ATF Muddies Machine Gun Waters

Jack_Bauer24 · May 29, 2014, 07:37 AM

This is a great article and shows the stupidity of the ATF and us govt.

http://www.gunnews.com/atf-muddies-machine-gun-waters/

Skans · May 29, 2014, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Helen L. Koppe sent a letter outlining that an unincorporated trust is not a person–therefore, a check must be performed. Get it? She just said that an unincorporated trust is not a person, therefore according to the GCA as stated above; an unincorporated trust can manufacture and possess machine guns without having to abide by the May 19, 1986 date. They can submit Form 1 and manufacture machine guns.

No. I don't get it. Where's the authorization in what Ms. Koope said that lets us start applying for Form 1's to build machine guns???

Willie Lowman · May 29, 2014, 08:48 AM

Read these words carefully.

ANY MACHINE GUN REGISTERED AFTER MAY 1986 IS A POST SAMPLE AND IS ONLY MAY ONLY BE POSSESSED BY A S.O.T. MILITARY OR LAW ENFORCEMENT.

Did everyone forget about that? Is your trust a Special Occupational Taxpayer? No it isn't. Is your trust a branch of the U.S. Military? Nope. Is your trust a Police Precinct or County Sheriff's office? I doubt it.

Hey, lets take a look at the BATFE form 5320.1 and see if there is anything printed on it that will lend clarity to this...

Quote:

Originally Posted by BATFE

7. Reasons for Disapproval. 26 U.S.C. § 5822 provides that applications shall be
denied if the making or possession of the firearm would place the maker in
violation of law.
a. State or Local Law. If State or local law prohibits the making or
possession of the firearm being made, the application will be disapproved.
b. Machineguns
(1) 18 U.S.C. § 922(o) provides that machineguns may be made only for
government use or export. An application will be denied unless the
making meets these criteria.

machineguns may be made only for
government use or export. An application will be denied unless the
making meets these criteria.

Is your trust an exporter? No it isn't that either.

If it sounds to good to be true, it probably is.

**Tom Servo** · May 29, 2014, 09:17 AM

That article is a mess. While there might be a semantic loophole in the ATF statement, woe unto anyone who actually tries to exploit it.

As for trustees having to undergo a NICS check on pickup, that's nothing new.

Theohazard · May 29, 2014, 09:51 AM

This has been going around the internet for several weeks now. I read about a gun trust lawyer who is trying it out and already submitted a Form 1 for a machine gun. I don't know if he honestly believes it will go through, or he's just setting the stage for a legal battle, or he's simply trying to drum up business for his trusts. But whatever happens from this, I can be fairly certain nobody's going to be getting or making any legal machine guns any time soon.

zincwarrior · May 29, 2014, 10:10 AM

Sorry but the whole trust method is a dodge in the first place. I'm actually onside with the ATF on this one. A trustee should have to perform the requisite activities as any other owner as they are acting on behalf of the beneficiaries of that trust.

James K · May 29, 2014, 09:46 PM

BATFE says, in essence, that it will not recognize a trust as an entity unless it is also a corporation. A corporation is what is termed a "corporate person", as opposed to a "natural person" (us), and has many of the same rights and obligations as a natural person. "Corporate persons" are included in the "no person shall" parts of the law. Normally, a "corporate person" that violates the law (GM fails to report a car defect) will be fined or at the extreme, its license to do business revoked. A corporation cannot be imprisoned, but any officer who violates the law can be imprisoned as an individual.

But an unincorporated group is not an entity under the law; it is simply a group of individuals and each member of the group is a "natural person" under the law. Any one of those "natural persons", if otherwise eligible, can purchase an NFA firearm; the group, since it is not a legal entity, cannot.

That does NOT mean the group can violate the law, as has been suggested. The group has no legal standing as an entity and any of its members who violates the law, or takes part in some collective violation of the law, can and will be prosecuted.

The idea that a group of people can get together to make machineguns when an individual or a corporation may not, is absurd on the face of it and the article is simply blowing some kind of smoke, medical or not.

Jim

May 29, 2014, 07:37 AM	#1
Jack_Bauer24 Senior Member Join Date: August 16, 2007 Posts: 147	ATF Muddies Machine Gun Waters This is a great article and shows the stupidity of the ATF and us govt. http://www.gunnews.com/atf-muddies-machine-gun-waters/ __________________ "When the people fear the govt there is tyranny, when the govt fears the people there is liberty." Thomas Jefferson

May 29, 2014, 09:17 AM	#4
Tom Servo Staff Join Date: September 27, 2008 Location: Foothills of the Appalachians Posts: 13,059	That article is a mess. While there might be a semantic loophole in the ATF statement, woe unto anyone who actually tries to exploit it. As for trustees having to undergo a NICS check on pickup, that's nothing new. __________________ Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe

May 29, 2014, 09:51 AM	#5
Theohazard Senior Member Join Date: April 19, 2012 Location: Western PA Posts: 3,829	This has been going around the internet for several weeks now. I read about a gun trust lawyer who is trying it out and already submitted a Form 1 for a machine gun. I don't know if he honestly believes it will go through, or he's just setting the stage for a legal battle, or he's simply trying to drum up business for his trusts. But whatever happens from this, I can be fairly certain nobody's going to be getting or making any legal machine guns any time soon. __________________ 0331: "Accuracy by volume."

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

May 29, 2014, 10:10 AM	#6
zincwarrior Senior Member Join Date: July 1, 2011 Location: Texas, land of Tex-Mex Posts: 2,259	Sorry but the whole trust method is a dodge in the first place. I'm actually onside with the ATF on this one. A trustee should have to perform the requisite activities as any other owner as they are acting on behalf of the beneficiaries of that trust.

May 29, 2014, 09:46 PM	#7
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	BATFE says, in essence, that it will not recognize a trust as an entity unless it is also a corporation. A corporation is what is termed a "corporate person", as opposed to a "natural person" (us), and has many of the same rights and obligations as a natural person. "Corporate persons" are included in the "no person shall" parts of the law. Normally, a "corporate person" that violates the law (GM fails to report a car defect) will be fined or at the extreme, its license to do business revoked. A corporation cannot be imprisoned, but any officer who violates the law can be imprisoned as an individual. But an unincorporated group is not an entity under the law; it is simply a group of individuals and each member of the group is a "natural person" under the law. Any one of those "natural persons", if otherwise eligible, can purchase an NFA firearm; the group, since it is not a legal entity, cannot. That does NOT mean the group can violate the law, as has been suggested. The group has no legal standing as an entity and any of its members who violates the law, or takes part in some collective violation of the law, can and will be prosecuted. The idea that a group of people can get together to make machineguns when an individual or a corporation may not, is absurd on the face of it and the article is simply blowing some kind of smoke, medical or not. Jim