbus/_DATA/TITLE23/Chapter_2323__ATTEMPT__COMPLICITY_/2323_11__Definitions_.html ETA: As I recall, the previous law was struck down because of the definition that an assualt weapon is "Any semiautomatic action, center fire rifle or carbine that accepts a detachable magazine with a capacity of twenty rounds or more." Since any rifle that accepts a detatchable magazine has the potential to accept a "magazine with a capacity of twenty rounds or more," the law was considered unconstitutionally vague. Without forcing owners to build or purchase without specific features, the only way I see re-introducing this so it withstands a legal challenge would be to ban all semi-autos. I've heard this is how the law is written in Cincy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2005 4:44:51 PM EDT
[#7]
Aren't you the DUI/Improper Transportation of a Firearm guy too? Man, you are asking for trouble.  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2005 4:48:51 PM EDT
[#8]
Hah, well I haven't been convicted yet, and when I applied, I still had a clean record. And I'm not yet convinced that I'm not allowed to own firearms. If they don't let me own firearms after my "speedy" trial, I'm going to leave the country anyway, so it won't matter at that point.
Besides, I'm not asking for trouble. I'm trying to get a LEGAL SBR. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/30/2005 5:23:45 PM EDT
[#9]
It an acronym for "Limited Liability Corporation." Corporations aren't required to get fingerprints, CLEO signoff, etc. SBR FAQ: www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=14&t=178305 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2005 5:06:20 AM EDT
[#10]
In your first post you said that you already have an 11.5" upper. If you don't have a registered SBR lower, you are asking for trouble. (Even if your aunt Nellie is 'storing' it for you.) I'm not trying to hassle you, but it would appear that you just admitted to commiting a felony on a public forum. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2005 8:15:49 AM EDT
[#11]
owning a upper that not on your lower is not a sbr.. its parts.. nothing more.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2005 8:23:11 AM EDT
[#12]
I said I have an 11.5” Bushmaster. While I didn't specify, I was referencing a barrel, and one that is not attached to an upper. Additionally, it has a 5.5-inch suppressor attached to it. So no, I didn't admit to a felony, nor did I commit one. Judging by your liberal interpretation of my statement, I’m guessing that you are a cop of some sort? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2005 8:48:45 AM EDT
[#13]
Not true, it can be considered constructive possession in the eyes of the ATF. Sucks but true. Scott |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2005 9:55:51 AM EDT
[#14]
Hardly. I was just trying to protect you from your own stupidity.  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/31/2005 6:27:03 PM EDT
[#15]
It's easy to misinterpret the original post. Owning a <16" upper is OK, as long as you own no other parts or something other than a lower without an upper (ie, a complete rifle). If law enforcement can only put your parts together as an SBR, it's considered "constructive possession" of an SBR. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2005 10:36:54 AM EDT
[#16]
How difficult was that? I just found out today I'll probably have to go that route also- I'm in the only township in Clermont county that has a CLEO that won's sign off the paperwork. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/16/2005 12:31:38 PM EDT
[#17]
if i built the lower from scratch, then no law can say its not a pistol. because it is yellowed as a "reciver" and not a rifle
as a pistol i can make it a rifle at any time and back to a pistol. there for i can own both long and short barlles for it just like a contender. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/11/2005 5:57:15 PM EDT
[#18]
No letter from the BATFE yet. Just saving the thread from the 30-day bit bucket. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/5/2005 7:58:19 PM EDT
[#19]
Still nothing from the BATFE yet, but since I didn't get a reply from the Attorney General, I resent him a letter. Since the last one was intercepted and misrouted by "Constituent Services," I also sent him one via his campaign office.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 4:46:45 AM EDT
[#20]
What would stop us from forming an "AR15.com/OHIO LLC" and making each member that wanted to participate an officer of the corporation with full possesive powers of the weapons they purchased?
