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<<<<<

Firearms Legal Protection

Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    Kalamazoo
    Posts
    2,231

    AFT: NFA Items No Longer Allowed To Be Used By People Not On Approved List, No Matter What

    So in the FAQ area of the AFT site, there is a question about NFA items where the answer has apparently be changed within the last few days.

    Q: If I am the registered owner of an NFA item, can someone else shoot shoot my item in my presence?

    A: No. Only Responsible Person(s) listed on the approved registration may have physical or constructive possession of the NFA item.


    Link to Fenix Ammos Twitter post that has a large screengrab.

    https://twitter.com/FenixAmmunition/...34377884422144

  2. #2
    MGO Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Ithaca
    Posts
    1,306
    I've seen all the videos on youtube that are addressing this but none of them seem to have the answer to where this change came from. More specifically what law or rule was this change of of ATF opinion based on? The ATF can't just make rules up out of thin air even though they try to frequently. It has to at least be based on law or regulation and if the regulation is changed it has to be opened up for public comment.

    This also creates more questions in my mind. If I have NFA items in my home and I leave the house, say to go to work, does that mean I have left my family members in possession of my NFA items? According to the FAQ it does. So now they and I are all felons? If not how does that differ from letting someone use your NFA item while in your presence? To take it a step further what if they are locked in a safe while I'm away but my wife has the combination to the safe? Wouldn't that mean she has access to them making felons out of both of us? This change of ATF opinion makes no sense whatsoever.

    There are waaaaay yoo many left leaning activists in positions of power in our government and this activism under color of law needs to be put in check.

  3. #3
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West of Bravo
    Posts
    7,477
    This is the traditional take. Think some BATFE weenie screwed up:

    https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/co...ands-required/

    Constructive Possession of Silencers and NFA Firearms…Red Hands Not Required
    By Matthew J. Bergstrom, Esq. - June 28, 2021

    There has been much confusion about the handling of another person’s NFA firearms and when criminal liability could arise. Generally speaking, possession of an NFA firearm by someone other than the registered owner could be viewed as an illegal transfer.

    Possession, however, is not limited to the non-registered person being caught red-handed with your can. The concept of constructive possession covers a broader set of circumstances encompassing many common situations for gun owners. Unfortunately, not everyone takes these issues seriously.

    Constructive possession exists when a person knowingly has the potential for access or control of NFA firearms outside the supervision of the registered owner of those arms.¹ When NFA firearms are in possession of someone other than the registered owner it could constitute an unlawful transfer subject to the severe penalties of the NFA and the tax code.

    These penalties could include a prison sentence, hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines, and loss of the right to own or possess firearms.²

    Some people complain legal concerns like these are either over-hyped or mischaracterized by incompetent lawyers peddling poorly designed “gun trusts.”

    Other people look to the past and comfort themselves by citing the dearth of criminal convictions resting on constructive possession of NFA firearms. There are also people who believe they have no worries because they never let their guns out of their sight.

    We need to be more realistic because times have changed.

    Previously, few people owned silencers and short-barreled rifles, but in the last decade or so, we’ve seen explosive growth in the number of these firearms. Consequently the higher profile of NFA regulated items has placed them under greater scrutiny.

    They’ve been threatened by proposed executive orders and local shooting ranges are more likely to scrutinize your tax stamps. These developments have occurred at a time when all gun owners need to be more concerned about overly aggressive policing of gun laws (see: John Filippidis, and see Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia who were ordered to arrest a man caught with a single spent shell casing in his car).

    Clearly, constructive possession of NFA firearms is an important issue, but with knowledge and proactive solutions, no one should be discouraged from plans to obtain a .22 can or even a machine gun.

    Initially, the possibility of another person having access or control of your firearms outside your presence might seem unrealistic, but think again. We’re not talking about black and white situations. Of course you can’t treat your NFA collection like a lending library. But we’re also not talking about the typical visit to the range when your buddy tries out your silencer under your supervision. T

    hose are relatively easy, black-and-white situations. We need to worry about the gray areas of everyday life.

    Consider these examples:

    • Your daughter drives away with your range bag in the trunk.
    • Your wife has the combination to your gun safe.
    • Your brother borrows your suppressor.
    • You share a hunting camp with friend.
    • Your father safeguards your NFA firearms while you’re . . .
    • Hospitalized
    • Vacationing
    • Deployed to Afghanistan
    • Traveling for business
    • Temporarily assigned to work out of state
    • Repairing your home from storm damage, or
    • Moving into a new home


    Could you find yourself in any of the above situations?

