The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > NFA Guns and Gear

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 17, 2011, 05:27 PM   #1
Blackops_2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2008
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 2,586
If the CLEO wont sign off?

I'm a year away from getting a suppressor. Problem is i worked with an ex-sheriff this previous summer and he said the chief wont sign off on it. I've read that in some states CLEO are required to sign off on form 4. A gun smith in town who does local work told me that the CLEO can do nothing about it. So i've got mixed reviews. But i'm suspecting he wont. And if he wont what are the ways around this?
Blackops_2 is offline  
Old February 17, 2011, 06:01 PM   #2
Willie Lowman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 5, 2009
Location: Uh-Hi-O
Posts: 2,419
Get a trust.
Willie Lowman is offline  
Old February 17, 2011, 06:13 PM   #3
NESHOOTER
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 16, 2009
Posts: 509
Yup, get a trust and no need to get fingerprints either, list those also as co-owners you as the executor and you can refile changes but the upside is they can also take the can when you can't go. And they will never have to pay the 200.00 for transfers when you depart this earth. (OH FUN). Ok my warped sense of humor out of the way the only way to go when the SLEO won't do his end. In my area they charge 75.00 for the paperwork filing just check with your NFA Dealer....
NESHOOTER is offline  
Old February 17, 2011, 06:20 PM   #4
Blackops_2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2008
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 2,586
I've yet to actually go to the class 3 dealer here in oxford, but i live in a small town an hour away so it's close. But i imagine they would fill out and help me out. I read about the trust. If i did the trust i could get the suppressor and do without the 200$ tax and fingerprints? Yet my family can use it also (dad)?

Is it more work to go the trust rout?
Blackops_2 is offline  
Old February 17, 2011, 06:34 PM   #5
silvercorvette
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 26, 2010
Location: Anderson SC
Posts: 466
Some people do the trust themselves, some use legal zoom, and some use lawyers, but you have to pay the $200 no matter what you do. I have three guns and wish I did the trust because if I want to do the trust again I have to pay $200 for each gun all over again.
__________________
I am broke, I spent my money on fast cars, guns, reloading equipment and ammo, the rest my money was wasted on nonessential stuff
silvercorvette is offline  
Old February 17, 2011, 06:34 PM   #6
NESHOOTER
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 16, 2009
Posts: 509
Quote:
I've yet to actually go to the class 3 dealer here in oxford, but i live in a small town an hour away so it's close. But i imagine they would fill out and help me out. I read about the trust. If i did the trust i could get the suppressor and do without the 200$ tax and fingerprints? Yet my family can use it also (dad)?

Is it more work to go the trust rout?
Yes, It would be worth the trouble.

Yes, They should have the paperwork refined as (No mistakes) and have you fill out the list of you co-trusties.

No, You can get the can but no matter what the 200.00 tax stamp is going to have to be paid 1-once.

Yes, Any one can use the can that you have listed as co-trusties, understand in its most simplified version is this is kinda like a WILL....
NESHOOTER is offline  
Old February 17, 2011, 06:37 PM   #7
NESHOOTER
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 16, 2009
Posts: 509
Quote:
Is it more work to go the trust rout?
No, It's easier and the only thing you have to do is put the names and get it notartized...send it back to your dealer.
NESHOOTER is offline  
Old February 17, 2011, 06:41 PM   #8
NESHOOTER
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 16, 2009
Posts: 509
Unless your a lawyer, don't do it yourself too much to learn and in the end it may not be legal. Let your class 3 dealer earn his keep and if he knows his business (as I am sure he does dealing with the BATF.... And keep his records and yours clean.
NESHOOTER is offline  
Old February 17, 2011, 07:01 PM   #9
Blackops_2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2008
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 2,586
Thanks for the advice. When the time comes i'll talk to my dad about forming a trust. He wants a silencer also, and was about to jump into it until i told him the price range lol. But he wants one for shooting pest so he doesn't have to wear hearing protection and can shoot a higher caliber. Yes i realize suppressors still shoot high enough in sound to damage your hearing. But i doubt it will bother him as much as a 20" .243 or .223 barrel unsuppressed. Will have to make a trip to the dealer here in oxford before summer for sure. It's pretty nice to find out about the trust. I didn't want to really own a suppressor and keep it at home while i'm in college and noone can use it.

On another note. What if we went ahead with the trust but my dad created it because he's of age. Would i still be able to use the suppressor being 20?
Blackops_2 is offline  
Old February 17, 2011, 07:36 PM   #10
NESHOOTER
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 16, 2009
Posts: 509
Quote:
On another note. What if we went ahead with the trust but my dad created it because he's of age. Would i still be able to use the suppressor being 20?
You bet as long as you listed on the trust and then you would be able to use it. I myself don't think you still need hearing protection when shooting the 7 mag its just about the same as a .22 going off I do use them for P-dogs and yote hunting. And at night when alls quiet no disturbing crack.