Just thinking out loud here... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/6/2005 5:41:54 PM EDT
[#21]
Probably nothing's stopping us. Officers don't have to be related or live in the same house. But we'd have to raise capital to purchase rifles or have them donated. Then deal with the pissing contest if we dissolve the corporation and have to liquidate the assests.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/8/2005 11:04:54 PM EDT
[#22]
Just knocking a few ideas around in my head, please bear with me..... von_landstuhl: Since you're in Columbus, if you don't get your Form 1 approved before Aug. 11th, would it be illegal to keep your SBR within city limits? When you SBR a rifle, isn't that considered MAKING a NEW firearm? So you'd essentially be making a new AW after the ban. Just curious cause I was thinking about registering my rifles(yeah, I know. ...) then later making one of them an SBR but I don't think it'd be legal to do so anymore after Aug. 11th with the ban. Any thoughts on this scenario?BTW, I know registration is blasphemy but I live and work downtown and realistically I'm just not going to store my rifles far out in the suburbs where I can't stroke them at night.  Half the fun of owning guns is being able to ogle them in the downtime. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/9/2005 9:29:08 PM EDT
[#23]
You do realize that your registration forms will be made public information, right? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/10/2005 4:08:32 PM EDT
[#24]
I'm no lawyer, but I'm going to say that if the serial numbered receiver is registered, them I'm OK. After all, the BATFE doesn't require the SBR to come from a stripped receiver. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/10/2005 4:12:14 PM EDT
[#25]
Yes, but so are pistol registrations and there's no evidence that they put owners at risk from theft. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/10/2005 9:03:44 PM EDT
[#26]
Do you have any details on what access the public has to this information? What pistol registrations are you referring to? I am unaware of a requirement to register pistols. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2005 3:08:01 PM EDT
[#27]
Not true, ATF form 4's are privileged tax information and therefore cannot be released by ATF to anyone. Scott Cousino |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2005 3:10:38 PM EDT
[#28]
I believe von landstuhl is referring to CCW permits. Scott |
|||
|
|
|
Posted: 8/11/2005 5:27:08 PM EDT
[#29]
StevenTMc was referring to the AWB registration, not the ATF SBR forms. I was referring to Weapons Transaction Permit required when purchasing with the city limits. According to the License Section of the Dept of Public Safety www.publicsafety.ci.columbus.oh.us/weapontrans.htm, which is the same group doing the AW registrations, Weapons Transaction Permit "applications shall contain a signed statement of understanding and agreement that any false information given may result in denial, revocation, or criminal prosecution, and that any information therein becomes a matter of public record." I've never bought within the city (hoo-rah for Vance's!), so I've misinterpreted this clause, please correct me. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2005 1:48:43 PM EDT
[#30]
I received a voicemail from Jon Fulkerson, Deputy Attorney General, in the Ohio Attorney General’s Health and Human Services Section. That seemed like an odd office to call me back, but after a Google search on his name, I found out he's scheduled to give a lecture on "Ohio’s Concealed Carry Law Update" at next month's "Attorney General’s 2005 Conference On Law Enforcement." The workshop is described as "an update regarding the enactment and enforcement of Ohio’s concealed handgun licensing law. Suggestions for training, enforcement and enactment are discussed followed by a question-and-answer session." I'll be calling him back tomorrow. Does anyone know him or his politics? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2005 2:15:16 PM EDT
[#31]
I talked with Jon Fulkerson today. Without going into too much detail, let's just say I couldn't have asked for a better point of contact. After I send him a background check I ran on myself, he's going to talk to the AG for me. Keep your fingers crossed and/or keep me in your prayers.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2005 4:54:58 PM EDT
[#32]
Excellent. I admire your perseverance (And patience).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2005 5:18:05 PM EDT
[#33]
Sounds like things are looking up for you. Good luck.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/26/2005 6:37:20 AM EDT
[#34]
I consider Jon Fulkerson a close friend. Let's just say he's one of the good guys.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2005 7:34:18 AM EDT
[#35]
who is autherised to view your ATF froms to make sure you stuff is legal? only ATF, or local cops as well? |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 9/15/2005 5:01:59 PM EDT
