Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.8
Site Design by Sekimori

« The mentality we have to deal with | Main | radio interview of documentary producer »

NFA proposed rule posted

Posted by David Hardy · 1 September 2013 10:27 AM

Here's the proposed rule. It results from a petition by the NFA Trade and Collectors Association ... why they petitioned, I cannot explain. Perhaps they counted upon the agency to be reasonable, which is never a good idea. Even if the agency is reasonable, the regs must clear the Office of Management and Budget, which is the President's right arm in regulatory matters.

The proposed rule (as a commenter to an earlier post predicted) would require photos and fingerprints of the operator for trusts and other business entities, but does not delete the requirement that the Chief LEO sign off on the transfer. It does shave that down a little, so that the CLEO certifies that the transfer would not place the recipient in violation of law, tho he wouldn't have to certify that he knows of no reason to believe the recipient would act illegally with the gun. That doesn't solve things for CLEOs who just refuse to sign, period.

It's also interesting that the reason for this (see pp. 14-15) is given as the Brady check being unreliable...50% of arrest records have no disposition report, for example.

· National Firearms Act

3 Comments | Leave a comment

Kevin | September 1, 2013 12:46 PM | Reply

The NFATCA is run by ATF snitches and junior G-men.

http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2012/01/attack-of-useful-jews-atf-snitch-anti.html

Ken M | September 1, 2013 2:14 PM | Reply

Karnack's prognostication when this idea was first floated would seem to have been spot on once again.: Expand the background checks to everybody and his brother; keep the CLEO pocket veto.

Harold | September 4, 2013 9:16 AM | Reply

Ken M: Worse; from what I read as of a few days ago the CLEO pocket veto is extended to trusts.

Leave a comment