I use YHM great quality and less than gemtech or others.
NESHOOTER is offline  
Old February 17, 2011, 08:19 PM   #11
Blackops_2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2008
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 2,586
Good to hear. I looked at YHM. I have 2 options for my ARs they're expensive but it's do to my "liking" what the military uses. And that my PWS SM556 will only accept the gemtech halo or the KAC NT. I will go with the NT4. Expensive sure but i like it alot. As for my SPR i'll be going with the Ops Inc. 12th model but i didn't find it too bad for 600+ versus the KAC for 1500$. For my bolt action is where i'm going to consult between YHM, SWR, Thunder beast arms, AAC, Gemtech, and AWC so on. Really love the Ops inc 12th model.

About the trust if the trust is his name or he is the owner of the so called "corp" then i can only use the suppressor to an extent right. As in taking it with me somewhere would require paperwork or a letter to the ATF?
Blackops_2 is offline  
Old February 18, 2011, 12:25 AM   #12
medalguy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 31, 2009
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 1,017
Find an attorney experienced in NFA trusts. This is too important to screw it up in order to save a couple hundred bucks. I know several attorneys who will do a trust for around $500 and it's money well spent. Would you do your own heart surgery? Get an expert. If there's a problem with your trust later, BATF can come in and take your weapons and possibly charge you as well. If you use an attorney, and the law changes in a few years (and it does!) your attorney can make whatever changes are needed to the documents to keep it legal. You have no way of knowing the law changed. That's the attorney's job.
medalguy is offline  
Old February 18, 2011, 10:45 PM   #13
NESHOOTER
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 16, 2009
Posts: 509
Quote:
About the trust if the trust is his name or he is the owner of the so called "corp" then i can only use the suppressor to an extent right. As in taking it with me somewhere would require paperwork or a letter to the ATF?
No you also have full rights, and the way to avoid the paperwork is I took mine to office max the orginals had them shrunk down to a 3x5 card size for a total of 3.75 for 10 copies readable to any batfe, and lamiate it put a copy of that with every firearm that that suppressor can be used on, the exta flashhiders are 57.00 to 75.00 and get the .308 and change the birdcage on your AR to the YHM one and use the same can on both of these this can is listed to you and dad as owners and you can put on any rifle (at least in my state) As we follow federal rules I would gather that the same would apply in your area, unlike Conceal Carry Weapon=CCW some places require you register each carry gun in my state some cities have attempted to mandate reg's that overrule federal reg's and our AG, has delivered to those cities that what they do is unconsitutional. One more thing to know if you buy the YHM 5.56/.223 can it will not fit on anything larger than that due to the difference of the flashhider .cal but if you get the .308 you can use it on .308 and smaller.

ONCE YOU GET YOUR ORGINALS COPIED PUT THOSE BAD BOYS IN THE BANK LOCK BOXES I believe our bank charges 25.00 a yr for one of those boxes depending on size yes I have a safe at home but I don't want to chance anything I did copy orginal and keep a full size copy at home so if you need more copies you have quick axcess to it. What your really taking care of is the STAMP on orginal paperwork.
NS
NESHOOTER is offline  
Old February 19, 2011, 02:33 AM   #14
Blackops_2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2008
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 2,586
Thanks for the additional info. Already eager to get started.
Blackops_2 is offline  
Old February 21, 2011, 09:58 AM   #15
Skans
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 7,791
You can do a Trust, but don't think that this is without risk. For now, Trusts are just fine. The trustee of the Trust gets to have possession of the gun and, I suppose has authority to actually shoot it.

Here's the problem I see with Trusts. Warning - I'm the "odd-man-out" in my views here, so let me be up front about that. Ask yourself this - "what is the purpose of the Trust"? Well, it could be for many things - investment, protection of assets, inheritance purposes, and some others. But, one thing that all Trustees are historically forbidden from doing is "wasting the assets" that are in that trust.

For example, in a non-NFA trust, If the maker of the trust puts his collection of rare valuable cars in a Trust, a successor Trustee will not typically be permitted to drive those cars around when they are being held for the benefit of others. The Trustee, as custodian for those cars, is required to do everything he can to care for and preserve their values.