[#36]
Not much to report. I haven't heard back from him since our initial conversation, so I dropped him an e-mail requesting an update. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/8/2005 3:27:23 PM EDT
[#37]
Still not much to report. I got an e-mail back from Mr. Fulkerson on the 19th stating, "I am hoping to find out something by the end of next week - I apologize but I've been in several trials and not been able to speak with anyone. I will email you by next week." I didn't get a reply. They haven't come right out and said no, so I don't want to bug them about it. I'll probably wait another week and drop him another note. All this waiting should be good practice for when I send the Form 1 off to the ATF. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/13/2005 2:56:43 PM EDT
[#38]
Good luck.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/18/2005 5:05:31 AM EDT
[#39]
Compared to what you've been going through, that wait will be short! Since you started this I have had two Form 1 approvals for SBRs, one Form 4 SBS, and one Form 4 AOW approved. You have much more patience than I do. You are making me glad that I decided to incorporate before really trying anyone beyond the chief though. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/10/2005 6:33:34 PM EDT
[#40]
Back on 10/17, Mr. Fulkerson wrote back saying, "I've been trying to get some movement on this - I've gotten through the first set of hurdles but am waiting on one other approval. If I don't get sometime by the end of this week I will send your materials back as it will likely not happen. I'm still hopeful." I didn't hear from him. I plan on writing back soon, but expect a rejection. In the meanwhile, I've started researching the Republicans on the Court of Common Pleas to find out if any are gun friendly. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/13/2005 4:21:04 PM EDT
[#41]
if your going to approach anyone on the Franklin County Municipal Court I might suggest Judge Salerno. She is one of the good ones and supports our 2nd Ammendment. Had a chance to speak with her at the last PRO show and she seem's pretty cool....
good luck! Mike |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/13/2005 5:08:27 PM EDT
[#42]
I don't think she'll pass muster. According to the ATF website, judges authorized to sign have to be "of state courts having authority to conduct jury trials in felony cases."
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2005 11:10:23 AM EDT
[#43]
I e-mailed Mr. Fulkerson yesterday and got the following back this afternoon: "I've finally gotten word. The Attorney General is not going to sign Form 4s [sic] at this time. I'm sorry that I could not help you." I thought Petro was a Republican. He'll never get my vote. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2005 11:32:44 AM EDT
[#44]
He wasn't going to get my vote anyway, though he'll likely beat Blackwell, cause Blackwell's....well, black.
So where does that leave you with your SBR quest? What's your next move? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2005 12:51:33 PM EDT
[#45]
I suggest you write the ATF and get their suggestion. Be sure to describe your trevails.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2005 4:38:21 PM EDT
[#46]
Per the ATF, " judges of state courts having authority to conduct jury trials in felony cases," so that's the Court of Common Pleas.
I've almost convinced myself I want a Phantom flash suppressor on my M4 barrel anyway (I've read they do a better job on short barrels), but this process is too interesting for me to stop now. After I run through the judges, I'm going to go back to the ATF for more names/positions. I really want to know what they're going to say next. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2005 5:38:17 PM EDT
[#47]
I applaud your conviction!
After 3+ years of trying to just get the local Chief to just RETURN MY PHONE CALL, I decided to incorporate... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/19/2005 6:05:39 PM EDT
[#48]
I received all my paperwork back from Jonathan Fulkerson, the Deputy Attorney General, with a letter that said, "Pursuant to my email of today, please find enclosed your original ATF Form 4 [sic] paperwork. I am sorry the Attorney General's Office could not assist you in securing your CLEO signature. I wish you the best of luck."
The ironic thing is that Mr. Fulkerson has an AR-15 and two sound supressors (.22 and .45). I wonder what the AG would say about that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2005 5:06:35 AM EDT
[#49]
Let me guess.....Union Township. Looks like I'm in the same boat. Has anyone used a living trust to transfer an NFA item? I've been researching using an LLC, and I've read of several people using trusts as the transferee. Seems like less hassle and no annual tax filing, etc. Thanks. Eric |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
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.
