SOT-Not Renewing & ATF not approving Form 3 w/ LE Letters

[Youlen Enterprises Inc.]

1.) If a 07 decides to not renew their SOT, are they permanently banned from acquiring/paying for a SOT at a future date and time?

2.) Has anyone else had form 3 transfers with a LE letter being denied on the basis 'Not Suitable for Law Enforcement Use?' The weapon in question is a M249.

 

Thank you!

[Ryo]

If you don't renew the SOT, then your just going to have to do Form 4 for NFA items like a regular non-FFL.

Also if you have any posties.. you have to give them up or destroy them.

[gftiv]

Had FFL and SOT 30 years ago. I let them lapse. Got new FFL and SOT last year. No problems.

[an1913t]

I'm not an sot, but have been told by one that the atf is kicking a lot of posties back for the aforementioned reason.  They are being a lot stricter on law letters. 

[Got Uzi]

Yep I’ve heard of several LE letters being kicked back. It’s more ofacommon sense thing-why would “Podunk PD” need a demo for a belt fed?? For what reason would they be using it for their job? Now if  the same PD was requesting a demo for an M16, AK, MP5, UMP, Glock 18, or something similar there wouldn’t be an issue.

There can also be something said for a PD wanting a demo for vintage machine guns too. Why is Podunk PD wanting a demo of a Thompson or MP40? They aren’t going to field that in their cruiser. The whole point of a demo letter is just that-a demo for PD use, not for someone to play with and “enhance their collection”  Also why do you think we are seeing so many new SOT’s cranking out post samples then dropping their license to sell them as “no law letter” guns? When the same person has 20 M16 lowers listed on GB, one has to question. Same goes for why has the pre sample market exploded? Same argument applies-all these new SOT’s wanting to cash in on “cheap machine guns” At some point this is going to get cracked down on too. 

My question is-when will ATF start denying new or renewing SOT’s based on this issue. This being based on how many transfers are done in a year, how many firearms are being built, ect. 

 

Ok ill step back as im sure I’ll be racked over the coals for my thoughts but it needed to be said.

[United Surplus Arms]

2 hours ago, Got Uzi said:

 

Yep I’ve heard of several LE letters being kicked back. It’s more ofacommon sense thing-why would “Podunk PD” need a demo for a belt fed?? For what reason would they be using it for their job? Now if  the same PD was requesting a demo for an M16, AK, MP5, UMP, Glock 18, or something similar there wouldn’t be an issue.

There can also be something said for a PD wanting a demo for vintage machine guns too. Why is Podunk PD wanting a demo of a Thompson or MP40? They aren’t going to field that in their cruiser. The whole point of a demo letter is just that-a demo for PD use, not for someone to play with and “enhance their collection”  Also why do you think we are seeing so many new SOT’s cranking out post samples then dropping their license to sell them as “no law letter” guns? When the same person has 20 M16 lowers listed on GB, one has to question. Same goes for why has the pre sample market exploded? Same argument applies-all these new SOT’s wanting to cash in on “cheap machine guns” At some point this is going to get cracked down on too. 

My question is-when will ATF start denying new or renewing SOT’s based on this issue. This being based on how many transfers are done in a year, how many firearms are being built, ect. 

 

Ok ill step back as im sure I’ll be racked over the coals for my thoughts but it needed to be said.

I agree with what you said 100%.  There is going to be more scrutiny going forward.  I never understood how the ATF allowed a gun range to have a bunch of post-sample machine guns (available to rent/shoot at the range) that they made, or obtained with a law letter (from the owner's buddy the local marshal).  

Edited March 24, 2022 by shiklg

[Ryo]

I know WA law letters have been denied but on the bases that WA passed a law not allowing LEO to own a machinegun or other military weapons. 

WA has fallen with the new >10rd magazine ban. I can't believe how the politicians are so anti cop and anti 2nd Amendment. A decade ago they approved SBR ownership and Silencer usage..

[SGT Fish]

On 3/24/2022 at 8:54 AM, shiklg said:

I agree with what you said 100%.  There is going to be more scrutiny going forward.  I never understood how the ATF allowed a gun range to have a bunch of post-sample machine guns (available to rent/shoot at the range) that they made, or obtained with a law letter (from the owner's buddy the local marshal).  

