View Full Version : Douglas Co Sheriff Weaver and ATF 41P
I am not sure if this is a major topic on the forum, but ATF 41P(and bama) are going the NFA Trusts and LLC's "loophole" that are made for getting NFA items if a CLEO refuses to sign off on a form 1 where the NFA items are legal to possess. For example people in Douglas county cannot own SBR's or suppressors because Sheriff Weaver refuses to sign the forms, the only way to own them is with an NFA trust or LLC. My question is, with all of the posturing that has been made for the 2nd amendment by our sheriff's, which I appreciate it, is it worth bringing up the argument to a sheriff that is against infringing out rights of the 2nd amendment, that they are still infringing on it by not allowing us to own NFA items in a state where they are legal?
It would be helpful to find out why he won't sign the Forms. My understanding is that some won't sign because they are worried about the their personal or the cities liability if someone uses a NFA item to commit a crime that he has signed off. He could also be worried about if it could be used against them in an election. There are probably other reasons too. You could tailor your arguing points if you knew the reason he won't sign. Your point about supporting some gun rights but not supporting NFA stuff would definitely be worth arguing along with any other points.
You should be asking the contenders running for his term-limited spot in 2014.
You should be asking the contenders running for his term-limited spot in 2014.
That is a waste of time. You have to research their previous actions. People running for election can say anything they want. You have to go by what they have done and, maybe, what they said in the past. Don't trust them if they did or said anything previously that didn't support the 2nd Amendment
Weaver, who personally owns several NFA items, says 'Civilians don't need those - what would happen if they were stolen?'
I have been around and around with him multiple times.
ChuckNorris
12-17-2013, 09:02
Weaver, who personally owns several NFA items, says 'Civilians don't need those - what would happen if they were stolen?'
I have been around and around with him multiple times.
There it is! The definition of hypocrisy, do as I say, not as I do.
Bitter Clinger
12-17-2013, 10:20
Weaver, who personally owns several NFA items, says 'Civilians don't need those - what would happen if they were stolen?'
I have been around and around with him multiple times.
Then he is saying that HE don't need them either, BECAUSE LEO's ARE CIVILIANS!
buckshotbarlow
12-17-2013, 11:23
Don't get me started on weaver, I tried voting him out because of this very issue...Do as I say, not as I do! Anyhow, I went the trust route, it helps when I die by keeping the item in the fam.
Weaver, who personally owns several NFA items, says 'Civilians don't need those - what would happen if they were stolen?'
I have been around and around with him multiple times.
This is exactly what I was told when I went to get the form signed. (Minus the part about him owning them)
Until the rules come out this is just rumor but 'they' are saying that with the new changes the ATF may make to the NFA trust laws due to the latest executive orders is to change the wording and make it so CLEO's don't have and excuse to not sign assuming normal background issues are in order.
Circuits
12-17-2013, 16:39
Just because the sheriff won't sign doesn't mean you can't have it - there are MANY other valid signers.
US Attorneys
DAs
Judges
State Police commanders/captains
City PD Chief
Town Chief Marshal
and a bunch of others...
lowbeyond
12-17-2013, 16:40
Weaver, who personally owns several NFA items, says 'Civilians don't need those - what would happen if they were stolen?'
I have been around and around with him multiple times.
ah and there is the reason.
he is a giant dick head
Then he is saying that HE don't need them either, BECAUSE LEO's ARE CIVILIANS!
THIS! "It is near impossible to police the community if you are not a member of the community." -Sir Robert Peel.
Ranger353
12-17-2013, 17:07
Spot on. Too many Chiefs and Sheriffs forget that small tidbit after they are in office for a few years.
Until the rules come out this is just rumor but 'they' are saying that with the new changes the ATF may make to the NFA trust laws due to the latest executive orders is to change the wording and make it so CLEO's don't have and excuse to not sign assuming normal background issues are in order.
Unfortunately I can't find myself trusting the ATF and bama's executive order, they want to make it as difficult as possible for us to get NFA items. I still don't think if 41P went into effect that Weaver would sign the forms...
