NFA Question

[R.W. Parker]

Esteemed Gentlemen,

The other night I watched Matt Gaetz flailing over this pistol brace thing, in part because the ATFs new rule wasn't approved by Congress. That got me to thinking about electronic ("e-Forms") 1 and 4 I've seen, that were approved with a facsimile of a $200 NFA tax stamp.

It's long been my understanding that the owner of a Title II firearm is authorized to possess same by the appropriate approved Form, with tax stamp affixed.

Obviously these "e-Forms" lack the singular device that makes possession of the named device "legal"; to wit: an actual, canceled NFA tax stamp.

While I'm sure that ATF has issued a "ruling" that gives these e-forms the same legal weight, I don't believe NFA '34 or GCA '68 has been similarly amended by Congress.

Does anyone other than me think we might see a day (perhaps after an alleged attack by "Russian hackers" on the NFTR) where ATF might no longer recognize the legitimacy of approved e-forms, because they lack the mechanism that grants lawful possession?

 

[mostpeople]

That would suck

 

[nirvana]

Lawyer here, I’m sure Hambone will co-sign me later.

Regulatory agencies are generally given the discretion to create procedures that make their work more effective, price efficient, whatever. An electronic NFA stamp is to a paper NFA stamp what a postage meter is to a postage stamp. It has the same validity, both of them.

In both of these instances, you aren’t BUYING the stamp. Most people who buy postage stamps do so with the intent of getting a letter from on place to another. They aren’t buying the stamp - they don’t even have it after it’s been mailed - they are buying the service.


Now look at the NFA stamp that way. It’s a proof of payment of the NFA tax. You aren’t buying the stamp to have a stamp, you are buying it to affect the transfer of a NFA firearm. You’re buying the service, or proving that you’ve done it, so as to own an NFA gun.

Now, I’ve been the owner of a transferable Sten without a stamp in my possession. What happened is that I bought the Sten, paid the fees, and then the ATF/USPS lost it in the mail. They lost my original stamp in the mail. So I called up the ATF and asked if they would send me another Form 4 with the stamp on it. “No, we don’t do that. When you buy a stamp you own that specific physical one, and if you lose it we aren’t authorized to give you a replacement.” So what did they send me? A shitty copy of the duplicate form they had on file, “notarized” with an illegible stamp, and a promise that it was proof enough to avoid jail. It’s like…. What if some state trooper pulls me over, asks for my papers, and all I can give him is a scribbled on photocopy with no stamp? Would I get arrested?

 

[R.W. Parker]

Would I get arrested?

Would you?

And if you did, would the burden of proof lie with the state, or would you have to prove your innocence? Either way it would seem that NFA branch's say-so would be the linchpin.

And while I understand the postage analogy (buying the service, not the stamp), isn't the "service" in this case the granting of lawful possession? I would think that the device (tax stamp) is what certifies you've applied for and been granted that service, much in the same way as a driver's license or CCW permit.

Not trying to be argumentative or even play devil's advocate, and I'm grateful for what you've shared Nirvana. It's just that the ATF are sneaky you-know-whats, and always err on the side of the antis. I realize that what I've postulated is a big "what if", so I suppose I'm trying to game out if such a thing is within the realm of possibility.

 

[mostpeople]

“Granting lawful posession” of a machine gun.. seems to me the 2nd amendment is all we should need.

/rant

 

[R.W. Parker]

Oh, you'll get no argument from me, Most. Just writing those words made me sick to my stomach.

But unfortunately you can't go into court with "...shall not be infringed" anymore.

 

[Navy87Guy]

What if some state trooper pulls me over, asks for my papers, and all I can give him is a scribbled on photocopy with no stamp? Would I get arrested?

Hmmm…but are you required to show your NFA paperwork to law enforcement?

Does the possessor of an NFA firearm have to show proof of registration?​

Yes. The approved application received from ATF serves as evidence of registration of the NFA firearm. This document must be made available upon request of any ATF officer. It is suggested that a photocopy of the approved application be carried by the possessor when the weapon is being transported.

I get it…best practice and common sense says you make it as easy as possible - but outside of my own local PD (all five officers) I really don’t trust law enforcement officers to understand the law and I’m fundamentally opposed to overreach.

All this assumes, of course, that they have probable cause to search your vehicle or have knowledge of your NFA item (like from some weasel at the range calling it in.)

 

[heavy_mech]

...or have knowledge of your NFA item (like from some weasel at the range calling it in.)

I've wondered about this and even among my Army and shooting buddies there's a strong suspicion this does happen. I try to keep my business my business.

 

[R.W. Parker]

Actually, ATF says the "document must be made available upon request of any ATF officer". So technically, you aren't required to show it to an everyday peace officer any more than you're required to show him last year's 1040. After all, it's a tax document.

But in any contact situation with Law (read: statute) Enforcement, I like to move things along as quickly as possible. So to that end, I carry a full color, two sided copy of the approved Form along with the firearm.

 

[biggymu]

I absolutely recommend carrying a copy. I’ve had shooting ranges refuse admission without showing a copy. They may not have legal authority, but it’s their range.