View Full Version : How bad an idea is this?
With July approaching fast I'm kinda running short on time to get an SBR or two before the new law takes effect. How unwise would it be to get a trust made up and then just start the process with a couple of stripped lowers I've got? I don't have the spare funds to assemble them at the moment, but I thought I could at least get the ball rolling now and just put them together later on when everything is approved...whenever that might be.
I get that one should use a proven lower for this, but where I kinda feel like it's now or never, can you largely mitigate the risks involved in SBRing an untested lower by simply selecting quality manufacturer or is it just not worth the risk?
It's obviously less than ideal, but you need to look at risk vs. benefit.
Are fingerprints and background checks really that big of a deal to you?
You have the cash for a trust, multiple engravings, and $200 tax stamps -- but not for a couple LPKs?
I'm not really following the logic...
It's more the hassle and additional wait time that I'm assuming will come post-July than the fingerprinting and background check per se. I just wanted to try and avoid that.
Although your point about the LPKs is well-taken, I suppose I could just assemble the lowers and stick the
non-NFA uppers from a couple other rifles on them for a few months.
No issue at all filing two lowers now and waiting to build them.
glock21xxx
05-16-16, 06:12
With July approaching fast I'm kinda running short on time to get an SBR or two before the new law takes effect. How unwise would it be to get a trust made up and then just start the process with a couple of stripped lowers I've got? I don't have the spare funds to assemble them at the moment, but I thought I could at least get the ball rolling now and just put them together later on when everything is approved...whenever that might be.
I get that one should use a proven lower for this, but where I kinda feel like it's now or never, can you largely mitigate the risks involved in SBRing an untested lower by simply selecting quality manufacturer or is it just not worth the risk?
This is fairly common with those I know that participate in the NFA game
Auto-X Fil
05-16-16, 07:55
Just buy quality lowers. BCM and others have great QC. Fitting a trigger, test-fitting a few magazines, and making sure the takedown holes line up will tell you everything you need to know.
Cheapest way to git'r'done would be to file Form 1's for future 80% builds.
You don't need ANYTHING but $200 and your intended (made up) serial number to do so. Make your 80%s and test them at your leisure in pistol form and when you're satisfied, engrave the serial (and other necessary information) from your approved Form 1 and you have an SBR.
I included explanatory text explaining that you will be personally making an 80% lower. I used the following text in addition to details regarding my proposed markings. "This firearm will be personally milled from aluminum by myself and not based on any existing Title I firearm."
If you never end up making them you can cancel the Form 1's as never built and get everything back but the postage stamps.
jackblack73
05-16-16, 15:08
I felt comfortable filing for a Mega lower because I simply couldn't find a bad review of a Mega. Their reputation for machining tolerances is impeccable. That said, although I thought I'd wait to assemble it, I couldn't wait and bought the LPK, Geissele trigger, and the rest and assembled it within a month.
With July approaching fast I'm kinda running short on time to get an SBR or two before the new law takes effect.
Why are you running out of time? Why not just do a Form 1 as an individual and avoid setting up a trust? It will actually be easier after July because you won't have to get your CLEO's signature. The reason that the vast majority of people who have trusts started using them is that their CLEO refused to sign. That obstacle will be gone. There can be other reasons for having a trust, but odds are you don't have a reason if you don't already have the need for a trust for your non-NFA firearms. If you do have a non-NFA reason to setup a trust, then you'll still be able to after July. So, I don't see where the hurry comes in. Setting up a trust sure seems like much more hassle to me than doing a Form 1 as an individual. The bottom line here is that there will be less hassle after July as an individual and more hassle than there is currently if you have a trust. I say go the easier route.
Why not just do a Form 1 as an individual and avoid setting up a trust?...The reason that the vast majority of people who have trusts started using them is that their CLEO refused to sign.
Really? I thought the biggest benefit of a trust was so that multiple people could legally use or have access to them, which also turns into the biggest hassle after 41f because of having to get multiple fingerprints from (potentially) uninterested people (like a spouse) who just happen to have access to the safe where the NFA stuff is.
Individual ownership could mean having a NFA-specific safe that nobody else has access to. Annoying at best.
Really? I thought the biggest benefit of a trust was so that multiple people could legally use or have access to them,
That's a valid reason if it applies to your situation. However, that's not the primary reason why people started using them. They were a good way to get around CLEO's who refused to sign.
BTW, if a spouse is uninterested, why would you want her in the trust? If she was going to use them without you, then she'd need to be in the trust. However, her just living in the same house with you doesn't require her to be in the trust.
