With the recent church shooting in Charleston, our office has received many questions asking if it is legal to carry a concealed weapon to church with a CWL, or concealed weapons license. Currently, there are no laws in Florida that forbid carrying a concealed weapon inside or on the grounds of a religious institution except in portions which may constitute a  church school.

Studies have shown that mass murders often pick places to attack where the attacker believes they cannot be attacked in retaliation. These “Gun Free Zones” are usually churches, schools, and former places of employment. The next question then becomes can a church hire armed security guards to defend against the crazy shooters?

Each state has their own rules regarding when guns may be brought and you should investigate them.

Continue reading

Vermont NFA Class 3 firearms
There are several type of Title II Firearms sold by Class 3 FFLs that are restricted by the National Firearms Act.

Each state can impose additional restrictions on the sale, purchase, and transfer of Title II or NFA firearms in addition to the compliance that is required with the National Firearms Act.

In Vermont you can own the following items that are regulated the National Firearms Act

Machine Guns Any Other Weapon (AOW)
Destructive Devices (DD)
Short Barreled Shotguns (SBS)
Short Barreled Rifles (SBR)

Suppressors (as of July 2, 2015)

In Vermont you cannot own the following NFA restricted items.

Prior to July 2, 2015 Vermont  did not permit suppressors and had a $25 penalty for anyone who manufactures, sells, uses, or who possesses a suppressor intent to sell or use.

Follow this link to find out more about Vermont and NFA restrictions on Class 3 Firearms

Vermont has officially become the 41St State to legalize suppressors when Governor Peter Shumlin signed the H. 5 bill last week. The new law will go into effect on July 2ND, and was the culmination of local Vermont republicans, the American Suppressor Association, and the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation.  Vermont residents now have another reason to form a Vermont Gun Trust with a Vermont Gun Trust Lawyer

Continue reading

Washington NFA Class 3 firearms
There are several type of Title II firearms (those sold by Class 3 SOT FFLs)  that are restricted by the National Firearms Act.

Each state can impose additional restrictions on the sale, purchase, and transfer of Title II or NFA firearms.  These laws or restrictions are in addition to the compliance that is required with the National Firearms Act.

In Washington you can own the following items that are regulated the National Firearms Act:

  • Silencers
  • Any Other Weapon (AOW)
  • Destructive Devices (DD)
  • Short Barreled Rifles (SBR)  legal to purchase and possess, but not manufacture.

In Washington you cannot own the following NFA restricted items.

  • Machine Guns*
  • Short Barreled Shotguns (SBS)*
  • It is not permitted to manufacture an SBR within the state of WA

NOTE:* Not legal to own or possess parts that can make these firearms unless these items were legally acquired prior to July 1, 1994 and be in compliance with federal law or machine Gun or Short Barreled Shotgun,  but be possessed by by peace officer for official duty, armed forces, or person in compliance with NFA who has undergone Fingerprint and background check who in engaged in the production , manufacture, repair, or testing of Machine guns, or SBS
Follow this link to find out more about Washington and NFA restrictions on Class 3 Firearms

If you want to build an SBR to possess in the state of Washington, a co-trustee in another state can apply for the Form 1 to build an SBR and then after it is built and engraved, it is legal to transfer to WA state using a Form 20 and would be legal to possess in the State of Washington.

 

ATF continues to let the date slide on a decision of when and how to implement 41P.

DOJ/ATF RIN: 1140-AA43 Publication ID: Spring 2015

Title:

Machine Guns, Destructive Devices and Certain Other Firearms; Background Checks for Responsible Persons of a Corporation, Trust, or Other Legal Entity With Respect to Making or Transferring a Firearm

Abstract:

The Department of Justice is planning to finalize a proposed rule to amend the regulations of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) regarding the making or transferring of a firearm under the National Firearms Act. As proposed, the rule would; (1) add a definition for the term “responsible person”; (2) require each responsible person of a corporation, trust or legal entity to complete a specified form, and to submit photographs and fingerprints; and (3) modify the requirements regarding the certificate of the chief law enforcement officer (CLEO).

 

To see a history on 41P as well as major comments see our 41p update page.

Suppressors (Silencers) are now legal to own and hunting will be Legal in Minnesota (MN) as of August 1, 2015. On Friday, Governor Mark Dayton signed Senate File 878 into law, officially making Minnesota the 40th state to legalize the private possession of suppressors. The bill will make Minnesota the 36th state to allow for the use of suppressors while hunting.

This major victory for suppressor rights comes after months of hard work on the part of the NRA, the ASA, and especially Rep. Tony Cornish (R-23B), Chairman of the House Public Safety Committee, who acted as a champion for our cause by shepherding this bill through committee and ensuring that this issue stayed at the top of the legislature’s agenda.

If you are wanting to permit multiple users to use your suppressor or silencer, a Gun Trust may be the best option for you and your family.

We have been telling people for years that a properly drafted gun trust can help protect your firearms in the event that you become a prohibited person in the future.  Today the Supreme Court came to a Unanimous Decisions supporting our view that a trust can be used to hold firearms for a liquidating event or for the future beneficiaries of the trust without being lost.

The court held that “while a convicted felon is prohibited from “possessing” firearms pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 922(g), nothing strips the individual of his/her property interest in the firearms and the individual retains “the right merely to sell or otherwise dispose of their firearms,” provided the felon lacks all control over the firearms.  Our Gun Trusts already provide for this ability to just this type of purpose.

