Cop encounters with NFA items

[wired]

do any of you have concerns that if the gubmint decides to get grabby with new laws that they will come for yours ? or does the trust provide a better protection for you?

Their stated goals are to put assault weapons under the NFA. Assault weapons as they designate them. Why would having them under a trust make any difference? If they do start tinkering with the NFA the first thing to go will be the trust route.

Might as well SBR it if its going into the NFA anyway. On the bright side if they do start jacking with the NFA they'll have to either add a few thousand more examiners or they'll have to put a computerized structure in place that actually works in a timely fashion.

 

[DrScaryGuy]

Moreover, the owner of my local gun shop is a deputy sheriff who knows me on sight and by name and has, right now, a MG sitting in his shop's safe waiting on ATF approval for transfer into my trust (with written notice regarding ownership of the MG already sent to the sheriff of my county, as required by law). So, the local law is unlikely to roll up on me and ask me questions about my fun toys since they already know me.

You're "one of the good ones" now, but are you sure that in a few years, with a different sheriff that has cleaned house of everybody but the most loyal lackies, you'll always be given the same deference you get now? What about the rest of us that aren't tight with cop buddies?
red places turn purple, purple places turn blue. blue places do crazy things.

I had to go with a trust because my local chief sat on my request for 6 months until he retired. the next chief turned my request over to the city lawyers who took another 6 to say they didn't want anybody in city govt to be responsible for signing a permission slip.

 

[surrealone]

You're "one of the good ones" now, but are you sure that in a few years, with a different sheriff that has cleaned house of everybody but the most loyal lackies, you'll always be given the same deference you get now? What about the rest of us that aren't tight with cop buddies?
red places turn purple, purple places turn blue. blue places do crazy things.

I had to go with a trust because my local chief sat on my request for 6 months until he retired. the next chief turned my request over to the city lawyers who took another 6 to say they didn't want anybody in city govt to be responsible for signing a permission slip.

When it comes to Law Enforcement Officers, it doesn't matter if I am or you are known to them or not. So long as we abide by the law and go about our business in a polite, safe, and considerate manner, there shouldn't be an issue no matter who we are.

I try to live my life that way because I consider it the 'right' way to live. However, I'm a licensed concealed carry holder who is well-trained with my EDC just in case someone who doesn't see things the same way should ever threaten me or my family with imminent death or grave bodily harm ... because I know the rest of the world isn't all peaches and cream.

I'm very sorry to hear that your CLEO was a "Richard". Sadly, we have had a few of those in our state. (Wake county's CLEOs come to mind.) These days, CLEO permission is no longer a thing; the CLEO must be notified, but the CLEO cannot stonewall or hold you up like s/he once could just because s/he has anti-2A sentiments when it comes to the ownership of firearms by citizens. If James Madison's signature on a letter of marque (which survives to this day in a museum) doesn't demonstrate that our founding fathers had no problems with the private ownership of anything the military could field in their day ... then I don't know what does or would. After all, a letter of marque authorizes a private ship owner to legitimate piracy of the state's enemies -- using privately-owned shipboard cannon, of course. (Those were only the WMD of their day...)

 

[BigWaylon]

I'm very sorry to hear that your CLEO was a "Richard". Sadly, we have had a few of those in our state. (Wake county's CLEOs come to mind.) These days, CLEO permission is no longer a thing; the CLEO must be notified, but the CLEO cannot stonewall or hold you up like s/he once could just because s/he has anti-2A sentiments when it comes to the ownership of firearms by citizens.

You also can easily avoid those CLEOs during the notification process by using a state-level CLEO...or picking a different local one. Lots of people on the list qualify.

 

[SCshooter]

do any of you have concerns that if the gubmint decides to get grabby with new laws that they will come for yours ? or does the trust provide a better protection for you?

Yes I take issue IF the "gubmint" decides to, based on no action(s) of my own, make me a criminal by means of a stroke of a pen.

