CLEO Signature Requirement Gone?
mekender
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Joined
·
13,656 Posts
Joined
·
5,018 Posts
A problem does lurk if the proposed change - an apparently good thing - completes the bureaucratic process: There will be a run on NFA firearms from citizens who could legally own NFA guns but had a chief or sheriff who denied them the right.
Are there that many who were denied?
"The Harris County Sheriff (Texas) has never approved a Form 1 or Form 4," Mr. Folloder said. "That's potentially four million applications right there. Since there's a federal hiring freeze and the number of examiners will not increase, the increased applications will likely expand the time needed to get completed forms back from ATF/NFA."
He told people to be careful for what they wish. It looks like now we'll get it.
Are there that many who were denied?
"The Harris County Sheriff (Texas) has never approved a Form 1 or Form 4," Mr. Folloder said. "That's potentially four million applications right there. Since there's a federal hiring freeze and the number of examiners will not increase, the increased applications will likely expand the time needed to get completed forms back from ATF/NFA."
He told people to be careful for what they wish. It looks like now we'll get it.
Joined
·
20,772 Posts
1 Question on this, even if it becomes policy. I have watercooler intel that even with a trust in NC, that only eliminates the CLEO signature on SBR's and Suppressors. Getting CLEO signature for MG's is state law and required for any MG purchase, whether a corporation, trust or individual.
I cannot find anything that confirms or denies this claim. Anybody got anything?
I cannot find anything that confirms or denies this claim. Anybody got anything?
Joined
·
5,018 Posts
Im still planning to go the trust route and get in the queue.... I DO beleive this will just make the wait time incredibly long.
The gov't might approve this, but if they sdont staff the office- they can essentially make the process to painfully slow- people will be turned off.
The gov't might approve this, but if they sdont staff the office- they can essentially make the process to painfully slow- people will be turned off.
Joined
·
669 Posts
Don't think you read the thread properly, it's the reverse. This removes the ATF form signature and had nothing to do with the NC law.
Joined
·
423 Posts
We have been hearing about this for sometime now, especially after Obamacare past. I really don't like Eric Holder's involvement as USAG. I believe they're throwing us a few peanuts to create another "ATF ruling" opportunity to incorporate personal healthcare records into the NICS data bank.
As North Carolinians we have nothing to gain after the HB650 went into affect Dec, 1st allowing NFA Revocable Living Trust to obtain machine guns / submachine guns without Sheriff's MG county permit status.
As North Carolinians we have nothing to gain after the HB650 went into affect Dec, 1st allowing NFA Revocable Living Trust to obtain machine guns / submachine guns without Sheriff's MG county permit status.
Joined
·
8,695 Posts
I don't suppose you'd believe me if I told you this is not true and there is no plans or planned attempts to do such.
Joined
·
423 Posts
NFATCA was founded several years after the original NFA lobbing group in 1983. After the Huge's Amendment (86 machine gun manufactures ban) the NFA turned more of there efforts towards competitive subgun matches at Knob Creek Range and around the Nation providing a solid and safe platform.
NFATCA has been deeply involved with working with ATF to develop the current Handbook Guidelines, which is now issued by ATF to help people to have a better understanding before calling and wasting valuable resources. NFATCA has also been instrumental providing assistance to streamline ATF's paperwork processing and organization that resulted in reducing Form4 waiting processing by 60%.
ATF's Form4 process averaged 3 months was dropped to a few weeks until the early 2000s when Revocable Living Trust had created a huge demand for SBRs, SBS, and Suppressors. Unfortunately ATF hasn't increased examiner's positions to accommodate higher volume applications since.
I'm a NFA Certified RO from the early 90s and subgun competitor from the late 80s. I personally know the founding members of NFATCA from long term involvement in the small NFA ownership social circles from that time period.
Never underestimate NFATCA ability to influence ATF policy.
http://www.nfatca.org/library.htm
HB 650 effective 12/1/2011 eliminated the requirement for a trust to obtain a "MG permit" from the local CLEO.
Joined
·
4,001 Posts
I'm waiting to see/hear affirmative proof that a NC resident gets a F4 approved for an MG on a trust w/o a permit. Maybe then I'll start saving my pennies for an SMG.
Why wouldnt it get approved? the Feds dont care about the NC statute, only the NC AGs office does. Elroth just pointed out that as of 12/1, our statute was amended to add another exception to the MG permit. Yeah, it wasnt as clear as I would have liked it to have been, but I think it will suffice (wont know till we get the first court case, which is exactly why I havent sent in a form 4 as I dont plan to be the first case). Send in a form 4 on a trust and it will be approved if it meets the same criteria as a form 4 from a state that doesnt have the sheriff permit requirement. The real issue is going to be which NC C3 dealer will transfer the MG to you without an MG permit. :sneaky2:
Joined
·
20,772 Posts
The ratified version of the bill (the section that pertains to this discussion) is below. It does not remove the CLEO signature or permit requirement. In fact, it actually clarifies that it is entirely at the discretion of the Sheriff in all cases.