The Court also held that  “§ 922(g) does not bar such a transfer unless it would allow the felon to later control the guns, so that he could either use them or direct their use.”  This even permits an individual to create a gun trust after they lose their rights, assign the property to a trust as long as they do not have the ability to have direct or indirect use nor direct their use.  A properly drafted gun trust would remove all abilities of a felon or prohibited person from using or directing the use of all firearms and ammo within the trust.

Section 922(g) proscribes possession alone, but covers possession in every form. By its terms, §922 (g) does not prohibit a felon from owning firearms. Rather, it interferes with a single incident of ownership—one of the proverbial sticks in the bundle of property rights—by preventing the felon from knowingly possessing his (or another person’s) guns. But that stick is a thick one, encompassing what the criminal law recognizes as “actual” and “constructive” possession alike. (Emphasis in original)

The Court declared that nothing prohibits the individual’s “right merely to sell or otherwise dispose of that item.” In supporting the concept of a gun trust the Court stated  “A court may also grant a felon’s request to transfer his guns to a person who expects to maintain custody of them, so long as the recipient will not allow the felon to exert any influence over their use.”

If you have lost or are expecting to lose your gun rights, it is not too late to create a gun trust, contact us to create a secure gun trust as permitted by the Supreme Court to protect the value of your firearms or the firearms for your children and future generations.

We are often asked if you have to be 21 to build an SBR or Suppressor.  If you are manufacturing a firearm under the NFA using an ATF Form 5320.1  you only need to be 18 under federal law.  Likewise, if you are purchasing a firearm using an ATF Form 4 from an individual, trust, or non FFL you only need to be 18 years old.  If you are buying one from an FFL, you must be 21 years old under federal law.  Your state may impose stricter requirements.

Below is an excerpt from the attached letter  from ATF explaining the age requirement.

This is in response to your letter of November 16, 2006, to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) advising that you are 18 years of age, the owner of a AR-15 type receiver, and wish to register it has a short-barreled rifle using an ATF 1 application.You ask whether ATF would approve the application submitted under these circumstances.

You state that your understanding of the Gun Control Act prohibits the transfer of Short Barreled Rifles, but that you cannot find any language in the GCA nor the NFA dealing with the already possessed rifle receiver. You are correct. The GCA does establish age requirements for the sale of firearms by licensees and the NFA is silent on age restrictions.

Accordingly, since the GCA does allow possession of rifles by persons under the age of 21, you would not be prohibited from applying on a Form 1 to make a short-barreled rifle.

While an application by an individual would need photographs and a certification from your chief of police or sheriff, an application using a Gun Trust would not.

Form1-18yr-old

 

 

It is now legal to hunt in Montana with a Suppressor.  On April 23rd, 2015, Gov. Steve Bullock signed House Bill 250, legalizing the use of suppressors for all lawful hunting in Montana. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Kirk Wagoner (R-75), originally pertained only to the use of a suppressed firearm “when hunting wildlife not protected by state or federal law”. However, on March 27th, Gov. Bullock’s returned HB 250 to the legislature with proposed amendments that sought to expand the scope of the legislation to allow the use of a suppressor on a firearm during all lawful hunting.

Mr Bullock previously vetoed a similar bill in 2013,  but explained the recent signing by stating:

“It is time for Montana to join the clear majority of states that allow the use of suppressors for hunting. All of the western states do so, except for California. The public perception of suppressors as the same thing as silencers, where the assassin quietly dispatches his victim, no longer holds true. Suppressors mitigate the sound of a shot, but do not silence it.

The use of suppressors for hunting, when hunters cannot wear ear protection because they need to be aware of their surroundings, can help protect against hearing loss. This is especially true for our younger hunters, even those who are not actually hunting, but are accompanying their parent in the field.

I understand the concerns regarding the risks of increased poaching and do not take this lightly, but other states have not found this to be the case.”

Montana has become the 35 state to permit hunting with suppressors without restrictions and the 36th state to permit hunting with a suppressor.    The use of a Gun Trust can simply the process or purchasing a suppressor and permit additional authorized users, which is not possible when purchased as an individual.  If you are looking for a Montana Gun Trust or Montana NFA trust contact us for further information on the process.

Continue reading

In the April 27th issue of Bullet Points, the NSSF wrote the following update

NO IMPLEMENTATION YET SEEN FOR NOTICE 41P AS FINAL RULE . . . NSSF has confirmed with ATF that the bureau is unlikely to publish Notice 41P (NFA Trusts) as a Final Rule for quite some time. This is in part because EPS resources are being diverted to help process the 310,000 public comments received in response to the armor piercing ammunition framework proposal. In addition, it seems ATF has not prepared to revise the NFA database so that it can track “responsible persons” for NFA trusts. The proposed rule would require the responsible person(s) on an NFA Trust be fingerprinted.

This seems consistent with the statements made by the ATF at the Annual Firearms Seminar in Nashville earlier this month when we reported on many of the statements ATF made including poorly written trusts.  Remember, a properly written gun trust should give you and others involved with the trust guidance what you can and can’t do instead of leave it up to the individual to determine what to do.

For a complete listing of our posts on 41P see our 41P webpage at http://www.guntrustlawyer.com/41p.html

Contact Information