• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

ACTION ITEM - Proposed BATFE rule change - deadline 12/9

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Time is almost up on contacting the BATFE on a proposed change to the rules for Class III items (machine guns, silencers, short barreled rifles, etc.) The proposed rule change could make the already difficult task of getting a tax stamp to purchase a Class III item even more difficult.

We need to stop this totally unnecessary rule change.

OCDO's John Pierce (also an Executive Member of VCDL) has put together a web page that explains the urgency of contacting BATFE, provides sample cut-and-paste text, and makes it a snap to respond to the proposal.

Here is the link to John's web page:

http://johnpierceesq.com/?p=389

All aboard friends of RKBA - make your voices heard, time is short.

[Adapted from a recent Va-Alert from the Virginia Citizens Defense League]
 
Last edited:

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Deadline 12/9

[h=1]Deadline fast approaching for comments on NFA trust rule change proposal[/h]by David Codrea

“The proposed regulations would,” according to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, “(1) add a definition for the term "responsible person"; (2) require each responsible person of a corporation, trust or legal entity to complete a specified form, and to submit photographs and fingerprints; (3) require that a copy of all applications to make or transfer a firearm be forwarded to the chief law enforcement officer (CLEO) of the locality in which the maker or transferee is located; and (4) eliminate the requirement for a certification signed by the CLEO."


That statement caused no small amount of confusion.

http://www.examiner.com/article/dea...e-change-proposal?CID=examiner_alerts_article
 

Thundar

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
4,946
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
The comment I submitted:

I am a licensed firearms manufacturer. The proposed regulation has the potential to prevent disabled veterans from being able to own firearms that they can actually use. There are many veterans with amputations that prevent them from using regular pistols, rifles and shotguns. Often the custom manufactured or modified firearm that accommodates the veteran’s disability will require an NFA stamp. In many cities in Virginia the only way to obtain the NFA stamp is via an NFA Trust because of policy decisions from various Chief Law Enforcement Officers to never sign an application. The rules requirement that all NFA Trustees be fingerprinted is particularly degrading and humiliating to these disabled veterans because many of them no longer have fingers to print. Some veterans choose the NFA Trust as a path to avoid the humiliation. The proposed rule will make it more difficult for disabled veterans to provide for their own self defence and remain independent. The rule will subject disabled veterans to needless humiliation. Because the proposed rule will disproportionately impact disabled Americans, including disabled veterans, a rulemaking evaluation that complies with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements and a subsequent comment period should be conducted prior to the enactment of this rule.

Your Comment Tracking Number: 1jx-896c-g183

Live Free or Die,
Thundar
 
Top