(5) Persons who lawfully possess or own a weapon as defined in subsection (c)
of this section in compliance with 26 U.S.C. Chapter 53, §§ 5801-5871.
Nothing in this subdivision shall limit the discretion of the sheriff in
executing the paperwork required by the United States Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms for such person to obtain the weapon."
SECTION 9. G.S. 14-409(b) reads as rewritten:
"(b) It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to manufacture, sell, give
away, dispose of, use or possess machine guns, submachine guns, or other like weapons as
defined by subsection (a) of this section: Provided, however, that this subsection shall not apply
to the following:
Banks, merchants, and recognized business establishments for use in their respective places
of business, who shall first apply to and receive from the sheriff of the county in which said
business is located, a permit to possess the said weapons for the purpose of defending the said
business; officers and soldiers of the United States Army, when in discharge of their official
duties, officers and soldiers of the militia when called into actual service, officers of the State,
or of any county, city or town, charged with the execution of the laws of the State, when acting
in the discharge of their official duties; the manufacture, use or possession of such weapons for
scientific or experimental purposes when such manufacture, use or possession is lawful under
federal laws and the weapon is registered with a federal agency, and when a permit to
manufacture, use or possess the weapon is issued by the sheriff of the county in which the
weapon is located. located; a person who lawfully possesses or owns a weapon as defined by
subsection (a) of this section in compliance with 26 U.S.C. Chapter 53, §§ 5801-5871. Nothing
in this subdivision shall limit the discretion of the sheriff in executing the paperwork required
by the United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms for such person to obtain the
weapon. Provided, further, that any bona fide resident of this State who now owns a machine
gun used in former wars, as a relic or souvenir, may retain and keep same as his or her property
without violating the provisions of this section upon his reporting said ownership to the sheriff
of the county in which said person lives."
(5) Persons who lawfully possess or own a weapon as defined in subsection (c)
of this section in compliance with 26 U.S.C. Chapter 53, §§ 5801-5871.
Nothing in this subdivision shall limit the discretion of the sheriff in
executing the paperwork required by the United States Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms for such person to obtain the weapon."
SECTION 9. G.S. 14-409(b) reads as rewritten:
"(b) It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to manufacture, sell, give
away, dispose of, use or possess machine guns, submachine guns, or other like weapons as
defined by subsection (a) of this section: Provided, however, that this subsection shall not apply
to the following:
Banks, merchants, and recognized business establishments for use in their respective places
of business, who shall first apply to and receive from the sheriff of the county in which said
business is located, a permit to possess the said weapons for the purpose of defending the said
business; officers and soldiers of the United States Army, when in discharge of their official
duties, officers and soldiers of the militia when called into actual service, officers of the State,
or of any county, city or town, charged with the execution of the laws of the State, when acting
in the discharge of their official duties; the manufacture, use or possession of such weapons for
scientific or experimental purposes when such manufacture, use or possession is lawful under
federal laws and the weapon is registered with a federal agency, and when a permit to
manufacture, use or possess the weapon is issued by the sheriff of the county in which the
weapon is located. located; a person who lawfully possesses or owns a weapon as defined by
subsection (a) of this section in compliance with 26 U.S.C. Chapter 53, §§ 5801-5871. Nothing
in this subdivision shall limit the discretion of the sheriff in executing the paperwork required
by the United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms for such person to obtain the
weapon. Provided, further, that any bona fide resident of this State who now owns a machine
gun used in former wars, as a relic or souvenir, may retain and keep same as his or her property
without violating the provisions of this section upon his reporting said ownership to the sheriff
of the county in which said person lives."
Joined
·
4,001 Posts
As you said, it's not clear that there is no longer a permit requirement. Prior to Dec 1, a F4 for an MG w/o a permit would not get approved. A F1 or F4 will not get approved if you put a purpose other than what the state law allows. So the NFA examiners definitely DO care about what state law says.
Everyone keeps saying that there is no longer a permit requirement but reading through HB650, the bolded section that chdam posted really stood out to me essentially saying that there are no changes to MG laws. This is why I said I'll wait until I see one approved. I've obviously never bought an MG so I'm not 100% sure but I thought the MG permit simply goes to the NFA, and is not for the dealer to use in processing the transfer. Hopefully someone who knows first hand can chime in on that.
Joined
·
173 Posts
I'll believe it when I see it. It would be nice to have this coupled with the new HB650 to open up a whole new avenue of awesome toys here in NC.
