NFATCA

[paper9]

I never knew about them;

http://www.nfatca.org/

Until recently...

[L1A1Rocker]

Yep, I HAD a subscription to Small Arms Review. NOT ANYMORE!!!

[paper9]

So, they are not so great or are being manipulated??...
Thanks.

[Libertarian_Geek]

They're effectively being the kid in class that asks: "Teacher... didn't we have homework last night?"

[Bendersquint]

They're effectively being the kid in class that asks: "Teacher... didn't we have homework last night?"

+1

[Kramer]

They're effectively being the kid in class that asks: "Teacher... didn't we have homework last night?"

That's funny! And typically that kid gets pummeled after school.

[Bendersquint]

They're effectively being the kid in class that asks: "Teacher... didn't we have homework last night?"

That's funny! And typically that kid gets pummeled after school.

They are receiving said pummel now and will be for years and years to come if this proposal goes through as it was released.

GemTax will be a thing of the past, noone will remember it after this screw!

[Armorer-at-Law]

They're effectively being the kid in class that asks: "Teacher... didn't we have homework last night?"

Not really. From NFATCA:

A Petition requires specific reference and citation of statutes, regulations, and legislation in question. ATF had informed us that they had concerns regarding prohibited persons getting NFA firearms without background checks via trusts and corporations. We offered to engage in a discussion on this subject with a very narrow definition set. ATF/DOJ never engaged us on the topic. The Executive Branch chose to obliterate all of the progress that NFATCA and ATF/DOJ had made and then instructed them (ATF/DOJ) to abandon the CLEO elimination and dramatically expand the vetting of trusts and corporations, again, without consulting us. At this stage, it is still not the law of the land and has not entered the mandatory rule making process.

[renegade]

They're effectively being the kid in class that asks: "Teacher... didn't we have homework last night?"

No they are far worse than that.

They try to make buying NFA via trusts/corps as difficult as possible.

They threw Trusts/Corps under the bus to get No CLEO.

They worked with ATF to get guns seized from gun owners.

They have worked to have some unfavorable rulings from BATFE on a variety of topics.

I think over the next few weeks more things are going to light and gun owners are going to wish they never existed.

Did anyone see the Bitner response on FB/ He basically said they were liars without saying it.

[karb]

They're getting hammered on FB by every SOT I know of here in Va.
It's going to be THE death stroke for most class 3 dealers.
The system will unclog for the rich investors, rich dealers, and the
Agency can go back to having vacations and drinking coffee.

Fu€K

[Armorer-at-Law]

They try to make buying NFA via trusts/corps as difficult as possible.

How so? Don't blame NFATCA for what ATF proposed.

They threw Trusts/Corps under the bus to get No CLEO.

Again, how so? They worked to get rid of CLEO sign-off. ATF had initially responded that there was still a concern with the use of trusts. Having one or more "responsible persons" designated for a trust or corporation (similar to how a corporate FFL works) was discussed as a possibility, not ALL members in a trust/corp/LLC. They were doublecrossed and "thrown under the bus" by ATF.

They worked with ATF to get guns seized from gun owners.

Please give your specific example(s).

They have worked to have some unfavorable rulings from BATFE on a variety of topics.

What specifically?

[raymond-]

i'm inclined to believe that NFATCA was naive and got in over their heads, with
BATF sandbagging them. why NFATCA ever though the terrorist organization
would negotiate in good faith is beyond me.

http://tinypic.com/player.php?v=r0xhj4&s=5

In addition, NYTimes had posted and expanded on the trust angle earlier this year

http://tinyurl.com/ad7bltx

[Bendersquint]

i'm inclined to beliefe that NFATCA were naive and got in over their heads, with
BATF sandbagging them. why NFATCA ever though the terrorist organization
would negotiate in good faith is beyond me.

http://tinypic.com/player.php?v=r0xhj4&s=5

In addition, NYTimes had posted and expanded on the trust angle earlier this year

http://tinyurl.com/ad7bltx

Please elaborate on why you think the NFATCA was naive and in over their heads.

[renegade]

Please elaborate on why you think the NFATCA was naive and in over their heads.

Can't speak for him, but it was a newly formed organization with zero victories behind it and the leaders were FFLs and book publishers with zero and I mean zero political experience. They were not even smart enough to hire professional lobbyists or consultants The biggest act of naivity was submitting this when the most anti-gun President in history is about to take office.

[raymond-]

I feel that NFATCA believed that their good intentions would pay off and their
organization would end up becoming the savior in negotiating the dissolution
of the CLEO sign off. They have been quite giddy dribbling out clues of their
efforts for well over a year, i.e. "...the end is in sight."

Lulled into a false sense of security....believing in their own publicity, they let their
guard down and BATF, the Obama administration, advising politicians, etc...pounced.

Obama et al can now munch on popcorn while prospective Title 2 owners work themselves
into a lather, point fingers and begin to attack each other.

also, a big "yeah...what renegade said " !

[Bendersquint]

OK I will buy that but I will definitely not defend them.

They should have known better.....now they are blaming the trust owners.

[beanfield33]

Could it not be the case that this rule change would have been pushed down by the Executive Branch with or without the NFATCA's petition? As posted above, the trust/background check issue was already gaining traction in the media (mostly due to Dorner) and Obama was already looking for some political cover after being defeated soundly on expanded background checks in Congress.

Be gentle, just asking the question. I have no affiliation with NFATCA and hadn't heard of them before the SHTF. I'm not defending their actions in any way. I'm just curious whether they're be leveraged as a convenient tool by the ATF.

[ncorry]

The California ex-cop that went wacko and posted a manifesto about NFA Trusts sure didn't help any of us.

[Kramer]

I feel that NFATCA believed that their good intentions would pay off and their
organization would end up becoming the savior in negotiating the dissolution
of the CLEO sign off. They have been quite giddy dribbling out clues of their
efforts for well over a year, i.e. "...the end is in sight."

Lulled into a false sense of security....believing in their own publicity, they let their
guard down and BATF, the Obama administration, advising politicians, etc...pounced.

Obama et al can now munch on popcorn while prospective Title 2 owners work themselves
into a lather, point fingers and begin to attack each other.

also, a big "yeah...what renegade said " !

Great post, I wish that I could rep you, but...

BTW ...the end is in sight!

[tazaroo]

I was just browsing the "forum" on the website of NFATCA and it's a joke. First it's hardly ever used it seems and reading some of the butt kissing posts made my testosterone levels drop.