BTW, if a spouse is uninterested, why would you want her in the trust? If she was going to use them without you, then she'd need to be in the trust. However, her just living in the same house with you doesn't require her to be in the trust.
Because I keep important documents and other non-firearm things in the safe where the NFA items are. She has "dominion and control" over the house and access to the safe, therefore has constructive possession of the NFA firearms. If she wasn't authorized to possess them then she could be charged with a felony.
See here: https://blog.princelaw.com/2009/07/08/nfa-and-constructive-possession-myth-or-reality/
Fortunately in my case she is interested, but not particularly so in the vagaries of NFA law. It doesn't make much sense to her that a rifle with a 12.5" barrel needs a permission slip to hit the range (just over the state line) while a longer one does not. Smart lady, she should run for Congress.
Edit to add: Another scenario is that she uses a firearm to defend the family when I'm not home. Good for her, but if she is using an SBR or a suppressor (or both :cool:) then the ATF will be on their way and they're going to want to see my paperwork.
Here's the money quote:
While there aren’t any cases of a spouse, significant other, or child being charged with constructive possession, those familiar with the Olofson case (BATFE successfully prosecuted an individual for a malfunctioning firearm in direct contravention to precedent) should recognize that the tide is changing. The absence of such a case does not mean that the BATFE or a zealous prosecutor cannot charge constructive possession and convict based on it. Moreover, the absence of such a case does not mean that a zealous prosecutor hasn’t already threatened charging such an individual unless that person testifies against the individual that the prosecutor really wants behind bars.
I wouldn't bother to setup a trust to avoid a charge that has never ever been applied to anyone and would have difficulty in resulting in a conviction. However, it's your choice. It doesn't apply to me anyway because my wife doesn't have access to my NFA firearms. Given a choice between paying a lawyer to put all my NFA firearms in a trust and buying another safe, I'd just buy another safe.
Why are you running out of time? Why not just do a Form 1 as an individual and avoid setting up a trust? It will actually be easier after July because you won't have to get your CLEO's signature. The reason that the vast majority of people who have trusts started using them is that their CLEO refused to sign. That obstacle will be gone. There can be other reasons for having a trust, but odds are you don't have a reason if you don't already have the need for a trust for your non-NFA firearms. If you do have a non-NFA reason to setup a trust, then you'll still be able to after July. So, I don't see where the hurry comes in. Setting up a trust sure seems like much more hassle to me than doing a Form 1 as an individual. The bottom line here is that there will be less hassle after July as an individual and more hassle than there is currently if you have a trust. I say go the easier route.
I was under the impression going the individual route was substantially slower on the wait times. I suppose now that the wait times even with a trust seem to be increasing quite a bit, and will likely continue to do so post-July, it really is questionable whether I should even bother with a trust.
I was under the impression going the individual route was substantially slower on the wait times. I suppose now that the wait times even with a trust seem to be increasing quite a bit, and will likely continue to do so post-July, it really is questionable whether I should even bother with a trust.
Individual Form 1 have consistently been faster recently, by a month or two.
There is no requirement to use existing lower in hand. Just file F1s with N/A in ORIGINAL MFG field.
I was under the impression going the individual route was substantially slower on the wait times.
Yeah, Like 10 years ago it was slower because the fingerprint check was the choke point. Now the chokepoint is 50,000 forms in front of yours to be processed.
The trust has always had two advantages: bypassing the cleo sign-off that so many cannot get, because the cleo just refuses, and allowing multiple possessors.
Come July, the cleo advantage will go away.
The only real reason, other than "I just want it that way" to do a trust will be multiple possessors.
Approval times are not that different these days.
Avoiding constructive possession in a multiple person access safe isn't so difficult.
Put them inside a locked case in the safe, or mount attachment points inside and lock them into the safe.
Any others who open the safe can no longer remove them, and therefore cannot exercise control of them.
Sent from my SGP612 using Tapatalk
I live with my GF but she has zero interest in guns and doesn't know or care what the combination to my safe is, so I don't really think "multiple possessors" really applies to my situation either. I'm starting to think I should just skip the trust altogether based on the info in this thread. Maybe one will make more sense for me in the future for some other reason but at the moment there doesn't seem to be much advantage.
Obviously the fingerprints and background checks suck, but even if I were to fast track the trust route before July it's not like that is going to give me some kind of anonymity or something. Once I have an NFA item I'm pretty much on a list regardless.
CrazyFingers
05-17-16, 12:25
It's 2016. If you've submitted a 4473, you're on a list. Probably several.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.