Trust Changes Ahead...

[ddnc]

A message from NFATCA, President, John Brown:

The NFATCA began a long, arduous journey almost nine years ago. For those of you who can remember, that was when the Bush administration and ATF were working very closely with anyone in the firearms industry. We made good progress, though the wheels of government churned ever so slowly - but it was progress. Two things happened that neither the NFATCA nor I will be held accountable for. First and foremost, the majority of this country voted for Barack Obama. Second, a couple of felons figured "Wow, no background check, I am buying my NFA stuff through a trust".
Now if you want to hold the NFATCA accountable for that, then you obviously must have been a part of that majority. When faced with the second issue and the fact that ATF was contemplating no longer honoring trust transfers because of the abuse, no one at the NFATCA came up with the alternatives. We don't make government policy and we don't write legislation coming out of this administration. I can't say this any clearer. This change in policy came directly from the Executive Branch.


We simply stand up in front for your rights. I didn't joint this fight for fun, nor did I start the NFATCA for myself. Every issue, every battle, has been crafted around the fact that my five sons should have the same opportunities that I have had. I did because I believe that every American should have those same rights, regardless of what the current government says. With every uphill fight, I get hundreds of grandstanders that call me personally, block their caller ID and tell me I should be shot. I have people telling me they are dropping their membership, only to find out they never have been a member. I have people questioning my commitment or motives. Let me assure you that having been a licensed dealer for over thirty years, this effects my livelihood - not just my collection of firearms.

We will continue to battle this issue and the White House. We know that many inside ATF do not and have not agreed with this change in stance. NFATCA counsel is prepared to fight, but unlike myself, he does not work free of charge for the NFATCA. Simply stated, if you choose not to support the NFATCA, then you weaken our chances of winning the battle. If you choose not to support the cause, don't complain about the outcome. Contribute your funds or your time and voice. A few have said they have a stronger voice in the NFA community than the NFATCA. I challenge you to put your words into actions and join us to make a difference rather than work against us.

Your point is taken and the death threat business is BS but be that as it may regardless of intention and who did what, NFATCA is going to get the lions share of blame for this. It is already evident all over the boards. NFATCA was thrown under the bus and hung out to dry by this current administration.
This should not be surprising though, they are very well adept at finding a scapegoat or someone to blame for anything they do. Owing up to responsibility is not the current despot's forte.

[ExecDirector]

You are correct, sir.

[mbogo]

Sirs,

Can you respond to the following article? http://www.examiner.com/article/nfa-...st-rule-change

What exactly did you petition the BATFE for regarding NFA trusts?

mbogo

[jason8844]

The NRA has come out with more. They seem to be taking a more proactive role in helping out the NFA community.

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/fe...-proposal.aspx

[ExecDirector]

Please review the official statement on our main website. Mr. Codrea is a talented writer but has a penchant for not consulting us on articles he writes concerning us.

[ExecDirector]

NFATCA has retained counsel to aggressively fight the White House actions. We will keep you informed. And yes, the NRA is helping fight the good fight!

[philcam]

A message from NFATCA, President, John Brown:

The NFATCA began a long, arduous journey almost nine years ago. For those of you who can remember, that was when the Bush administration and ATF were working very closely with anyone in the firearms industry.

Yes, John, we know just how closely you worked with the ATF. In fact, you were in bed with them working as a confidential informant.

My question is, when will the NFATCA release an original, unedited copy of the petition it sent to the ATF, or should we just submit a FOIA request?

[ExecDirector]

Actually, you know nothing of the sort, save for what you have read on the Internet (so it must be true, right?). I challenge you to provide factual evidence that John is "in bed with them working as a confidential informant." The text of the petition is ALREADY released in ATF's publication that everyone is citing, but does not appear to be reading. Just like they miss the details about prohibited persons receiving weapons without background checks via legal entities. Here, I'll save you some time on that one:

In Texas, ATF became aware of a situation in which the member of an LLC was illegal alien, living in the United States under an assumed name, and had a felony warrant outstanding. At that time, the LLC had 19 firearms registered to it and ATF lacked the necessary information to conduct any background checks to determine whether the member was a prohibited person. In Tennessee, as a result of information provided by a Federal Firearms Licensee, ATF became aware of applications submitted to transfer two NFA firearms to a trust in which one of the trustees was a convicted felon.

[jason8844]

In Texas, ATF became aware of a situation in which the member of an LLC was illegal alien, living in the United States under an assumed name, and had a felony warrant outstanding. At that time, the LLC had 19 firearms registered to it and ATF lacked the necessary information to conduct any background checks to determine whether the member was a prohibited person. In Tennessee, as a result of information provided by a Federal Firearms Licensee, ATF became aware of applications submitted to transfer two NFA firearms to a trust in which one of the trustees was a convicted felon.

This is funny. I thought this administration was all about extending rights to illegal aliens and convicted felons? After all, they vote Democrat. I am going to throw it back at them and say this administration is "racist" for not letting illegals have Title II weapons. Hell, we give them instate tuition for college, welfare, food stamps, driver's licences, Social Security, disability, cash for every kid they pop out, free K-12 education for those kids, the right to vote, the right to serve on juries, and pretty much every other right citizens get, then give them more through "privileges". Why stop at firearms? Or even better.... Title II weapons? Hell, they should be able to get their stamps back in 7 days, or not need stamps at all!!

Does anyone else see how screwed up our nation is? We have given so much to illegals that they can make their way on to gun trusts and the ATF can not properly investigate because of all this pandering. Yet, people like me have to follow the rules, pay taxes, submit fingerprints, get CLEO sign off just to take 3 inches off my shotgun or rifle barrel and then wait 9 freaking months to get the paperwork back.

[ExecDirector]

Agreed... It is penultimately silly. Currently trying to pull all of the adjudicated cases involving a 922(g) charge (prohibited person in possession) for the past few years. 922(g) does not have a separate "specifying" charge for "by way of a legal entity," so this is going to require a lot of manual work. I know that it has, in fact, happened on may occasions. And yes, it is already illegal. But the current trust/corp set up allows principals in these entities to easily skirt a background check. Additionally:

• Although the NFA Handbook has had language added to it by ATF that directs FFL's to run a NICS check on NFA pick ups by trusts/corps
• That handbook is NOT a regulation book
• There is no current supporting regulation for this directive
• The 4473 form at line 22 STILL clearly states "No NICS check was required because the transfer involved only National Firearms Act firearms(s)."
• No official notice of this directive has been sent out to current FFL's.
• No consistent notice of this directive has been sent out to IOI's to advise FFL's during inspections

People are up in arms screaming that the situation is "already illegal." That is absolutely true. But ATF is in the awkward position of facilitating the illegal activity because they have no way to perform even a basic check under current law. We acknowledged this situation back in the Bush era and offered that eliminating CLEO would substantially reduce the incidence of this situation by removing a majority of the need for using legal entities in first place. We then went on to suggest designating a responsible person(s) with a background check would give them the ability to validate that each transfer had at least one background check. We also advocated for using the NICS system to perform the check. The current White House went crazy with it as a political expedient. We have now engaged counsel to fight this.

Until the NFA is eliminated (again, something that we DO support), there are going to be road blocks on the path to NFA ownership. We will try to minimize and reduce the impact of those road blocks as long as they exist. We will not just throw our hands up and wait for the NFA to be repealed.