    Next, let’s add some context. Imagine one of those scenarios happens at the wrong place and at the wrong time. A skillful law enforcement officer could unexpectedly discover a way to throw the book at you with the simplest line of questioning.

    “You match the description of someone we’re looking for, and your taillight is out. Is this your car? Who owns it? Is he a gun owner? Are there guns in the car? Can you show us? Do you have paperwork for this silencer?”

    Or how about this: “Ma’am, we received a call from your home security company, do you want us to check your house? Are there guns in the house? Do you have access to them? Whose SBR is this?”

    If you understand these risks, you’ll know how to secure your NFA firearms. If you wish to mitigate the risk for yourself and others who might have constructive possession of your firearms, then you should consider forming a legal entity like a trust.

    Eligible people named in a trust may have legal possession of the property in the trust. Thus, no transfer legally occurs when people in your trust have potential access or control of the NFA-regulated items in your trust.

    A trust has added benefits. It can serve as an estate plan for your firearms and is the only legal method of conveying property at your death that will avoid a public court record. Trusts are also eligible for ATF eFile, which, despite the occasional glitch, processes tax stamps more quickly.

    Please note: We offered this analysis for informational and discussion purposes only, and it is not intended as legal advice. If you have questions or concerns about firearms law, please contact Arsenal Attorneys.

    ¹ See U.S. v Booth, 111 F.3d 2 (1st Cir.1997); United States v. Cardenas, 864 F.2d 1528, 1533 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 491 U.S. 909, 109 S.Ct. 3197, 105 L.Ed.2d 705(1989); United States v. Hien Van Tieu, 279 F.3d 917, 922 (10th Cir. 2002).
    ² 26 U.S.C. § 5871.
    GCA '68 only registers NFA weapons to individuals. Licensing and responsible persons only applies to dealerships, manufacturers, importers/exporters, and trusts.

    Otherwise, police departments and federal agencies would have to file BATFE Form 5320.23 for each agent.

  4. #4
    MGO Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Romeo
    Posts
    344
    I've seen all the videos on youtube that are addressing this but none of them seem to have the answer to where this change came from. More specifically what law or rule was this change of of ATF opinion based on? The ATF can't just make rules up out of thin air even though they try to frequently. It has to at least be based on law or regulation and if the regulation is changed it has to be opened up for public comment.

    This also creates more questions in my mind. If I have NFA items in my home and I leave the house, say to go to work, does that mean I have left my family members in possession of my NFA items? According to the FAQ it does. So now they and I are all felons? If not how does that differ from letting someone use your NFA item while in your presence? To take it a step further what if they are locked in a safe while I'm away but my wife has the combination to the safe? Wouldn't that mean she has access to them making felons out of both of us? This change of ATF opinion makes no sense whatsoever.

    There are waaaaay yoo many left leaning activists in positions of power in our government and this activism under color of law needs to be put in check.

    Technically yes, you would be in violation. I don't remember exactly, since it's been a while but I seem to recall something in the paperwork I filled out for my tax stamp made me certify that I was the only one in the home that would have access to them. If they were in a safe, that I was the only person with the combination to that specific safe.

    As far as someone else using it, it says possession of it, I interpret that to be as long as I am still there, I possess ownership of it at that time, they are just shooting it.

  5. #5
    MGO Member SuedePflow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Coloma
    Posts
    1,103
    Quote Originally Posted by Blue XJ View Post
    As far as someone else using it, it says possession of it, I interpret that to be as long as I am still there, I possess ownership of it at that time, they are just shooting it.
    possession is defined as "the state of having, owning, or controlling somethin". The ATF used to agree with your interpretation, but they seemed to have changed their mind recently (which is no surprise).

  6. #6
    MGO Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Romeo
    Posts
    344
    Quote Originally Posted by SuedePflow View Post
    possession is defined as "the state of having, owning, or controlling somethin". The ATF used to agree with your interpretation, but they seemed to have changed their mind recently (which is no surprise).
    They sure make this stuff confusing don't they?

  7. #7
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    7,264
    Quote Originally Posted by Blue XJ View Post
    They sure make this stuff confusing don't they?
    It's intentional.

  8. #8
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West of Bravo
    Posts
    7,477
    BATFE has told NSSF that they are fixing their screwup:

    https://bearingarms.com/ryan-petty/2...-owners-n66642

    “The Q&A currently listed on the eforms account is incorrect. In this scenario, the registered owner of the NFA weapon is co-located with the firearm and thus no transfer has occurred. However, if the person firing the NFA weapon is prohibited from possessing the firearm there could be a GCA violation. We are working to correct the site as quickly as possible.”

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