Now, there is a very big difference between a trust for holding an NFA item and typical trusts used for other reasons. With an NFA trust, the person setting up the trust never actually owned what he is placing into the trust. So, it makes the "trustee" look even more like someone who really has no valid reason for shooting NFA items for kicks and giggles. So, what does this mean? In my opinion, the BATFE at any time can simply declare that all NFA items held in trusts can no longer be used by the trustee of the trust. All it would take is a few noisy CLEO's and a director of BATFE with a sympathetic ear for this to happen.

For example, lets say that Liberal-Town, Florida elected an ultra-liberal Sheriff who hates private ownership of guns, and really hates machine guns. This CLEO campaigns on on the fact that he won't sign-off on Form 4's like the last Sheriff did. But, owning a machine gun is the new status symbol in Liberal Town. G-man gun range located in Liberal Town decides to permit full-auto weapons to shoot there. Biff and Biff's 50 friends decide they want machine guns, use trusts because they know the Sheriff won't sign, and as trustees take they guns to the range twice a week for some good fun. Liberal-Sheriff doesn't like this and gets a bunch of other like-Minded Sheriff's to beg the director of BATFE to put a stop to machine-gun owners being able to end-run TopDog Sheriff of Liberal-Town. I think you can figure out the rest.

The morals to this story:

1. When too many people make use of a "loophole" (I know, that term is debatable), guns and bruised egos are involved, bad things happen.

2. Who you elect as Sheriff really should matter to you.

3. If you don't have to use a Trust, then don't use it. If you do have to use a Trust, you better know the potential downside and be prepared for it.
Skans is offline  
Old February 21, 2011, 02:52 PM   #16
langenc
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 19, 2007
Location: Montmorency Co, MI
Posts: 1,187
Sounds like another lawbreaking LEO--or is he just protecting the children???
langenc is offline  
Old February 21, 2011, 08:07 PM   #17
NESHOOTER
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 16, 2009
Posts: 509
Quote:
Today, 08:58 AM #15
Skans
Senior Member


Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 3,601 You can do a Trust, but don't think that this is without risk. For now, Trusts are just fine. The trustee of the Trust gets to have possession of the gun and, I suppose has authority to actually shoot it.

Here's the problem I see with Trusts. Warning - I'm the "odd-man-out" in my views here, so let me be up front about that. Ask yourself this - "what is the purpose of the Trust"? Well, it could be for many things - investment, protection of assets, inheritance purposes, and some others. But, one thing that all Trustees are historically forbidden from doing is "wasting the assets" that are in that trust.

For example, in a non-NFA trust, If the maker of the trust puts his collection of rare valuable cars in a Trust, a successor Trustee will not typically be permitted to drive those cars around when they are being held for the benefit of others. The Trustee, as custodian for those cars, is required to do everything he can to care for and preserve their values.

Now, there is a very big difference between a trust for holding an NFA item and typical trusts used for other reasons. With an NFA trust, the person setting up the trust never actually owned what he is placing into the trust. So, it makes the "trustee" look even more like someone who really has no valid reason for shooting NFA items for kicks and giggles. So, what does this mean? In my opinion, the BATFE at any time can simply declare that all NFA items held in trusts can no longer be used by the trustee of the trust. All it would take is a few noisy CLEO's and a director of BATFE with a sympathetic ear for this to happen.

For example, lets say that Liberal-Town, Florida elected an ultra-liberal Sheriff who hates private ownership of guns, and really hates machine guns. This CLEO campaigns on on the fact that he won't sign-off on Form 4's like the last Sheriff did. But, owning a machine gun is the new status symbol in Liberal Town. G-man gun range located in Liberal Town decides to permit full-auto weapons to shoot there. Biff and Biff's 50 friends decide they want machine guns, use trusts because they know the Sheriff won't sign, and as trustees take they guns to the range twice a week for some good fun. Liberal-Sheriff doesn't like this and gets a bunch of other like-Minded Sheriff's to beg the director of BATFE to put a stop to machine-gun owners being able to end-run TopDog Sheriff of Liberal-Town. I think you can figure out the rest.

The morals to this story:

1. When too many people make use of a "loophole" (I know, that term is debatable), guns and bruised egos are involved, bad things happen.

