Kicked off range for not having NFA paperwork...

[Skans]

And so an NFA firearms trust would need to be uniquely structured to properly serve its purposes and goals.

Fiddletown, I don't dissagree with anything you've said. But, I do have a question for you. What would be the stated purpose of a trust established for the ownership of NFA items? Investment? If that's the case, then don't shoot the machinegun, because that has noting to do with investment.

I can't see how it could be defense related, or "just for fun". From the little I know, these purposes wouldn't jive with what trusts are for. Tell me, how do you grant the Trustee or beneficiary the power, under a trust, to take the trust asset (machinegun) to a range and shoot it just for kicks and giggles? Who pays for the ammunition if you do this? The trust? Who pays the range fees? The trust? Surely, the trustee isn't going to use his own funds for this and the trust asset for his own kicks and giggles, now is he?

 

[Frank Ettin]

..,I do have a question for you. What would be the stated purpose of a trust established for the ownership of NFA items? Investment?...

Beats me. I chimed in to offer some background on the general nature of a trust. I have no experience specifically with NFA firearm trusts. I would expect that the lawyers who do that sort of work have good answers.

I know it's very common and fashionable to mistrust lawyers. And there certainly are plenty who are on the smarmy side. Also, if you're dealing with one who is actually representing someone you're dealing with, he doesn't owe you anything. But at the same time, bar associations don't have any more sense of humor than ATF when it comes to lawyers who take on stuff they're not qualified to handle.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

What would be the stated purpose of a trust established for the ownership of NFA items? Investment?...

There are three primary reasons for getting a trust. One is for those people that cannot obtain a CLEO autograph. Second is for those that frequently buy NFA items and want to simplify the paperwork.

The important reason for a trust is to ensure the proper distribution of your NFA items upon your death. With common M16s and MP5s selling for $20,000 these days, it is important that you plan ahead for your demise.

 

[Willie Lowman]

Who pays for the ammunition if you do this? The trust? Who pays the range fees? The trust? Surely, the trustee isn't going to use his own funds for this and the trust asset for his own kicks and giggles, now is he?

Yes, the trust does pay for it. From a bank account in the name of the trust that the trustees put money into. Same way tax stamps are paid for.

 

[Skans]

I know it's very common and fashionable to mistrust lawyers.

I don't have a beef with lawyers, per se. I simply think that the use of a trust or corp to purchase NFA comes with some real problems. Recreational use of firearms by individuals seems contrary to what trusts are set up for - i.e. the preservation of assets or distribution upon death. How many folks who have these trusts actually set up bank accounts in the name of the trust for the purpose of paying all related costs to shooting NFA item?

But, the bigger question is really what purpose does it serve for the trustee of such a trust to take the gun out to the range and do mag dumps with it. A trust might work fine for guns that are nothing but safe queens, but I think there is a real contridiction using them for guns you want to use and shoot. I think it would way too easy for BATFE to simply declare by "special ruling" that all NFA guns in trusts can only be kept for investment purposes - not used for target practice, etc. If everyone started putting their NFA items in trusts, it sure would be an easy way for BATFE to prohibit people from ever using them.

 

[Powderman]

And this post hits at the heart of the problem.

Why on earth do we have to duck and go through all kinds of twists and turns to exercise a right? Why?

It seems that the answer is that we haven't gotten mad enough yet. We, as a nation, are like the frog in the pot of slowly heating water. We aren't at the tepid stage--far from it! We are in the rolling boil, and we don't seem to care about it.

How did we get here? Simple. Look at the last election.

"I'll never vote for Palin."
"I hope Obama gets elected."
"Maybe this will be a wake-up call."
"I'm not voting this year."
"I'm going to vote for_____."

The Obama crowd didn't even have to fight to defeat us. We whacked ourselves in the head quite nicely, thank you very much. And still, it was a very close thing.

We haven't gotten mad enough yet to seriously ask questions like, "Why do I have to jump through these hoops? Why do I have to twist and turn and go into convulsions to own a fully automatic firearm?"

"Why does one inch of barrel even make a difference?"

We as a Nation have just sat by and let it happen. We have the most powerful weapon imaginable--the VOTE--and we waste it, squander it away on candidates who don't have a chance of winning, withhold it.

And we get what we deserve. After the election, what happened?

Panic buying. Primer and powder shortages.

A general air of defeat.

Elected officials giving voice to ideas that are the stuff of nightmares--registration schemes, confiscation, submission to UN control, outright bans--all open discussions; things that should not even be spoken of in a free Nation.

And we let it happen.

I see posts on the forums stating: "If you are a true patriot, you won't enforce this law. You'll turn a blind eye to this."

Wrong.

We, as a Nation, have allowed these laws to exist. We, as a Nation, have allowed officials to be elected that will eventually take our rights and strangle our freedoms into subjugation.

And then there is a lot of empty rhetoric about what will happen "if they come to take our guns away".

Why will we let it come to that? Why do we not unite, on a solid front, and come Election Day--starting with the mid terms, coming up next year--and VOTE THESE BUMS OUT OF OFFICE?

Until we DO wake up, let's try to stop having angels dance on the head of a pin.

And just to be safe, have your NFA paperwork with you when you go to the range.

 

[LukeA]

Does any evidence corroborate any of the above claims?

 

[ssmdive]

Skans

Let me guess - this comes from some lawyer who sells trusts for NFA purchases. What a load of BS - if my wife knows the combination of my safe, which holds my registered machinegun, she and I are violating the NFA??

Like it or not, that is the way the law is written.

