The clock has started on Trust Ruling (90 days to go)

ppapago

Texas
SUS VENATOR CLUB
https://www.federalregister.gov/arti...y-with-respect

It has been published in the federal register which means comments should start today and we have 90 days to send in comments and fight to get this rule changed or stopped completely.

Download the PDF and read up for instructions on how to leave comments. Also see this link below for more information on how to construct your arguments effectively.

http://blog.princelaw.com/

Contact senators, reps, NRA, or whatever orginization you believe may help. We cannot allow this to go through!
 

Afalex1

LSB Active Member
SUS VENATOR CLUB
I don't want to be a stick in the mud and I dont think we will have any issues in this thread, but I want to remind everyone to keep this informative and not political.

I will be reading the PDF tonight. It is my top priority after work. Thanks for the link.
 

ppapago

Texas
SUS VENATOR CLUB
I don't want to be a stick in the mud and I dont think we will have any issues in this thread, but I want to remind everyone to keep this informative and not political.

I will be reading the PDF tonight. It is my top priority after work. Thanks for the link.

Agreed. Lets keep the rhetoric out of this thread and stay on point.

Also I need to clarify. The timer starts on MONDAY the 9th not today. So do not send in any comments today as they will not count. Spend the weekend thinking about what you want to say.

1. Be professional
2. Do not construct arguments based on emotion. The best way to do this is use real world factual data and experience. Talk to local Class 3 dealers to find out how it will affect them. You need to explain how this affects you personally.
3. Use proper spelling and grammar.
4. Remember, by law, the ATF must respond to your comment. Therefore, the more comments submitted the longer the regulatory process takes. Get your friends and family involved. Spread the word!
5. DO NOT give the ATF ideas on potential compromises! This is how we got here in the first place. Nothing short of complete withdrawal of the proposed rule is acceptable.
 

rob072770

Lewisville NC
SUS VENATOR CLUB
LoneStarBoars Supporter
I read that thing. So if I read it correctly they understand why there are more trust due CLEO not signing off on there forms. In the next paragraph the say the believe the CLEO sign off should stay. Is that how you read it?
 

Wildfowler

Mis'sippi
SUS VENATOR CLUB
I read that thing. So if I read it correctly they understand why there are more trust due CLEO not signing off on there forms. In the next paragraph the say the believe the CLEO sign off should stay. Is that how you read it?

I have skimmed through the PDF and found this on page 24. It looks like the info below will be the new language for the law enforcement sign off:

The certificate for each responsible person must be completed by the CLEO who has jurisdiction in the area in which the responsible person resides. The certificate must state that the official is satisfied that the fingerprints and photograph accompanying the application are those of the responsible person and that the certifying official has no information indicating that receipt or possession of the firearm by the responsible person would be in violation of state or local law.

For people who had had trouble getting the CLEO sign off in the past may well be able to do so now? This doesn't look that onerous to me? Honestly wish this were the case all along so that the Feds wouldn't even be looking into this type of gun ownership in the first place.

The fact that they are scrutinizing this has me most worried.
 

FrankT

Destin FL
LSB TURKEY BUZZARD PRESERVATION SOCIETY
LoneStarBoars Supporter
Agree, I think most of us feel the same way politically and I see no reason to beat dead horses. Polite, to the point and professional is the only way to write...with the millions of letters going in I doubt many will be read.
 

Afalex1

LSB Active Member
SUS VENATOR CLUB
I have skimmed through the PDF and found this on page 24. It looks like the info below will be the new language for the law enforcement sign off:



For people who had had trouble getting the CLEO sign off in the past may well be able to do so now? This doesn't look that onerous to me? Honestly wish this were the case all along so that the Feds wouldn't even be looking into this type of gun ownership in the first place.

The fact that they are scrutinizing this has me most worried.


I agree with you on two points. If the CLEO requirement for INDVIDUALS read like this already CLEOs probably would not have as many reservation with signing the documents. I also agree that this would have avoided the political scrutiny we are going through now.

