Posted on 11/24/2013 7:18:32 AM PST by marktwain
These proposals attempt to provide solutions for problems that are non-existent. The existing problem with the regulations is that they are non-responsive, result in unreasonable waiting times, and create barriers to good safety practice. I have not heard of a single example of criminal misuse of these items that resulted from NFA trusts or companies. The excessive federal regulation on gun mufflers, suppressors or silencers, has caused millions of people to have substantial hearing loss, a federally mandated health disaster. The regulations on short barreled rifles and shotguns, given the Supreme Court decisions in Heller and McDonald, no longer make any rational sense. To make them even more intrusive and complex is bad policy, on the edge of irrationality.After submitting the comment, you will be given a tracking number to track it through the system. My tracking number is: 1jx-88wl-w71t.
The BATFE currently handles the annual caseload of about 30,000 transactions poorly, with delays of six to nine months. Instead of potentially doubling this caseload for frivolous political reasons, the administration should be looking to eliminate the requirement for these intrusive and unnecessary checks on items that are treated no differently than common firearms or accessories in many European nations. In Finland, for example, gun mufflers, suppressors or silencers are considered a constitutional right. No crime problems have resulted from this. Short barreled rifles and shotguns are functionally no different than handguns, possession of which has been ruled to be a constitutional right in the United States. They should be treated the same as handguns. If these actions were approved, the wait times for other applications could be handled in a timely manner.
The current Chief Law Enforcement Officer certification requirement should be done away with completely. At present, local officials are able to stop individuals from obtaining federal licenses based on nothing by individual bias, discrimination, an unwillingness to process the forms, or simple caprice, without any appeal. The proposed rule changes would extend this affront to the rule of law to trusts and companies as well.
The citizens that apply for these "tax stamps", which are in fact, poorly disguised licenses, have been shown to be the most law abiding of the top 10 percent of the country. They should not be punished for the remarkable safety record that they have established. There is no rational basis to make these regulations more restrictive.
“based on nothing by individual bias”
do you mean nothing BUT ?
Yes. Thanks for the catch.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.