Why wouldn't they be allowed to have a bunch of post samples that they made? They can make as many MGs as they want just like FN or HK. 

 

Also, does the law/regulation state that the only reason a PD can get a demo is for purchasing decisions? Sincere question. What's stopping a PD from saying "I want a glock 18 demo so we can see what the gangsters are spraying in the hood." 

 

I would argue that there are no machineguns that are suitable for police use. 

 

All this being said. This is just more ATF BS of them tightening the noose on law abiding citizens. Just like these form 1 denials that have lots upset. 

Edited March 25, 2022 by SGT Fish

[United Surplus Arms]

56 minutes ago, SGT Fish said:

Why wouldn't they be allowed to have a bunch of post samples that they made? They can make as many MGs as they want just like FN or HK. 

 

I didn't know that post samples can be made to use as rentals at a gun range.  If this is legal then it's ok.  I stand by my statement that it's no surprise the ATF is cracking down.  

[Got Uzi]

Iirc there is a clause in there statute saying post samples aren’t allowed to be rented out. They are for demonstration only. Not to be making money on. Someone correct me if I’m wrong. 

 

[SGT Fish]

27 minutes ago, Got Uzi said:

Iirc there is a clause in there statute saying post samples aren’t allowed to be rented out. They are for demonstration only. Not to be making money on. Someone correct me if I’m wrong. 

 

Never heard of such a thing in all my years of being in the NFA community. Post samples are made for sales, not for demos. Demo letters are just a way for ATF to F over dealers by slowing down business and preventing dealers from being able to stock post-86 inventory for sales.

 

[Got Uzi]

Building them as rental guns isn’t selling them tho. That’s what I’m referring to

[SGT Fish]

 Think what tou are referring to, is some Dealers that may have been acquiring post 86 MGs in rental businesses on police dept demo letters. Which is not what they are for. And could be considered "breaking the rules." What you "heard" was some grumpy people that would rather play volunteer atf agent, than mind their own business

There is no rule, let alone law, that post samples cannot be rented for use on a range. Manufacturers can build any MG they want, as they are licensed to. And building some historic MGs is a great way to learn design and manufacture techniques.  Manufacturers are able to buy post 86MGs from retiring dealers without a demo letter, so who is stopping them from renting them at that point?

 

[Got Uzi]

That sounds similar to what I was thinking. I guess I look at it, IMHO, a demo gun is just that, for demos, not to rent out for people to get their jolly’s.

 

I don’t want to come off as a non capitalist as that’s not the case, but I don’t want to get caught up or lose my ability to conduct business because of a few people’s greed. 

[Chef]

43 minutes ago, Got Uzi said:

That sounds similar to what I was thinking. I guess I look at it, IMHO, a demo gun is just that, for demos, not to rent out for people to get their jolly’s.

 

I don’t want to come off as a non capitalist as that’s not the case, but I don’t want to get caught up or lose my ability to conduct business because of a few people’s greed. 

As long as you (the dealer) perform the demo for the department who requested it, then I would say your obligation to the intent of the purpose for which you acquired the gun is fulfilled. What you do after that is (I would think) irrelevant.
So hypothetically, you get a letter from a department to demo a Mp7. With that letter you purchase one and perform the demo for the department. After that, I'd say you are free to use that Mp7 for whatever purpose you want, including renting it. Assuming of course you own the rental range.
And as far as building guns, I don't believe there are any restrictions placed upon that. I believe you just add whatever you build to your books and build it. You don't have to notify the ATF whenever you build a post sample, you just have to account for them when you have your compliance checks. (I am not a 07 but know some and that's how they explained it to me)

All that being said, I'm afraid that due to the greed of some people in the last few years, taking advantage of the ability to sell post samples without a LE letter when "going out of business", I feel there are going to be some big changes and new restrictions on dealers soon. 

(I put "going out of business" in quotes because there has been a growing trend, which you all are aware of, of 07 SOT dealers acquiring/building large quantities of post samples and then "going out of business" to be able to sell them without letters and then "reorganizing" into a new entity and doing it all over again. All of which may be technically legal but was clearly not what the ATF intended dealers to be doing when they wrote the rules. And just like with open bolt semi-autos in 1980, bump stocks, solvent traps and now FRTs, the feds notice this stuff and act quickly to stop or restrict it.)