Just because the sheriff won't sign doesn't mean you can't have it - there are MANY other valid signers.
US Attorneys
DAs
Judges
State Police commanders/captains
City PD Chief
Town Chief Marshal
and a bunch of others...
I have never heard this before, where did you hear this? If it is true, who would actually sign off on it?
I already have an LLC but would like to know just in case...
Unfortunately I can't find myself trusting the ATF and bama's executive order, they want to make it as difficult as possible for us to get NFA items. I still don't think if 41P went into effect that Weaver would sign the forms...
I unfortunately can't disagree but still hope for the best.
Until the rules come out this is just rumor but 'they' are saying that with the new changes the ATF may make to the NFA trust laws due to the latest executive orders is to change the wording and make it so CLEO's don't have and excuse to not sign assuming normal background issues are in order.
That was the original 'trade' - people give up the trusts/llcs/etc and CLEOs are no longer required to 'sign' (just proof of notification). However, the ATF has backed off on the CLEO part (after they had a 'deal' with the ASA) - and said they will review that portion "at a later date".
Circuits
12-18-2013, 00:49
I have never heard this before, where did you hear this? If it is true, who would actually sign off on it?
I already have an LLC but would like to know just in case...
Does no one ever READ these forms they're filling out, and the instructions that are provided?
Instructions item 2e on the third page of the form 4 itself. Item 2f on the form 1 instructions. Additional examples beyond those specifically stated in the form have been documented in the past, and you may write to the ATF to request a list of additional acceptable persons if you wish.
Does no one ever READ these forms they're filling out, and the instructions that are provided?
Instructions item 2e on the third page of the form 4 itself. Item 2f on the form 1 instructions. Additional examples beyond those specifically stated in the form have been documented in the past, and you may write to the ATF to request a list of additional acceptable persons if you wish.
I am aware and READING the form would of gotten me to the ATF only. And again I ask, can you name a single person in those positions who will sign off?
Great-Kazoo
12-18-2013, 09:37
I am aware and READING the form would of gotten me to the ATF only. And again I ask, can you name a single person in those positions who will sign off?
A few phone calls will get you answers. Does someone else need to do your leg work. I can get the sheriff or chief of police to sign off.
Circuits
12-18-2013, 09:43
And again I ask, can you name a single person in those positions who will sign off?
I don't live in Douglas Co - why would I bother researching something like that?
The sheriff is not the only one who *can* sign, so it's not like you're one and done after 41P changes are enacted. It'll be up to you Douglas Co-ians to find other ways to stick it to the man.
A few phone calls will get you answers. Does someone else need to do your leg work. I can get the sheriff or chief of police to sign off.
Nope, don't need anyone to do the leg work. My point was that I doubt any people in those positions would sign off on it. So rather than call around and paint a target on my back I chose to do the LLC route. And good for you it is not that easy for all of us
Great-Kazoo
12-18-2013, 12:16
Nope, don't need anyone to do the leg work. My point was that I doubt any people in those positions would sign off on it. So rather than call around and paint a target on my back I chose to do the LLC route. And good for you it is not that easy for all of us
You're on a gun forum and worried about a target on your back. [facepalm]
You're on a gun forum and worried about a target on your back. [facepalm]
I know what you are trying to do, so just drop it if you have nothing meaningful to contribute to this thread. I do not care what your opinion is at this point, go play in another thread.
Not too mention that they are two different things a face to face would require my full name and personal info including the items I have/want. Posting on a gun forum does not put a target on you, you are under the guise of anonymity. Hence the reason we use handles rather than our full names.
Back to the purpose of this thread I still think it is worth the effort to talk to weaver about this. I just wanted to gain other people's opinions
Aloha_Shooter
12-19-2013, 21:14
Let me get this straight. Newbie with a whole 7 posts -- who didn't even read the form he's asking about -- is telling jim to go play in another thread? Okay ... [facepalm]
The chief law enforcement officer is considered to be the Chief of Police for the maker’s city or town of residence, the Sheriff for the maker’s county of residence; the Head of the State Police for the maker’s State of residence; a State or local district attorney or prosecutor having jurisdiction in the maker’s area of residence; or another person whose certifcation is acceptable to the Director, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms and Explosives.