However, even with the new wording of the CLEO requirement this will be a huge burden for families and businesses with a trust. Each person that has access the the nfa items is considered a responsible person. Think about this. A trust might have anywhere from 2 to 20 or more people depending on the situation. Ages could range from a newborn to 100 years. Imagine getting prints and photos for a 2 year old because you want a new nfa item and you want them to use it when they are older. What if you are military and have your brother and dad in the trust, who live in nfa approving states, just so you have a place to store them if you get stationed in a state that doesn't allow them.or overseas? Now you have to have prints, photos, and CLEO sigs on multiple people in multuliple states. What do you do if one CLEO wont sign? Sounds like too much BS and rights infringement to me. Don't compromise.

This new rule must not go through. We need to go offensive on this and beat it!
 

ppapago

Texas
SUS VENATOR CLUB
I have skimmed through the PDF and found this on page 24. It looks like the info below will be the new language for the law enforcement sign off:



For people who had had trouble getting the CLEO sign off in the past may well be able to do so now? This doesn't look that onerous to me? Honestly wish this were the case all along so that the Feds wouldn't even be looking into this type of gun ownership in the first place.

The fact that they are scrutinizing this has me most worried.

Do not be fooled by the less harsh language in the new ruling. It still does not compel a CLEO to sign. CLEOs are mostly politcal figures who push their own agenda and/or unwilling to signoff due to any "perceived" liabililty.

I am pretty much set on my toys for a very long time. This time next year I will have more silencers than I will know what to do with. I am more concerned about the booming silencer market imploding and all the jobs and fine companies that have sprung up recently (AAC, Silencerco, etc) as well as class 3 dealers who will probably lose their businesses due to this ruling.
 

Afalex1

LSB Active Member
SUS VENATOR CLUB
Ppapago,

The business aspect of things is something that should be mentioned in everyone's comments. I'm not sure if our lawmakers are actually concerned with our current economic state, but to me it would make sense to keep the suppressor business "wave" rolling as long and as large as we can make it. It is one of the few industries that has continually gained steam over the last few years.

I'm not a lawyer or have ever participated in something like this before, but I plan to speak with my local class 3 dealer. I plan to ask him a few questions to get cold hard facts out of him to put in my comments. Things like how many class 3 items do you sell a year? What is the average profit per item? How many items are bought using a trust? How much revenue will you lose if ATF 41P is passed as written and people stop using trusts and stop buying class 3 items? Will this cause you to lay off any employees? Will it convince you to quit selling class 3 items? Will this new rule negatively effect your and your business's well being?

Doing a little research and adding facts that range from the local to national level is what helps create a strong comment. Just saying ATF 41P is BS or spewing political agenda type stuff is not going to push our cause. Be specific and pointed, but professional.
 

rob072770

Lewisville NC
SUS VENATOR CLUB
LoneStarBoars Supporter
Here in Forsyth Co. NC our CLEO said he would not sign off on any class 3 period. I asked someone why and was told he does not believe anyone needs nor does he have the time. Just think from a time stand point for a metro CLEO how much time that it. We just got the OK this summer to be able to hunt suppressed. What would be over whelming to a CLEO if he would sign.
 

FrankT

Destin FL
LSB TURKEY BUZZARD PRESERVATION SOCIETY
LoneStarBoars Supporter

Wildfowler

Mis'sippi
SUS VENATOR CLUB
Says its a bill sponsored by two representatives (D). Surely the ATF can't institute a new tax rate?

I wish you could tax deduct these special taxes
 

ppapago

Texas
SUS VENATOR CLUB
I sent a couple emails to Silencer Shop and Silenced America trying to get confirmation on what will happen to pending applications if the new rules get implemented.

From Silenced America...

"There shouldn't be any issue whatsoever with pending apps. I don't have any definitive confirmation from the ATF, but it is what I've been told."

I was hoping for a more definitive answer, but it will have to do for now. Still waiting to hear back from Silencer Shop. I just wish the ATF would have someone set the record straight on this.
 

FrankT

Destin FL
LSB TURKEY BUZZARD PRESERVATION SOCIETY
LoneStarBoars Supporter
Yeah they will do whatever they want to at the time, really no way of knowing.
 

1956_4x4

Crestview, Florida
LoneStarBoars Supporter
I know the ATF is getting slammed with applications from folks trying to get in under the cut-off. I have a couple of things that have not even gone "Pending" yet and all I can do is hope for the best.

Smitty
 

Houlador

New Member
I too am waiting on some NFA items. My dealer just told me about the trust/CLEO and the $500 tax stamp. Had not heard about the ammo tax. Anything else being discussed?
 
Top