[gftiv]

When a manufacturer builds a post machine gun or any other NFA item, they are required to send notification to ATF (form2?) when they build it. There is a time limit on notification, I think 24 hours.

[mattnh]

The only valid reasons to mfg a post sample MG are as noted below.

Anything built needs to be built for sale.  R&D, testing, rental, etc. are not valid mfg reasons

as noted below.  Once legally manufactured (or imported) any legal use is fine  (hang on wall, rental, testing, etc.).

 

ATF NFA Handbook
7.6.2 Manufacture of machineguns solely for purposes of testing. The manufacture of machineguns solely for testing or research purposes is not recognized as a legitimate exception to the ban on possession or transfer of firearms under 18 U.S.C. 922(o). As previously stated, manufacturers may only manufacture machineguns on or after May 19, 1986 and stockpile the same if they are manufactured and held for sale to Federal or State agencies, for distribution as “sales samples,” or for exportation.

Edited March 26, 2022 by mattnh

[SGT Fish]

On 3/26/2022 at 10:20 AM, mattnh said:

The only valid reasons to mfg a post sample MG are as noted below.

Anything built needs to be built for sale.  R&D, testing, rental, etc. are not valid mfg reasons

as noted below.  Once legally manufactured (or imported) any legal use is fine  (hang on wall, rental, testing, etc.).

 

ATF NFA Handbook
7.6.2 Manufacture of machineguns solely for purposes of testing. The manufacture of machineguns solely for testing or research purposes is not recognized as a legitimate exception to the ban on possession or transfer of firearms under 18 U.S.C. 922(o). As previously stated, manufacturers may only manufacture machineguns on or after May 19, 1986 and stockpile the same if they are manufactured and held for sale to Federal or State agencies, for distribution as “sales samples,” or for exportation.

I guess colt and FN better not build any prototypes or test subjects lol. 

I know thats that's NFA handbook, but how much of that is actual codified law and how much is ATF opinion?

[mattnh]

Not an attrny.  I’d consult one of you need a legal opinion…  My personal read/opinion of 922.o.2.a is whatever gvmt says at any time is the law wrt possession/mfg of postie MGs. I think the handbook expressed the working opinion/guidance of some relevant gov officials at one time in the past.

[SGT Fish]

9 hours ago, mattnh said:

Not an attrny.  I’d consult one of you need a legal opinion…  My personal read/opinion of 922.o.2.a is whatever gvmt says at any time is the law wrt possession/mfg of postie MGs. I think the handbook expressed the working opinion/guidance of some relevant gov officials at one time in the past.

It reminds me of a few years ago when ohio passed a law that action military didn't need a CCW to carry. Soon after the AG office updated the CCW pamphlet to say that it only applied to "active duty" military and not reservists or NG. But they law only states "active military service" which includes all people currently serving in the military. 

 

[United Surplus Arms]

27 minutes ago, SGT Fish said:

It reminds me of a few years ago when ohio passed a law that action military didn't need a CCW to carry. Soon after the AG office updated the CCW pamphlet to say that it only applied to "active duty" military and not reservists or NG. But they law only states "active military service" which includes all people currently serving in the military. 

 

as a former member of the Ohio National Guard, this is (was) BS.

That said, under Ohio law, an Attorney General Opinion (legal letter) has the force of law, as long as there is no conflicting judicial (court) ruling

 

[Benellisima]

To clarify, this is what I did 2 weeks ago.  I am going out of business and have several Le lettered post smgs for sale.  I sold several of them already but had to education the examiner about the law.  The first form 3 was denied with a quote saying I needed to sell with a law letter ( I had provided a copy of a letter with the date I was closing my business). So then I resubmitted the form 3 and provided a copy of the rule that allows me to sell and transfer withOUT a law letter.  The second form 3 was denied asking for a list of the post smgs I had to sell and when I had planned to close the business,( I had already provided the closure letter).  After attaching that information the 3s were approved.