Welcome to MGO's Internet Discussion Forums…Please Consider Becoming a Dues-Paying Member of the ORG…Click >>>>>HERE<<<<< for more info…………****DONATIONS**** can also be made toward MGO's Legal Defense Fund and/or MGO's Forums >>>>>HERE<<<<<

KROGER

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27
  1. #11
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Grand Haven
    Posts
    754
    Quote Originally Posted by RCT View Post
    Hey midlandshooter, I forgot to ask before, what’s the name of the gun shop you own? Just curious I didn’t see it in your profile.

    NFA branch is odd for sure. It’s always been weird to me what they require and what they would simply prefer.

    It’s funny you mention braces, I was at an ATF sponsored training for FFL holders last month and the director of the NFA branch was there and the topic of braces on pistols came up. if I posted what we were told about braces, everyone here would say I was lying and flame me. It was not good news at all. It will be interesting to see how it all unfolds...

    SCOTUS took care of any tax concerns on out of state sales so it’s a moot point now anyway.

    However, I do enjoy how stories take on lives of their own and the facts change of over time...

    All my best.
    So now I'm interested, what did the NFA director say about pistol braces.

    A letter from the ATF was released a month ago about pistol braces, is what you were told different than what is described in the that letter?

    https://www.migunowners.org/forum/sh...ilizing-braces

  2. #12
    MGO Member Coctailer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Hastings, MI
    Posts
    4,666
    Quote Originally Posted by DrScaryGuy View Post
    I have it on good authority.
    In other news, during this move process, pistols and rifles went wrapped and locked up with with the movers. SBRs went to a trustee pending ATF paperwork. AOW (the one you sold me) and silencers went in a ~30" tac bag with pouches pouches pouches. They'll probably just go in the trunk WITH ME on the trip.
    Wait.... Where are you going? You're leaving us???

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Coctailer View Post
    Wait.... Where are you going? You're leaving us???
    No, he’s just going to NC to live.

  4. #14
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Lansing
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by DrScaryGuy View Post
    I don't own a shop either, but I've proven many shop owners and employees wrong too.
    Gotta side with MLS here. I also remember you posting some things which were most politely described as Brashly Spurious.
    I bet a lot of dealers have to be corrected by you guys. Based on the questions dealers ask at the trainings I attend I sometimes wonder how they are still in business and not shut down. Its scary. Its basic stuff they need to be doing to be in compliance with BATFE regulations. Do they ever read the rules or call the ATF for help? I guess not.

    I would be very curious as to what items I posted that were considered 'spurious'.

    I have not been around much as the gun shop has been crazy busy and I finally had a few moments to return to my life for a moment. After all this time, its sad to see that the same people continue to be negative.

    I do my best to help. I do not do this to feed my ego or try to be some god of the forum. I could not care less.

    I have relationships with ATF IOIs and Agents, NFA branch leaders, local police, silencer engineers, and more. For some reason people have a tendency to like me and overshare. So I listen and ask questions. I reach out to those people for opinions and to get clarification. I try to pass what they tell me on to you guys. I go to ATF and NSSF trainings any time they offer them as well as trainings at Shot Show every January.

    I have nothing to hide and zero interest in getting caught up in negativity. I have no time for such nonsense. Anyone who thinks they know me based solely on some text postings on this site, I invite you to stop by my shop and introduce yourself. Happy to chat about most any topic of interest.


    This is what I was eluding to in my earlier post:

    We were told by BATFE that the current administration has decided that in order for the BATFE to create a new regulation they must first remove two existing regulations. Can you imagine? The BATFE is not even allowed to publish opinions right now as that is considered a regulation (this is not the same as the technology branch giving an opinion on an item submitted to them for evaluation). Ridiculous I guess, but good for those that desire no new regulations.

    Because of this they cannot deal with firearms that have pistol braces on them (its a new regulation even if they give new guidance). I want to be very clear here. THIS IS WHAT THEY TOLD US AND NOT MY OPINION. The NFA branch agrees that its perfectly legal to build, buy and own pistol braces. However, they are not stupid and based on the fact that the braces have morphed and are now basically a stock, they consider pistols with braces added to them an SBR. The director told us because its only around 30 days for e-Form1 approval right now everyone who owns one of these items should just SBR it. He said we are not going to go after the owners of these right now (and can't until they find two regulations to delete so they can regulate pistol braces).