2. Who you elect as Sheriff really should matter to you.

3. If you don't have to use a Trust, then don't use it. If you do have to use a Trust, you better know the potential downside and be prepared for it.
Ok, Skans.... "1. When too many people make use of a "loophole" (I know, that term is debatable), guns and bruised egos are involved, bad things happen."
I see the point your trying to kinda between the lines type....

but I don't agree.... trust are wills, and all listed are co-owners not just names but share said property as equal owners/shareholders.

with your belief in pending going against the grain is bad and then everyone will suffer.(hope not then the ANTI'S may get their way)

Do you may have a CLEO that you know and likes you (but thats irrelevant) and will sign for you great, but what about johnny (nobody) not wanted,respectable,hardworking, pays his bill, lawful, honest... and the CLEO don't know him from atom...
Should he be denied No. but he may anyhow while I am not a class III dealer nor lawyer. but I do own class III items and have depended to those who should know the law and its dealings in this is how they stay in business and make their living.
Not flaming on you just trying to understand your doom and gloom.
In my state I will post info on class III info on trust from a class III dealer while you forming a very good arguement and points outlined,......
Once granted and approved it become a living legal, contract if done correctly
it would take more than the BATFE could do. Here's a link, that makes more sense than I do... or can explain it way better than I can do it...

http://www.nebraskafirepower.com/for...p?topic=2967.0 I answer more if I know the answer to the questions. Again Skans not flaming on you just trying to understand.
NESHOOTER is offline  
Old February 22, 2011, 08:57 AM   #18
Skans
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 7,791
Quote:
but I don't agree.... trust are wills, and all listed are co-owners not just names but share said property as equal owners/shareholders.

with your belief in pending going against the grain is bad and then everyone will suffer.(hope not then the ANTI'S may get their way)
Let me make one thing clear - I am not against using corps, llc's or trusts to purchase NFA items. Not so long as those using them recognize that there are some risks - different risks than if you get the NFA item registered to you as an individual. But, from what I've read lately, no one is pointing out these risks to those who decide to go the trust route. That's the only problem I have with this.

Trusts are not Wills - they are entirely different things. Also, all listed on a trust are not co-owners. Some may be are co-trustees - and there is a very big difference. Although those differences vary from state to state, it is fairly universal that a trustee holds money, valuables, etc. only for the benefit of the designated beneficiaries. If what the trustee is doing with the assets does not benefit the ultimate beneficiaries, then the trustee is basically "out of line". If a trust is set up to benefit trustees and not beneficiaries, then the validity of that trust can be called into question especially when it involves regulated items.

Here, try these examples out - give my your thoughts:

1. I set up a trust to purchase an airplane. Airplane is sold directly to the trust. I'm the trustee. I do not have a pilot's license. Do I get to pilot the plane?

2. I set up a trust to buy a veterinary clinic. I am not a veterinarian, but I am the trustee of the trust. Can I practice veterinary medicine?

My "beliefs" can harm no one. I would hope that all reading this board see and understand that. I am merely trying to give you some information where there seems to be quite a bit of misinformation. Anyone who thinks that BATFE is blind to what I have raised as an issue is naive.

To answer your question - Yes, my CLEO will sign off on machineguns but not silencers. If I want a silencer, I'd have to go the trust, corp, llc route. And, with a silencer(s) I wouldn't mind doing that since they are relatively cheap NFA toys.

Last edited by Skans; February 22, 2011 at 01:57 PM.
Skans is offline  
Old February 22, 2011, 11:10 PM   #19
NESHOOTER
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 16, 2009
Posts: 509
Quote:
Here, try these examples out - give my your thoughts:

1. I set up a trust to purchase an airplane. Airplane is sold directly to the trust. I'm the trustee. I do not have a pilot's license. Do I get to pilot the plane?

2. I set up a trust to buy a veterinary clinic. I am not a veterinarian, but I am the trustee of the trust. Can I practice veterinary medicine?

My "beliefs" can harm no one. I would hope that all reading this board see and understand that. I am merely trying to give you some information where there seems to be quite a bit of misinformation. Anyone who thinks that BATFE is blind to what I have raised as an issue is naive.

To answer your question - Yes, my CLEO will sign off on machineguns but not silencers. If I want a silencer, I'd have to go the trust, corp, llc route. And, with a silencer(s) I wouldn't mind doing that since they are relatively cheap NFA toys.
Thanks for your reply Skans.


1. Not the same, set up a trust to buy a plane, can you fly it No... but you can utilize it(fly around in it).

2. Buying a clinic for animals, can you practice veterinary medicine. No but you can shampoo the animals and trim their nails.

3. "Can your beliefs harm anyone" No but again, are you saying your information is correct and all others is misinformation.

4. No one that owns firearms or the like would ever under estimate the BATFE on attempting to remove and control our 2nd.

5. That great that you CLEO would sign off on AUTO's by definition are the so called Assault Rifle (capable of auto fire without resetting the trigger) and the suppressor is only a method of controlling sound to a bearable level. The LEO'S who have no interaction with suppressor's do not know its not like the movies and is not quiet a butterfly, as the movies would portray. And the suppressor can not deliver a lethal blow anymore than a bat.

