Remember that dude who form 1ed an MG?

[Moose242]

Remember this:

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/05/16/atf-inadvertently-open-door-machine-guns-trusts/

Well he got approved, lol!

http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1624460_ATF_ruling_may_have_accidentally_opened_door_to_new_machine_guns_PAGE_9_Form_1_APPROVED.html&page=1

And it was immediately rescinded.

[dee]

Well this could get interesting.

[KBScobravert]

Haha. Reading the ar15 thread now.

[phaux]

Hahahhaa, I bet some heads are going to roll at the ATF for this

[CJ]

And the first thing he does is tell the whole world what he got away with, and instantly gets a call from the ATF.

[Cobraman]

And the first thing he does is tell the whole world what he got away with, and instantly gets a call from the ATF.

Reminds me of the whole kids fucking teachers deal

[phaux]

Lol, you know there lawyers are reading that arfcom post and their own wording on the law scratchin their heads wondering how the fuck to handle this... or they'll just say they can do what they want, because gubment

[slow06]

Lol, you know there lawyers are reading that arfcom post and their own wording on the law scratchin their heads wondering how the fuck to handle this... or they'll just say they can do what they want, because gubment

Pretty much what they did:

THE GUN CONTROL ACT OF 1968 (GCA), AS AMENDED, PROHIBITS ANY PERSON FROM POSSESSING A MACHINEGUN NOT

LAWFULLY POSSESSED AND REGISTERED PRIOR TO MAY 19, 1986. SEE 18 U.S.C. § 922(O). THE GCA DEFINES THE TERM "PERSON"

TO "INCLUDE ANY INDIVIDUAL, CORPORATION, COMPANY, ASSOCIATION, FIRM, PARTNERSHIP, SOCIETY, OR JOINT STOCK

COMPANY." SEE 18 U.S.C. § 921(A)(1). PURSUANT TO THE NFA, 26 U.S.C. § 5822, AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS, 27 C.F.R. §

479.105(A), ATF MAY NOT APPROVE ANY PRIVATE PERSON'S APPLICATION TO MAKE AND REGISTER A MACHINEGUN AFTER MAY

19, 1986.


THE FACT THAT AN UNINCORPORATED TRUST IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE DEFINITION OF "PERSON" UNDER THE GCA DOES NOT

MEAN THAT AN INDIVIDUAL MAY AVOID LIABILITY UNDER SECTION 922(O) BY PLACING A MACHINEGUN "IN TRUST."

CONSEQUENTLY, IN TERMS OF AN UNINCORPORATED TRUST, ATF MUST DISREGARD SUCH A NON-ENTITY UNDER THE GCA AND

CONSIDER THE INDIVIDUAL ACTING ON BEHALF OF THE TRUST TO BE THE PROPOSED MAKER/POSSESSOR OF THE

MACHINEGUN.

[YALE]

That should open them up to legal action.

[Denny]

I wonder if it would have stuck if he didn't go bragging about it on the net. I can't say I don't blame him. I'd share the info just to help others for future endeavors.

I bet it was exactly as they said. It was a legit request that showed no skirting around the law, so someone on the ATF side initially approved it. Then once that thread blew up, hitting every gun site on the web, ATF personnel assigned to web troll duty made the call to their daddy to yank the request.

"Because I said so"
Sincerely,
ATF

[Moose242]

On the nose Denny.

[Nash B.]

And the first thing he does is tell the whole world what he got away with, and instantly gets a call from the ATF.

The way I read it, he told the whole world what he was trying to get away with, and he got a call from the ATF before he ever realized he got away with it.

[Moose242]

[YALE]

Does anyone at the BATFE actually like machineguns?

[Moose242]

Apparently either one examiner does or he/she was trolling to the max.