So you know for a fact that District Attorney Brauchler would refuse to sign your form? or Attorney General Sutherland?
XC700116
12-19-2013, 22:25
I know what you are trying to do, so just drop it if you have nothing meaningful to contribute to this thread. I do not care what your opinion is at this point, go play in another thread.
Not too mention that they are two different things a face to face would require my full name and personal info including the items I have/want. Posting on a gun forum does not put a target on you, you are under the guise of anonymity. Hence the reason we use handles rather than our full names.
Back to the purpose of this thread I still think it is worth the effort to talk to weaver about this. I just wanted to gain other people's opinions
You don't really know how the internet actually works do you.
Then to the point, if you're not willing to go through the effort of doing the legwork should the llc/trust option be shut down, then why are you willing to submit all those forms to the ATF in the first place? And if it is shut down, I guess you'll just have to go without.
Great-Kazoo
12-19-2013, 22:49
I know what you are trying to do, [panic] so just drop it if you have nothing meaningful to contribute to this thread. I do not care what your opinion is at this point, go play in another thread.
Not too mention that they are two different things a face to face would require my full name and personal info including the items I have/want. Posting on a gun forum does not put a target on you, you are under the guise of anonymity. [ROFL3]Hence the reason we use handles rather than our full names.
Back to the purpose of this thread I still think it is worth the effort to talk to weaver about this. I just wanted to gain other people's opinions
I believe some of us gave you our Opinion.
You are asking about a FEDERALLY REGISTERED (yes folks i used registered) ITEM, which requires you to file paperwork in duplicate. WHICH has your full name, address and location on it. You are worried about a face to face with someone that may or may not sign off [facepalm]
This contradicts your Anonymity / FACE TO FACE sentence.
I still think it is worth the effort to talk to weaver about this.
Gotta run time for work.
http://ts2.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4858682959724577&pid=15.1
Still trying to understand that thought of anonymity on the Internet with Feds being involved? Then the 13K post to 7 posts panties in a twist when Jim is not attacking in the first place......
I am getting a troll feeling from this. [Coffee]
SamuraiCO
12-20-2013, 08:08
Please not the same Samurai and no relation to me [panic]
JM Ver. 2.0
12-20-2013, 12:05
I know what you are trying to do, so just drop it if you have nothing meaningful to contribute to this thread. I do not care what your opinion is at this point, go play in another thread.
Not too mention that they are two different things a face to face would require my full name and personal info including the items I have/want. Posting on a gun forum does not put a target on you, you are under the guise of anonymity. Hence the reason we use handles rather than our full names.
Back to the purpose of this thread I still think it is worth the effort to talk to weaver about this. I just wanted to gain other people's opinions
http://img.tapatalk.com/d/13/12/21/sevaburu.jpg
Sent from my teepee using smoke signals.
electronman1729
12-20-2013, 23:04
get out of Douglas and move to Jeffco. Unknown to my wife this is why we live Arvada.
I believe some of us gave you our Opinion.
And I appreciated the ones that were relevant to the thread
You are asking about a FEDERALLY REGISTERED (yes folks i used registered) ITEM, which requires you to file paperwork in duplicate. WHICH has your full name, address and location on it. You are worried about a face to face with someone that may or may not sign off [facepalm]
I will try to explain this again, going to a person whom I do not know if they will sign off on the form or not presents them with the option to be able to record my information and deny the form. I have no problem giving it to the NFA and as you said that is a federal registry, however, they WILL approve the form so I do not have to worry about giving my personal info/serial numbers to someone who would deny the form and use it against me. It is purely a privacy thing. That is what I was trying to say.
This contradicts your Anonymity / FACE TO FACE sentence.
