Smith And Wesson Forums banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,055 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Some or most of you may be familiar with us trying to "assert" our 2d rights by dealing with some of the federal rules and regs concerning firearms manufacturing and ownership here in Montana.

Apparently Tennessee tried to do something similar and was "shot down" as well.

At least we tried....... :x

Here is a sweet little reply from the BATF in regards to this............

[u][url]http://www.atf.gov/firearms/071709-montana-openletter.pdf[/u][/url]

An Open Letter To All Montana Federal Firearms Licensees
U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Assistant Director

The purpose of this letter is to provide guidance on your obligations as a Federal firearms licensee (FFL). The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is dedicated to your success in meeting requirements as a Federal Firearms licensee.
The passage of the Montana Firearms Freedom Act, House Bill 246 (Act), effective, October 1, 2009, has generated questions from industry members as to how this State law may affect them while engaged in firearms business activity. The Act purports to exempt personal firearms, firearms accessories and ammunition manufactured in the State, from most Federal Firearms laws and regulations. However, because the Act conflicts with Federal firearms laws and regulations, Federal law supercedes the Act, and all provisions of the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act, and their corresponding regulations, continue to apply.
As you may know, Federal law requires a license to engage in the business of manufacturing firearms or ammunition, or to deal in firearms, even if the firearms or ammunition remain in the state. All firearms manufactured by a licensee must be properly marked. Additionally, each licensee must record the type, model, caliber or gauge and serial number of each firearm manufactured or otherwise, and the date such manufacture or other acquistion was made. Firearms transaction records and NICS background checks must be conducted prior to disposition of firearms to unlicensed persons. These, as well as other Federal requirements and prohibitions, apply whether or not the firearms or ammunitions have crossed state lines.
If you have any questions regarding the Federal firearms laws and regulations, please contact your local ATF office. ATF works closely with the firearms industry and appreciates the important role the industry plays in combating violent crime. A listing of phone numbers can be found at : http://www.atf.gov/contact/field.htm
It is signed by Carson W. Carroll Assistant Director (Enforcement Programs and Services)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,055 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
Oops, I just realized that I probably should have posted this in the CCW/State Laws forum.

Could a kindly moderator move it perhaps? fhfjjjj
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
30 Posts
I too am an FFL, however I reside in Arizona. Having had the time to give this some thought I conclude that this means absolutely nothing. Fact is from the start no FFL was ever to have neccesarily been involved. As I understand it the plan was for an individual to build about 20 simple guns and to then dispose of them himself, with the backing of Montana. I can't see why anyone is worried about the ATF anyhow. They don't have much effect on Non-Licensees who can keep their mouths shut (Take the 5th)
Just my view, been wrong more times than I can count (In The Past)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,488 Posts
Montanans are asserting their rights and breaking the BATF monopoly. What else would you expect the BATF to say? They are trying to keep a Genie in the Bottle.... The BATF may have their opinions and certainly are not shy about trying to throw their weight around, but when it comes down to Free Men exercising their God Given Rights, Washington is going to be a long way away.....
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
11,069 Posts
I hope that Jessie, aka Bulletman, will chime in on this. Being a FFL from Tennessee, he had a very telling response to this situation on another forum. Basically, his point was that if you are an FFL, you are bound to the federal regulations regardless of what the state regs may say. The first F in FFL does stand for Federal, you know. :D

Bill is on to something, though. I like his argument regarding the non-FFl.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top