Want to buy a machine gun with no background check?
The regulation in question — proposed earlier this year by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) — has drawn more than 9,000 comments. Many are from individuals urged to write the agency by gun groups, according to analysis via Sunlight’s Docket Wrench tool. The comment period for the proposed rule closed on Dec. 9.
They are protesting the agency's plan to shut down a loophole that allows people to avoid background checks when purchasing sawed off shotguns, machine guns, silencers, guns that look like pens, and even Molotov cocktails--all classified as National Firearms Act weapons under a law dating back to 1934, the glory days of Al Capone and Baby Face Nelson -- as long as the weaponry is transferred into a legal trust. Usually, purchasers of such weapons must get approval from the ATF, pay a $200 tax, undergo stringent fingerprint-based background checks, and get sign off from local law enforcement officials, among other measures.
But if individuals register these firearms to a legal trust or corporation, there is no background check or required approval from local law enforcement officials. In recent years, gun enthusiasts have been flocking to lawyers or creating their own trusts with popular software such as Quicken. The New York Times reported that Christopher J. Dorner, the former Los Angeles police officer who went on a shooting rampage earlier this year, wrote in his manifesto that he'd used Quicken to create a trust where he placed silencers and a short-barreled rifle without having to undergo a background check. (The paper notes, however, that because Dorner was not a felon, he would have passed a background check.)
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/Want_to_buy_a_machine_gun_without_a_background_check_Federal_law_allows_it__for_now.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)definitely would not miss the opportunity to own a weapon that could mow down a bunch of folks with one pull of the trigger.
Don't see why any gun fancier would complain about closing that loophole regarding a background check, their being so law-abiding -- if morally degenerate.
SQUEE
(1,320 posts)First and formost being the ability for my fiance to use them when I am away from home. My fiance, sister and nephew are also on my trust to ease the passing of my firearms should I die, or become incapacitated. It also allows me to have a modicum of security in that my local LEO, who are known to be bit crooked, have no idea what I have in my safes.
I own no FA because I think they are silly, overpriced and I foresee absolutely no need for supressive fire. The deadly effect of automatic weapons fire is completely a Hollywood creation. Any and all people on a trust must be able to legaly own a firearm, all laws still apply. Any questions and I will gladly answer.
thelordofhell
(4,569 posts)
Packerowner740
(676 posts)That's just crazy.
sir pball
(4,946 posts)All NFA items, regardless of how they're obtained (i.e. individually or through a corp/trust) must still be registered with the ATF and be demonstrably securely stored. In the case of items purchased by a trust, IIRC the trust is listed as the owner on the paperwork; the trust is set up in somebody's name, who is going to have some 'splainin to do if the weapons are misused or misplaced. I'm not offering any opinion on the "rightness" of allowing non-person-legal-entities to acquire NFA firearms without a check (IMO it is foolish and should be straightened out somehow), just pointing out that there's still names attached to the guns in question.
jeepnstein
(2,631 posts)All the NFA Trust route does is allows Citizens to pay for their tax stamp in localities where the chief law enforcement officer won't sign NFA paperwork, for whatever reason. All State and Federal laws still apply to the purchase and use of the weapon. And you still have to pass NICS when you go to pick it up from the dealer.