I wish an attorney like Gura would challenge the Gov’t in court basically saying anything longer than NICS check is a defacto ban.
I’ve often thought this myself, but if the recent conversation I had with a local attorney who is a major NFA owner, is any indication, then I doubt it will happen anytime soon. I really got the feeling that the NFA guys that have spent large amounts of money don’t want these items more accessible. In fact, in regards to the trust rule changes, he seemed very much for them.
Yeah, justice delayed is justice denied, or something like that.
I just got mine approved after submitting it on a trust in Jan. I still had to undergo a phone call background check to pick it up from a dealer.
submission & approval date?
I submitted two items feb 15th… waiting for approval
Which lawyer is this?
What was his reasoning? These things are completely legal and unregulated in norway. The safest country in all of europe.
Suppressors or machine guns?
I could see wanting to keep the machine gun market limited to jeep prices high, but suppressors are a bag investment. Unless they were thinking of commercial availability and keeping their wait times down.
An gun defense lawyer on another forum got in a heated debate over the "abuse"of gun trusts and how the NFATCA was right in going after the “trust loop hole”.
A lot of guys that have been into NFA for the last 2 decades are getting butt hurt because the wait times have gone up. But instead of fighting the problem (government red tape) they are attacking fellow class III newcomers.
Elitist crap.
I’m amazed people like this exist. Don’t they know there is safety in numbers?
I honestly can’t remember his name. He was the guest speaker at a continuing legal education dinner, that I attended with my wife. When I mentioned I had an SBR on a trust, he was genuinely curious why I bothered to register it when, in his words, “most people just put them on there to shoot, then put the original barrel back on.” I told him I wanted it completely legitimate, and that I wasn’t interested in breaking the law. When I mentioned adding a suppressor to the trust, and brought up the proposed rule changes, he immediately jumped on the fact that “it’s necessary to keep these weapons out of criminals hands” talking point. I dissented with his opinion, but at that point it was patently obvious he no longer wished to speak with me.
To be fair, he was a machine gun guy, from what I gathered. Apparently he has a couple pretty rare Thompson sub-machine guns, and some belt feds like the MG-42. Those are just the ones he mentioned during his lackluster presentation on gun law. He struck me as being genuinely surprised that I had an NFA item, and that I was semi-conversant on the subject. It was also obvious from his tone and body language, that an SBR wasn’t a “real” NFA item in his mind. I actually had to explain what my SBR was.
And that is a first-hand encounter with someone who is truly ignorant of the facts, or as most would call them, an “idiot”. People like this are truly and actively working against our cause, perhaps because they are hopelessly misguided, regardless of whatever they claim.
In a similar vein, I have observed a disturbing trend among some NFA owners of a genuinely defeatist attitude regarding the upcoming trust regulation changes. These people, some well-known and respected community members, are actively trying to convince others not to bother commenting on the NPRM, because “it’s a waste of time”. Meanwhile, I have seen more than one comment submitted on this which are actually in support of the changes, and essentially applauding the administration on what these individuals perceive as a step towards preventing crime. How is our side sitting idly by going to accomplish anything except setting the stage for more onerous regulations in the future?
So yes, there are certainly NFA owners out there who seem to be working against us for whatever reason. One has to question their motives.
Or perhaps they are astute economists. They know there is a limited supply of machine guns so they don’t want others competing for their $15,000 grease gun. Murphy did say he was into machine guns and lifted his nose at SBR’s.
Economists call this: “barrier to entry”
Toddlers call this: “What’s mine is mine and what’s yours is mine too.”
Maybe we need a different set of rules (or at least processing queue’s) for SBR’s and Suppressors. That would avoid the cannibalism.
I sent in two Form 4s for two silencers on Jan 25th 2013 (Trust). Both were approved Oct. 22nd 2013.
Their self-serving interests aside, they are hurting their own cause in the end, if they are in fact shooting enthusiasts and not simply out to make a profit. If they are just in it for money, and willing to throw all of the rest of us under the bus for their own personal gain, then they might as well be lobbying against our rights. THAT is the issue, not whether they are somehow justified in their argument.
Still, I am highly skeptical that this lawyer’s apparent ignorance of the definition of an SBR is somehow indicative of financial insight.
Do you live in Norway? Curious because we have a member from Norway and there was a discussion a while back about laws and what not. I seem to remember Norway being very restrictive.
Did you read the thread where I debated Grass Roots North Carolina?
In that thread they admit they are machine gunners. Their form letters also seem to endorse greater and onerous restrictions.
Once is merely a data point. Twice is a coincidence… third time makes a trend.
Just trying to figure out if there is method behind the madness. I’m a scientist at heart. In crazy times all hypotheses are taken seriously. All hypotheses are falsifiable.
Edit: just found out the ASA supported this NFATC mess. I got nothin.
Wikipedia says otherwise:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppressor#Europe
I’ve read a few technical articles from Norwegians on the topic affirming that fact.
Random comment from “lolinski” says
Here in Norway its as easy to buy a silencer as a scope(they fall in the “firearms accesory” definition)
PS: does anyone know of the legality of exporting a suppressor from the US since they are generally better than the ones here.
I’m sure I can find a lot better sources but rushing out the door right now.
Sorry, I don’t trust Wikipedia for info like this. We have someone here who is former military and can get us a straight answer.
When I was in Germany I never heard of anyone being able to legally own a suppressor and in spite of the Wikipedia article I believe suppressors fall under the KrWaffKontrG or Kriegswaffenkontrollgesetz which governs weapons of war.
They also don’t list Switzerland on their list which it is still legal buy as far as I know.
I sent in my first Form 1 on Jan 5th this year and got the stamp back mid august.
You’re killing me Brother! I sent my Form 4 for my SOCOM 556-RC on 26 Jan (Trust) and my check was cashed on 2 Feb; I’m still waiting. I hope I’m getting closer…
I wanted a SOCOM556-RC but ended up with the old FA556-212 instead damn it because they didn’t have it in stock at the time.
Submitted mine on January 21, 2013, and they were approved September 18, 2013 and I finally got them on October 11, 2013. That’s 263-days total time (8.7-months)
My SBR was sent in same day and I’m still waiting for approval that should have arrived already by end of October. With the shutdown and uncertain future, I’m hoping that it’ll come within a few weeks instead of months.