 

[Lafayette Gregory]

I had an issue with a Game warden at a range in SC. he accused me of an illegal weapon and he said he could confiscate the gun. He told me all this before even identifying himself or even a good morning. I unloaded the Thompson, laid the tax paperwork on the table. he checked that the serial numbers matched and I do not even think he knew anything about what he was saying or doing. He did not check my photo,, my DL or anything else. When he said ok and started to walk away, I ask him since this was a federal only issue, did he think he should call the ATF? Man that was an ugly face he showed me then😆

 

[DrScaryGuy]

You also can easily avoid those CLEOs during the notification process by using a state-level CLEO...or picking a different local one. Lots of people on the list qualify.

yeah, now. back in 2010 or so when my home state first started allowing NFA items, we didn't know much about that. and at the time you needed permission, not just to give notification.
many areas just plain weren't allowing, or were making people sign all sorts of agreements about letting the police come and inspect routinely, etc.

 

[Flashpoint]

Gg

 

[Clicker]

Couple times shooting MG's at a USFS public range. It's to the point now that I give them a form for a gun other than the one that I was shooting which is sitting on the table in plain view.

Some are cool others not so much but never has an officer checked the S.N. on the weapon and matched it to the paperwork!

 

[thaifighter]

I always keep copies on my phone. The idea that you have to have hard copies with you is a bit of an overreach considering if you efile a Form 1, they never send you a hard copy to begin with, it's a .pdf.

I've never had anyone ask to see my docs, but had a Fudd try to convince me that suppressors are illegal and I was breaking the law being in possession of and shooting with one...

I shrugged and told him I'd write down the number for 911 for him if he wanted to call the cops...

 

[BatteryOaksBilly]

As a matter of fact, along comes in the mail yesterday an epistle from the ATF giving a member from N.C. the A-OK on bringing some of his stuff here on occasion. This ole boy goes by the book and don't want NO trouble with those Bastards.

 

[BatteryOaksBilly]

Might as well SBR it if its going into the NFA anyway.

Or............................might as well..............you know

 

[BatteryOaksBilly]

Almost none do......they have other things to be concerned about.

Up until 1998 there weren't 5 LEs in Horry that knew there were people that had CWPs.

 

[Spartan]

I can neither confirm nor deny that an investigator specifically not from the ATFECES asked me during an official investigation
"How many suppressed weapons do you own"
"None"
"Who accompanied you to the range that day?"
"Nobody"
.... later in the investigation
"How many suppressors do you own?"
"Six"
"AHA! that's a lie! you said you don't own any!"
"No, what I said, in fact was "I don't own any suppressed weapons"
"I don't understand the difference"
"Exactly! That is why you have absolutely zero business conducting this investigation which is also the purview of the ATFECES"
"NO, I can investigate anything I want, and I know you met with XXXX at the range that day
Yes, I did
AHA! so you lied, you said no body accompanied you!"
No, I said nobody accompanied me to the range. XXXXX met me at the range. This is why you have no business being an investigator, you do not understand the basic nuances of the English language.

 

[blackbelt1222]

I do keep a shrunk down, laminated copy in my range bag. I only have a few so it's easy to hide them somewhere in my bag.

As for LE, I'll gladly show them if it'll help me get on my way quicker/easier. I have many LE friends, and they don't know the first thing about NFA with the exception of 1 who is a gun guy and member on Crack Smoking Canadians (reminds me to tell him to join over here). They usually ask me most gun questions.

Oh how things have changed!

 

[JohnFreeman]

When it comes to Law Enforcement Officers, it doesn't matter if I am or you are known to them or not. So long as we abide by the law and go about our business in a polite, safe, and considerate manner, there shouldn't be an issue no matter who we are.

Agree entirely, but "shouldn't be an issue" and "isn't an issue" are two very different things.

 

[surrealone]

Agree entirely, but "shouldn't be an issue" and "isn't an issue" are two very different things.

Sadly, this is true. It is a very unfortunate reality. But to be fair, LEOs are people, too -- i.e. they're just as human as the rest of us, faults and all.