    Also, the lovely State of Michigan, when processing background checks for CPL evaluations, has not been searching all the databases that FBI NICS checks. As such, there has been an issue with people being issued a CPL that are being denied firearms as they fail the NICS check (Not due to any error). So we have disqualified people with handguns and a CPL.
    The BATFE and the FBI is working with the State on this, but if it is not resolved, they are going to pull the waivers that allow a MI CPL to be used instead of a background check. I forgot to ask them, but I assume if the waiver is pulled it could also affect reciprocity with other states (please correct me if I am wrong about loss of reciprocity).

    The BATFE at first didn't want to talk about this, but several dealers brought it up as they had experienced the NICS denials of CPL holders and forced the issue.

    In fact, based on that I am considering a new policy of NICS checks for all at the shop (most big box stores already do this anyway).

    I am simply reporting what occurred at that training.

    Cheers,
    Last edited by RCT; 07-29-2019 at 11:42 PM.

  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by RCT View Post
    I would be very curious as to what items I posted that were considered 'spurious'.
    Not to speak for the good doctor, but I'm guessing he was using "Brashly Spurious" as a substitute for another phrase with the same starting letters.

    I love all those threads about "what you heard at the gun store". I've always assumed you were a source of many of those sorts of stories. Some gun store owners think they know much more than they do. Let's face it, you applied for and were issued an FFL. You're running a business. You buy and sell guns and gun accessories. That alone doesn't make you an expert on the subject. Most people here can recognize BS.

    Welcome back.

  6. #16
    MGO Board of Directors

    Trustee


    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Now far south of the city: FAR.
    Posts
    11,433
    Quote Originally Posted by RCT View Post
    However, they are not stupid and based on the fact that the braces have morphed and are now basically a stock, they consider pistols with braces added to them an SBR. The director told us because its only around 30 days for e-Form1 approval right now everyone who owns one of these items should just SBR it. He said we are not going to go after the owners of these right now (and can't until they find two regulations to delete so they can regulate pistol braces).

    Also, the lovely State of Michigan, when processing background checks for CPL evaluations, has not been searching all the databases that FBI NICS checks. As such, there has been an issue with people being issued a CPL that are being denied firearms as they fail the NICS check (Not due to any error). So we have disqualified people with handguns and a CPL.
    The BATFE and the FBI is working with the State on this, but if it is not resolved, they are going to pull the waivers that allow a MI CPL to be used instead of a background check. I forgot to ask them, but I assume if the waiver is pulled it could also affect reciprocity with other states (please correct me if I am wrong about loss of reciprocity).
    I can actually believe this, and it's why I haven't invested too much money in braces, and have gone ahead and registered a couple SBRs. Most free rides eventually end.
    As for the CPL exemption from NICS, it just happened with Alabama. Why we need a background check and a license to exercise a right is a whole different issue, but I can believe your post.
    This time
    DISCLAIMER: Disclaimer. The opinions expressed in this post are those of the author, DrScaryGuy. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of MGO, its board of directors, or its members.

  7. #17
    MGO Member Roundballer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    I/C "Gateway to the Thumb" Lapeer County
    Posts
    22,562
    Our law requires a NICS check as part of the CPL application process:

    MCL 28-425b
    (6) The department of state police shall verify the requirements of subsection (7)(d), (e), (f), (h), (i), (j), (k), and (m) through the law enforcement information network and the national instant criminal background check system and shall report to the county clerk all statutory disqualifications, if any, under this act that apply to an applicant.
    MCL 28-426
    (2) A county clerk shall not issue a license to an applicant under section 5b unless both of the following apply:
    (a) The department of state police, or the county sheriff under section 5a(4), has determined through the federal national instant criminal background check system that the applicant is not prohibited under federal law from possessing or transporting a firearm.
    (b) If the applicant is not a United States citizen, the department of state police has verified through the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement databases that the applicant is not an illegal alien or a nonimmigrant alien.
    Someone is operating under a misconception of what is contained in the CPL background requirements.


    Life Member, NRA, Lapeer County Sportsmen's Club Disclaimer: I Am Not A Lawyer. Opinions expressed are not representative of any organization to which I may belong, and are solely mine. Any natural person or legal entity reading this post accepts all responsibility for any actions undertaken by that person or entity, based upon what they perceived was contained in this post, and shall hold harmless this poster, his antecedents, and descendants, in perpetuity.

  8. #18
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    49601
    Posts
    923
    Quote Originally Posted by RCT View Post
    I bet a lot of dealers have to be corrected by you guys. Based on the questions dealers ask at the trainings I attend I sometimes wonder how they are still in business and not shut down. Its scary. Its basic stuff they need to be doing to be in compliance with BATFE regulations. Do they ever read the rules or call the ATF for help? I guess not.