Here is 14-409 in its current, post 12/1/11 form (ie, our current law):
§ 14-409. Machine guns and other like weapons
(a) As used in this section, "machine gun" or "submachine gun" means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a weapon into a machine gun, and any combination of parts from which a machine gun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.
(b) It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to manufacture, sell, give away, dispose of, use or possess machine guns, submachine guns, or other like weapons as defined by subsection (a) of this section: Provided, however, that this subsection shall not apply to the following:Banks, merchants, and recognized business establishments for use in their respective places of business, who shall first apply to and receive from the sheriff of the county in which said business is located, a permit to possess the said weapons for the purpose of defending the said business; officers and soldiers of the United States Army, when in discharge of their official duties, officers and soldiers of the militia when called into actual service, officers of the State, or of any county, city or town, charged with the execution of the laws of the State, when acting in the discharge of their official duties; the manufacture, use or possession of such weapons for scientific or experimental purposes when such manufacture, use or possession is lawful under federal laws and the weapon is registered with a federal agency, and when a permit to manufacture, use or possess the weapon is issued by the sheriff of the county in which the weapon is located; a person who lawfully possesses or owns a weapon as defined by Subsection (a) of this section in compliance with 26 U.S.C. Chapter 53, §§ 5801-5871. Nothing in this subdivision shall limit the discretion of the sheriff in executing the paperwork required by the United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms for such person to obtain the weapon. Provided, further, that any bona fide resident of this State who now owns a machine gun used in former wars, as a relic or souvenir, may retain and keep same as his or her property without violating the provisions of this section upon his reporting said ownership to the sheriff of the county in which said person lives.
(c) Any person violating any of the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a Class I felony.
Ok, the italics are mine. This statute was NOT amended to remove the permit requirement. What happened was the legislature added an exception to the permit requirement for persons that have complied with 26 USC Chapeter 53, etc. The problem is that it would now appear to kick this back onto the Fed examiners to approve the form 4. If the form 4 is approved you get a tax stamp, well, guess what, you have fallen into an exception to the permit requirement. But is that getting the cart before the horse? Unfortunately, I wasnt involved in the drafting of the amendment, had I been, I would have been pushing for something different. Unfortunately, I wasnt asked an opinion until AFTER it was passed. Go figure.
Oh, and another reason not to mess with this stuff unless you got your ducks in a row.....did you note the Class I felony part? And if you look at 14-288.8, its a Class F. Sorry, but I dont think it wise to tread lightly in this arena.
§ 14-409. Machine guns and other like weapons
(a) As used in this section, "machine gun" or "submachine gun" means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a weapon into a machine gun, and any combination of parts from which a machine gun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.
(b) It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to manufacture, sell, give away, dispose of, use or possess machine guns, submachine guns, or other like weapons as defined by subsection (a) of this section: Provided, however, that this subsection shall not apply to the following:Banks, merchants, and recognized business establishments for use in their respective places of business, who shall first apply to and receive from the sheriff of the county in which said business is located, a permit to possess the said weapons for the purpose of defending the said business; officers and soldiers of the United States Army, when in discharge of their official duties, officers and soldiers of the militia when called into actual service, officers of the State, or of any county, city or town, charged with the execution of the laws of the State, when acting in the discharge of their official duties; the manufacture, use or possession of such weapons for scientific or experimental purposes when such manufacture, use or possession is lawful under federal laws and the weapon is registered with a federal agency, and when a permit to manufacture, use or possess the weapon is issued by the sheriff of the county in which the weapon is located; a person who lawfully possesses or owns a weapon as defined by Subsection (a) of this section in compliance with 26 U.S.C. Chapter 53, §§ 5801-5871. Nothing in this subdivision shall limit the discretion of the sheriff in executing the paperwork required by the United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms for such person to obtain the weapon. Provided, further, that any bona fide resident of this State who now owns a machine gun used in former wars, as a relic or souvenir, may retain and keep same as his or her property without violating the provisions of this section upon his reporting said ownership to the sheriff of the county in which said person lives.
(c) Any person violating any of the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a Class I felony.
Ok, the italics are mine. This statute was NOT amended to remove the permit requirement. What happened was the legislature added an exception to the permit requirement for persons that have complied with 26 USC Chapeter 53, etc. The problem is that it would now appear to kick this back onto the Fed examiners to approve the form 4. If the form 4 is approved you get a tax stamp, well, guess what, you have fallen into an exception to the permit requirement. But is that getting the cart before the horse? Unfortunately, I wasnt involved in the drafting of the amendment, had I been, I would have been pushing for something different. Unfortunately, I wasnt asked an opinion until AFTER it was passed. Go figure.
Oh, and another reason not to mess with this stuff unless you got your ducks in a row.....did you note the Class I felony part? And if you look at 14-288.8, its a Class F. Sorry, but I dont think it wise to tread lightly in this arena.
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
