ATF Comments at NRA Law Seminar

[cannoncocker]

Interesting read.

 

http://blog.princela...ms-law-seminar/

Edited April 14, 2015 by cannoncocker

[btq96r]

Should probably change your link with this direct one, as new posts to the blog will bump the NFA one down.

http://blog.princelaw.com/2015/04/10/shocking-statementsconcessions-by-atf-at-the-nra-firearms-law-seminar/

 

The quality of invalid trusts from low quality preparation is a great point for the ATF to bring up.  Here on TGO, we've had discussions about using our two resident attorneys to draft a trust versus just buying one off the internet.  I saw the bit of extra money spent going to an attorney as an investment for protection when entering a world full of federal regulation.  But, this being America, if you can get a low enough price to show up on page 1 of a Google search, you're going to get people's business.

 

I also think the sheer number of Trusts popping up will keep ATF from implementing 41P.  For the purposes of saving face, they won't officially back down, just keep pushing the timeline for a final decision to the right, requiring more research, implementing a study...but in the end a bureaucratic surrender is good enough for our purposes.

Edited April 14, 2015 by btq96r

[cannoncocker]

Thanks, didn't realize the post I linked to would be bumped down.

Change made.

 

Should probably change your link with this direct one, as new posts to the blog will bump the NFA one down.

http://blog.princelaw.com/2015/04/10/shocking-statementsconcessions-by-atf-at-the-nra-firearms-law-seminar/

 

 

 

 

[JohnC]

Subscribing to read later... :up:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[midtennchip]

I went to the seminar last Friday. I, too, was a bit surprised by some of the comments. He did make a big deal about fill-in the blank trusts. Glad someone else posted it (I didn't want to come across as being self-serving).

Another interesting conversation was how trusts are processed. Generally, the agents handle several hundred a day. If there is a question of validity, they walk it over the one of two (yes, just two) attorneys on staff at the WV office. Bill Ryan (who gave the speech) and another attorney (she was there, but I didn't meet her). Ryan genuinely seemed helpful. Very nice during individual conversations after the seminar. But it does appear that he is in charge of the response to all of the 41P comments. 41P is not dead, but certainly doesn't appear to be moving very fast. There were a number of specific issues raised about 41P and Ryan's answer was esssentially "we have figured that out yet." One very specific issue (seemed to be a hot button issue for Nevada and Arizona lawyers) was how a Responsible Person could possibly get a CLEO signature if he lives in, for example, San Francisco, even if he will NEVER bring the item into the state of California. The example was a trustee living in CA with all the NFA items being held by a second trustee in NV. The answer was "we don't know yet, but we (the ATF) aren't sure the CA CLEO would even be needed." So, I have no idea what the ATF's final position on CLEO signatures will be.