 

[gyvel]

I was at the Markham Park shooting range today in South Florida.

The ultimate irony is that C. R. Markham was one of the biggest anti-gun politicians in Broward County and they named a park/shooting range after him

 

[gyvel]

Perhaps I am being overly simple minded, but NFA Regs regarding Form 4s clearly state that it is SUGGESTED to carry a copy. SUGGESTED does not mean REQUIRED.

Now, assuming there are no state or local ordinances to the contrary and some LEO, going on the basis of prima facie evidence, actually arrests (NOT detains) you for possessing the weapon, and you do not have your stamped paperwork with you, which, BY LAW you are NOT required have in your immediate possession, wouldn't you have a whopper of a case for false arrest once you go to court and produce said documentation?

For that matter, since the only law/regulation governing such an incident clearly states that the document is only required to be surrendered to the Attorney General or ATF officers, would you have to produce it in court at all? At that point would it become incumbent on the prosecution to prove otherwise?

The only parallel I have for this is a former acquaintance who was stopped by a Chandler, AZ LEO one night while walking with his girlfriend.

He refused to produce identification upon demand of said LEO, was arrested, jailed overnight, and, when brought before the judge was immediately exonerated due to the fact that there is no legal requirement (in AZ, at least) to show identification when walking in a public place upon demand of an LEO.

He did receive an out-of-court settlement of $10,000.00 from the City of Chandler.

Assuming no such requirement exists in Broward County or Florida, wouldn't the arrest of a person for simply refusing to produce NFA docs be the same principle?

 

[Frank Ettin]

....some LEO, going on the basis of prima facie evidence, actually arrests (NOT detains) you for possessing the weapon, and you do not have your stamped paperwork with you, which, BY LAW you are NOT required have in your immediate possession, wouldn't you have a whopper of a case for false arrest once you go to court and produce said documentation?...

Nope. It would be a lawful arrest. Prima facie evidence constitutes probable cause, and an LEO is entitled to arrest on probable cause.

See posts 91 and 112.

....The only parallel I have for this is a former acquaintance who was stopped by a Chandler, AZ LEO one night while walking with his girlfriend...

Not at all parallel. You've stated nothing that could be probable cause for arrest. Walking at night is not, in and of itself, a crime. Possession of an unregistered NFA weapon is a crime, and the only way a person in possession of such a weapon can demonstrate he's in lawful possession is by producing a copy of the NFA paper work.

 

[Powderman]

Now, assuming there are no state or local ordinances to the contrary and some LEO, going on the basis of prima facie evidence, actually arrests (NOT detains) you for possessing the weapon, and you do not have your stamped paperwork with you, which, BY LAW you are NOT required have in your immediate possession, wouldn't you have a whopper of a case for false arrest once you go to court and produce said documentation?

Suggestion: See Terry v. Ohio, cert. to the Supreme Court of OH, 392 US.

 

[Hkmp5sd]

Here is my take on the issue. Under Florida law, a machinegun is only legal if registered under federal guidelines.

790.221 Possession of short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, or machine gun; penalty.--

(1) It is unlawful for any person to own or to have in his or her care, custody, possession, or control any short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, or machine gun which is, or may readily be made, operable; but this section shall not apply to antique firearms.

(2) A person who violates this section commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

(3) Firearms in violation hereof which are lawfully owned and possessed under provisions of federal law are excepted.

If you are stopped by a Florida LEO with a machinegun, you must show proof that the machinegun is owned under federal law. If you want to do that at the police station in the presence of an ATF agent, go for it. If you want your $20,000 machinegun bouncing around in the trunk of a patrol car for the trip, go for it. If you think you can hit the lottery on a false arrest lawsuit, go to it. If you have any common sense, put a copy of your forms in the case with your machinegun.

 

[Powderman]

And, with that in mind, let's take this to another level.

Suppose that you are at home. You have just moved into a nice, quiet neighborhood. You also live in a State like Alaska or Vermont--open carry/concealed carry/etc.

Now, you're standing outside and you notice that a guy is standing by a vehicle. He is carrying a firearm that you KNOW is a submachine gun. At the same time, I come cruising through in my patrol unit. I also see the weapon; you see me stop and make contact with the guy.

Would you still say that I was wrong is asking the guy to produce his NFA paperwork?

 

[Hkmp5sd]

Would you still say that I was wrong is asking the guy to produce his NFA paperwork?

No, I would not say you were wrong.

Unlike common, Title 1 weapons, machineguns are restricted. They are totally illegal unless registered. You can cry 2nd Amendment, invasion of privacy or false arrest until the cows come home, but keep a copy of your forms handy.

 

[Johnny Guest]

Round and round and round AND ROUND we go - - -

Friends, I believe each and every permutation of the law has been discussed at least once. Yeah, we can keep coming up with off-the-wall scenarios, but it wouldn't much alter the facts. Even the OP, cptsplashdown, has repeatedly stated that the question has been answered.

We can all agree that the laws concening NFA items are imperfect, and surely imperfectly administered. Unless and until you --WE, actually-- can convince a majority of voters that such federal laws should be voided or massively modified, we have little or no chance at making things better. THEN, you'll notice, NFA-weapons enthusiasts will need to go the individual states and work to have THEIR laws changed.

This last is not truly beyond hope. I personally remember when federal law allowed for registration of machine guns, but TEXAS law forbade personal ownership. After considerable hassle, state law was changed to allow for possession/ownership IF federal registration was accomplished.

Anyhow, rather than see this entire topic beaten to death again and again, the thread is - -
CLOSED.

Johnny