View Full Version : Everyone's opinion on 41P
What does everyone think will happen? It has been delayed a couple of times and seems to be losing steam. If it does go through will the prices be effected?
Discuss
Supposedly Dec 1 of this year. I was going to make a pistol with a lower I just picked up, but I guess I'll SBR it before then. I doubt I'll be able to get a can before this goes into effect.
Great-Kazoo
07-19-2015, 14:19
What does everyone think will happen? It has been delayed a couple of times and seems to be losing steam. If it does go through will the prices be effected?
Discuss
12/1/15 as posted in other threads, here and elsewhere.UNLESS something drastic happens between now & then. It's one of the reasons the wait for F1's have hit the 100+ day mark.
Prices have nothing to do with 41P. it's only being able to get a CLEO signature. NFA items will always be NFA priced. It's going to suck for you Arapahoe cty and other places CLEO's do not sign off. Up here it's the Sheriff or my local Police chief that will sign.
I think administration and its agencies are determined to do whatever they can to carry out their agenda . . . and I can't see them NOT going through with this change. I think they were content to let things die down a little and then they'll just sign off on it anyway.
I jumped on getting a stamp for an SBR build (just got approved) and have a can processing--deciding whether I want to try and get another build going, too. From my understanding, the DC sheriff's office in the past has refused to sign off and I am not sure that has changed at all. Wasn't going to take the chance. If you think you want to go NFA and live where you don't know for sure that CLEO sign-off is a strong likelihood, I would get on a trust and your paperwork submission ASAP. The downside is you got all worked up over nothing. If 41P is enacted and you didn't act . . . you're hosed on NFA items if your CLEO won't sign.
It's going to suck for you Arapahoe cty and other places CLEO's do not sign off.
Last thing I heard 41P required NOTIFICATION of the CLEO, not a signature for trusts.
Of course it's finger prints and all the BS for EVERYONE on the trust.
O2
Last thing I heard 41P required NOTIFICATION of the CLEO, not a signature for trusts.
Of course it's finger prints and all the BS for EVERYONE on the trust.
O2
Isn't it beyond just a "notification" of the CLEO . . . and they'd have to sign a certificate for each set of photos/prints that, while seemingly innocuous in the wording, is what a CLEO who doesn't want to sign anyway can/will use as their out due to "liability" or some bs. Just like some do now? That was the warning I got . . . that it would loop in the same nonsense now for individuals where it's all the wiggle room they need to not sign.
"The proposed ยง 479.63, where the applicant is a partnership, company,association, trust, or corporation:1. Provides that the applicant must be identified on the Form 1 application by the name and exact location of the place of business, including the name of the county in which the business is located or, in the case of a trust, the address where the firearm is located. In the case of two or more locations, the address shown must be the principal place of business (or principal office, in the case of a corporation) or, in the case of a trust, the principal address at which the firearm is located;2. Requires the applicant to attach to the application:
...
In accordance with the instructions provided on Form 5320.23, a certificate for each responsible person completed by the local chief of police, sheriff of the county, head of the state police, state or local district attorney or prosecutor, or such other person whose certificate may in a particular case be acceptable to the Director. The certificate for each responsible person must be completed by the CLEO who has jurisdiction in the area in which the responsible person resides. The certificate must state that the official is satisfied that the fingerprints and photograph accompanying the application are those of the responsible person and that the certifying official has no information indicating that possession of the firearm by the responsible person would be in violation of state or local law."
Rooskibar03
07-19-2015, 19:39
There are few more cans I would like to obtain prior. Guess I better get a move on.
Question. Anything already owned by the trust at the time isn't subject to new regulations is it?
There are few more cans I would like to obtain prior. Guess I better get a move on.
Question. Anything already owned by the trust at the time isn't subject to new regulations is it?
I don't know that anyone knows for sure . . . I'll defer to those who know a helluva lot more than I do. All I know is that the lawyer who I worked through for my trust said it would be highly unlikely they'd do anything with what is already out there and approved (epic nightmare for all involved, from the ATF to the owners). And he thought it would be "probable" that the ATF wouldn't enforce on paperwork already submitted and processing. But anything new would be under the new reg.
So whatever that's worth--maybe nothing.
Just to stir the tin foil hat pot...
I can't find an officially approved Form 5320.23 anywhere. I can find a draft of the proposed Form 5320.23. I wouldn't put it past obamas gang to stall the approval of the F5320.23 form for as long as they can.
Great-Kazoo
07-19-2015, 21:25
There are few more cans I would like to obtain prior. Guess I better get a move on.
Question. Anything already owned by the trust at the time isn't subject to new regulations is it?
No , because they've already been approved. It is for new applications for the trust. How can an agency require you to pay 2x for an item already approved. That's a bit of a stretch. Even for the .gov
So what happened with this?
Sounds like sometime in January the ATF will make a ruling.
Delayed as Lurch has said, Jan. 16th I believe is the new date. Got paperwork going out on a new can now, and what to do with my Thunderbeast 338BA will be decided on the Jan. decision. Wish I had funds for one more can, but I can get by with six for now.
Great-Kazoo
12-21-2015, 01:07
Delayed as Lurch has said, Jan. 16th I believe is the new date. Got paperwork going out on a new can now, and what to do with my Thunderbeast 338BA will be decided on the Jan. decision. Wish I had funds for one more can, but I can get by with six [panic] for now.
SIX !!! How terrible. You looking to buy the 338BA, or that a back burner depending which way this 42P implementation goes. I'd like to do 1 maybe 2 more Form 1 suppressors and or lowers.
AS for 41P. That would basically gut the whole E-File system for non-FFL's. Unless they allowed a scan of the fingerprints & photo. NAW........................ who am i kidding, The .gov exist solely for the purpose of making it as difficult as possible for an individual to do anything. Outside of creating as many taxes as possible.
What's this 42P you speak of?
drift_g35
12-21-2015, 12:48
If I file paperwork before anything happens will it be denied or will it be something that if its in I'm good.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Great-Kazoo
12-21-2015, 13:40
If I file paperwork before anything happens will it be denied or will it be something that if its in I'm good.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Once again, no. it's for any application filed after 41P takes effect.
SIX !!! How terrible. You looking to buy the 338BA, or that a back burner depending which way this 42P implementation goes.
I currently have one that is affected by the recall, if 41P passes then I will just have it repaired, if it doesn't go through then I will upgrade to the new Ultra version. I'd like to do another lower also!
I need to file to build an SBR asap.
Great-Kazoo
01-13-2016, 02:28
I need to file to build an SBR asap.
paper file.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.