This does not contradict what I just stated above to your other point. What I am saying about anonymity of the internet is that my gun information is not attainable. Not a single person on here can tell me what guns I own, if I own suppressors/AOW/SBR/SBS or anything of that nature, to include serial numbers, or the name of an LLC. If you can attain that information based on my posts here, please do.
In short, the primary reason I got defensive was for the fact that I am on many many gun forums and I strongly dislike when a member with a high post count talks down to the new little guy, because his post count somehow makes him superior to the new person. Clearly that is what the others that posted here think, in my mind it doesn't, respect is earned not given and clearly you have earned those guys respect, which is great. The way that some of the others have been replying are not different then when you go to the gun store and talk to the one guy behind the counter who is the ultimate armchair commando and talks down to you because you ask him a question about a gun. I hate that elitist bullshit, so didn't feel like tolerating it. In these times you would think us gun owners would want to stick together and not try to separate the veterans from the N00bs...Believe me I have quite the extensive knowledge about many types of firearms and NFA items...
But I have no problem admitting that i did not call around to judges and DA's in the state simply because Weaver denied all of my forms. I decided the smart thing to do was make an LLC, so that is exactly what I did, now nobody but the NFA and I know what I own. Weaver is a fool...
get out of Douglas and move to Jeffco. Unknown to my wife this is why we live Arvada.
I have actually considered other counties for this very reason! I stayed in DougCo only because I had the ability to maintain my LLC.
Please not the same Samurai and no relation to me [panic]
Sorry man, I am not trying to hurt the samurai name! [not-worthy]
You don't really know how the internet actually works do you.
Then to the point, if you're not willing to go through the effort of doing the legwork should the llc/trust option be shut down, then why are you willing to submit all those forms to the ATF in the first place? And if it is shut down, I guess you'll just have to go without.
As I understood it, it would not effect previous purchases, only future purchases. No?
XC700116
12-21-2013, 21:46
As I understood it, it would not effect previous purchases, only future purchases. No?
Correct, it couldn't effect prior purchases. But what you're referring to is if the option for LLC/Trust becomes necessary to receive CLEO signature, then you'd be in a spot where you'd need it for new purchases. In which case you'll need to do one of three things.
1. Go without new purchase NFA items
2. Move to a more NFA friendly county
3. Find a chief in a different branch of LE to sign off that is acceptable to NFA regs. Clearly your Sheriff is out on that one (at least this guy) so you'll have to explore those other options. I'd start by making phone calls using hypothetical questions, ie no specifics. Call or email their offices and ask if they are willing to sign off on the paperwork, worst thing they can say is no.
Also, if one is willing, and has the authority, to sign off on it, the others can't do jack squat about it, no matter if they have all your info or not. After the fact it's a moot point because the BATFE has all the info on it anyway.
Correct, it couldn't effect prior purchases..
.Why can't it affect prior purchases? Or current purchases?
Great-Kazoo
12-22-2013, 09:43
Why can't it affect prior purchases? Or current purchases?
Prior purchase submitted for and approved are already GTG. it would be Future ones after the changes are enacted. Until it becomes "gospel" they cannot require the CLEO sign off on LLC / Trusts. Till then submit away.
If I recall correctly, the ATF will do nothing with this until June of 2014, so if you ever wanted it, do it!
Also, dont forget you can submit you form electronically!
I forgot that the current version of the proposed rule only applies to transfers. I just hope that the transfers I currently have in the system get approved before they put the final version of this proposed regulation goes into effect.
Great-Kazoo
12-22-2013, 18:55
I forgot that the current version of the proposed rule only applies to transfers. I just hope that the transfers I currently have in the system get approved before they put the final version of this proposed regulation goes into effect.
If they are pending no issue. Nor do i suspect (key word) the atf will force everyone , prior to 6/14, resubmit.
Circuits
12-22-2013, 20:38
It will also affect existing registered items if you wish to add someone new to the trust after the effective date of the rule change.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.