Results 91 to 105 of 158
Thread: ATF-41P
-
16 January 2016, 10:04 #91
-
16 January 2016, 11:09 #92
Agreed... taking out the CLEO signoff was a huge win IMO, at least as far as the new rules go.
-----------------------------------------------
Jim
"You can never have too many guns" - my wife's actual comment
Alaska Fun
-
16 January 2016, 11:22 #93
Unless it speeds up the turnaround time or removes the requirement to tattoo your lower...it still sucks balls.
-
16 January 2016, 11:31 #94Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
- Posts
- 81
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Keep in mind, you need them every time you do a transfer... not just a one time thing... and if you do have a trust, you have to do multiple people, every time... and you are also being compelled to release otherwise confidential tax information (CLEO notification) that you otherwise didn't have to... so yeah, it kinda sucks...
ETA, and also unless they figure decide to do electronic submission of photos and fingerprints, say goodbye to eForms...Last edited by jdhill; 16 January 2016 at 11:35.
-
16 January 2016, 11:34 #95
-
16 January 2016, 11:42 #96Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
- Posts
- 81
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
On page 60 of the pdf from the federal register, ATF estimates that it takes 15 min to process a background check... so why does it take 6+ months to get a form approved?
-
16 January 2016, 13:40 #97
I could be wrong on my understanding of this but...
1) Processing forms is a manual, paper process (as opposed to NICS over the phone)Example 1A) Combing through a 30 page trusts to make sure things appear kosherExample 1B) Sending off fingerprints to be reviewed by FBI2) There's only a limited number of people that review/approve the forms - each person can only process x forms per day
3) No incentive for employees to churn out approvals
-
16 January 2016, 14:13 #98
-
16 January 2016, 14:21 #99
-
16 January 2016, 14:52 #100
It's not a deal breaker, but it is asinine for certain people to be required to jump though those hoops. LEOs for example. Or CCW holders. These people have already been vetted. Those credentials ought to allow them to bypass the fingerprint and/or photo requirements. As for me personally, i'm a federal employee with a security clearance, i hold a valid CCW, and have current passport. i have already been put under the microscope multiple times. My photos and fingerprints are on file with multiple agencies, and i'm damn sure not the only one. There needs to be agency cross talk. As long as one's credentials are valid and current, it should be as simple as passing a background check like you do every time you fill out a 4473. It's absurd to require those people to prove themselves yet again. But then, the entire NFA in general is absurd so it fits right in i reckon.
"It's time to start slapping people." - George Carlin
NRA Life Member | SAF Life Member | FPC Member
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
-
16 January 2016, 16:08 #101
100% Agree.
NFA is outdated, and everything should be GTG with just an over the counter 4473.
BUT... we are stuck with what we have for now. IMHO in this climate it could have been a lot worse. Say... let's adjust the NFA $200 stamp for inflation and go back to what it was intended for?
No more Trusts at all? Yeah, it's 2 more hoops for sure, but killing off the CLEO sign off was a win in my book.
-
16 January 2016, 16:16 #102
I thought the prints had to be on a certain type of Federal print card, rather than the type commonly used by LEAs? With most agencies doing electronic print scanning now, I played hell and gave up trying to go the individual route with my SBR. The CLEO sign-off taken care of, the prints were the hangup.
There's no "Team" in F**K YOU!
-
16 January 2016, 19:19 #103
You're right, it could've been much worse. And i guess we should count our blessings and take removal of the CLEO sign off as a win. But with that comes the requirement to notify the CLEO in all instances, correct? Granted, our NFA items are already on a federal registry, but i feel that the new requirement to notify the CLEO opens up some privacy concerns. I can see states using this information to build their own databases. And in jurisdictions that are less than 2A friendly i can see that information being misused, like publishing names and address of people who own NFA items like some places have done with names of those who hold CCWs. I try to avoid conspiracy theories, but given this administrations track record on our second Amendment freedoms, i can't imagine the ATF writing any new rule with our best interest in mind.
"It's time to start slapping people." - George Carlin
NRA Life Member | SAF Life Member | FPC Member
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
-
16 January 2016, 19:29 #104
I believe you're correct that there is a specific card the ATF wants your prints on, and that's the only one they'll accept. I think you can request them from the ATF and have them mailed to you, but i could be wrong. I haven't had to get my prints taken in a while, but it was pretty easy the last time i did need them. My local PD did prints on certain days during certain hours and it was first come, first served. But that was a while back and things may have changed.
"It's time to start slapping people." - George Carlin
NRA Life Member | SAF Life Member | FPC Member
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
-
16 January 2016, 19:32 #105
With regards to fingerprint cards and fast tracking. This from the Silencer Shop blog:
Originally Posted by silencer shop