That being said it varys from state to state and it is a person/s responsibility to find the resources to be informed and to OWN AND PROMOTE our 2nd by purchasing these type of items and exercise our rights and educate those who have no understanding of said products or ownership of said items.
NESHOOTER is offline  
Old February 23, 2011, 09:07 AM   #20
Skans
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 7,791
Quote:
3. "Can your beliefs harm anyone" No but again, are you saying your information is correct and all others is misinformation.
I haven't said that. I was, however, addressing your response disagreeing with me where you gave some misinformation. A Trust is not a Will - there's no way around this, its simply wrong. You said that "all listed (in trusts) are co-owners" - that's simply inaccurate as well.

But, here's what I've really got a problem with - you said that my beliefs going against the grain is bad, and everyone will suffer. Yeah, that one got me a little defensive. Then you alluded to me being privileged or lucky that I have a CLEO that will sign and somehow want to squash any ability of others to bypass the CLEO sign-off using Trusts. How should I take that?

All I was trying to do, and still am trying to do is educate folks who are considering these NFA trusts about some risks that they may not have considered. I see that you try to pick apart my examples, but I think you get the point. The point is that just because you are a trustee of a trust that owns something doesn't necessarily give you the right to use it, especially when it comes to regulated items......riding in an airplane is not even close to the same thing as flying one.
Skans is offline  
Old February 23, 2011, 07:54 PM   #21
NESHOOTER
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 16, 2009
Posts: 509
nuff said I do not claim to be a legal absolute last word. I am not here to twist your words to say neither you "you alluded to you being privileged or lucky" just to offer some knowledge to those who have not traveled the NFA route. And I give way to your knowledge...
NESHOOTER.
Quote:
understand in its most simplified version is this is kinda like a WILL....
NESHOOTER is offline  
Old February 23, 2011, 09:56 PM   #22
oldcspsarge
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 11, 2008
Location: Rocky Mountains
Posts: 441
You may have to have your CLEO wake up and smell the coffee.

It no longer matters what a Police Chief or Sheriff personally thinks about form-4's.

The Supreme Court has ruled...ANY public official who refuses to review any application for a lawful process becomes PERSONALLY liable and cannot be defended by the political subdivision that employ's Him/Her for his illegal conduct.

This case came from very strange bedfellows....the applicant for a parade permit was the KKK., who the Sheriff did not like, ...and their attorneys, the ACLU ran the appeal all the way up. I have had a few CLEO's refuse to review and consider form-4's. All I did is ask the name of their City/County Attorney was...and made a phone call. In every case, I had a call back from the CLEO saying PLEASE submit the form-4 and it would be considered......and all came back signed off.

Stand up to these public servants with the Law and it will work for you.
They either must have a LEGAL reason to deny you or they MUST sign off on the form-4's.....it's the LAW !
oldcspsarge is offline  
Old February 24, 2011, 08:38 AM   #23
Skans
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 7,791
Quote:
The Supreme Court has ruled...ANY public official who refuses to review any application for a lawful process becomes PERSONALLY liable and cannot be defended by the political subdivision that employ's Him/Her for his illegal conduct.

This case came from very strange bedfellows....the applicant for a parade permit was the KKK., who the Sheriff did not like, ...and their attorneys, the ACLU ran the appeal all the way up. I have had a few CLEO's refuse to review and consider form-4's. All I did is ask the name of their City/County Attorney was...and made a phone call. In every case, I had a call back from the CLEO saying PLEASE submit the form-4 and it would be considered......and all came back signed off.
That's pretty interesting - do you happen to know the name of the case?
Skans is offline  
Old February 24, 2011, 12:19 PM   #24
GoingQuiet
Member
 
Join Date: July 1, 2010
Location: Melbourne, FL
Posts: 88
You can go to another CLEO or form a trust, those are essentially your only options.
__________________
FFL/SOT Melbourne, FL - Sales by appointment. sales@goingquiet.com
Sig Sauer Stocking Dealer
Silencerco Stocking Distributor
GoingQuiet is offline  
Old March 4, 2011, 12:31 AM   #25
Romeo 33 Delta
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 27, 2009
Posts: 313
oldcspsarge ... I had wondered about a refusal to sign off on a form 4. I always believed that the signature of the CLEO was certification that the applicant was whom he or she claimed they were ... not a form of "permission". (now, this may NOT be the purpose and I'm open to being educated on the purpose of the sign-off on a Form 4).

On the basis of how I understood it ... I didn't see how a CLEO could refuse. Just do your damned job kinda' thing.

This Court decision is certainly interesting and I always like it when the Sheriff of Nottingham gets a phone call thatresults in an instant attitude adjustment.
Romeo 33 Delta is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.14437 seconds with 9 queries