    I would be very curious as to what items I posted that were considered 'spurious'.

    I have not been around much as the gun shop has been crazy busy and I finally had a few moments to return to my life for a moment. After all this time, its sad to see that the same people continue to be negative.

    I do my best to help. I do not do this to feed my ego or try to be some god of the forum. I could not care less.

    I have relationships with ATF IOIs and Agents, NFA branch leaders, local police, silencer engineers, and more. For some reason people have a tendency to like me and overshare. So I listen and ask questions. I reach out to those people for opinions and to get clarification. I try to pass what they tell me on to you guys. I go to ATF and NSSF trainings any time they offer them as well as trainings at Shot Show every January.

    I have nothing to hide and zero interest in getting caught up in negativity. I have no time for such nonsense. Anyone who thinks they know me based solely on some text postings on this site, I invite you to stop by my shop and introduce yourself. Happy to chat about most any topic of interest.


    This is what I was eluding to in my earlier post:

    We were told by BATFE that the current administration has decided that in order for the BATFE to create a new regulation they must first remove two existing regulations. Can you imagine? The BATFE is not even allowed to publish opinions right now as that is considered a regulation (this is not the same as the technology branch giving an opinion on an item submitted to them for evaluation). Ridiculous I guess, but good for those that desire no new regulations.

    Because of this they cannot deal with firearms that have pistol braces on them (its a new regulation even if they give new guidance). I want to be very clear here. THIS IS WHAT THEY TOLD US AND NOT MY OPINION. The NFA branch agrees that its perfectly legal to build, buy and own pistol braces. However, they are not stupid and based on the fact that the braces have morphed and are now basically a stock, they consider pistols with braces added to them an SBR. The director told us because its only around 30 days for e-Form1 approval right now everyone who owns one of these items should just SBR it. He said we are not going to go after the owners of these right now (and can't until they find two regulations to delete so they can regulate pistol braces).

    Also, the lovely State of Michigan, when processing background checks for CPL evaluations, has not been searching all the databases that FBI NICS checks. As such, there has been an issue with people being issued a CPL that are being denied firearms as they fail the NICS check (Not due to any error). So we have disqualified people with handguns and a CPL.
    The BATFE and the FBI is working with the State on this, but if it is not resolved, they are going to pull the waivers that allow a MI CPL to be used instead of a background check. I forgot to ask them, but I assume if the waiver is pulled it could also affect reciprocity with other states (please correct me if I am wrong about loss of reciprocity).

    The BATFE at first didn't want to talk about this, but several dealers brought it up as they had experienced the NICS denials of CPL holders and forced the issue.

    In fact, based on that I am considering a new policy of NICS checks for all at the shop (most big box stores already do this anyway).


    I am simply reporting what occurred at that training.

    Cheers,
    Why are FFLs running NICS when NOT required. Please post a list so I may avoid these dealers and spend my money else where.

  9. #19
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Lansing
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Roundballer View Post
    Our law requires a NICS check as part of the CPL application process:

    MCL 28-425b


    MCL 28-426


    Someone is operating under a misconception of what is contained in the CPL background requirements.

    From what was stated something is not happening correctly. The ATF and FBI guys and gals were a bit cagey on this topic as I mentioned.

    However, something is up based on the discussion.

  10. #20
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Lansing
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Remo View Post
    Why are FFLs running NICS when NOT required. Please post a list so I may avoid these dealers and spend my money else where.
    Not required is true. However, as you likely know, FFL holders are able to make decisions that make sense for their business and it is, of course, perfectly fine for them to do a NICS check on a CPL holder.

    I would argue that every firearms dealer should run the check anyway. There is a lot at stake now. However, I can see how difficult/uncomfortable it would be if one of your best CPL holding customers got a denial. But, that person was denied (assuming not due to an error in the FBI searched databases) and If what the ATF stated is true that MI has issued CPLs to prohibited persons, do you want to be the one arming them. Maybe they know they should be denied and were shocked that they got approved for a CPL and make it a point to make sure where they shop uses CPL instead of NICS. You guys are smart (likely smarter than me) and can see where I am going with this...

    I understand all the pro 2nd arguments and etc that go with this area but the regs are regs for now.


    Remo, I'm curious, why does it upset you if a dealer performs a NICS check on you as a CPL holder?

    When I lived in Nevada, we had to pay $25 for the background check. CPL holders were exempt like here and in that case it put $25 back in your pocket. Totally worth it. Here its free.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
only search Michigan Gun Owners Forums
MGO's Facebook MGO's Twitter