Tag Archives: machinegun

2nd Annual FICG/Shooters Gauntlet Next EVOLUTION Machine Gun Shoot!

We are proud to announce that Firearms Industry Consulting Group (FICG)® (FICG®) and Shooters Gauntlet, LLC will be hosting our 2nd annual Next EVOLUTION machinegun shoot at the Shooters Gauntlet on June 3-4, 2017, in celebration of the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution, and Article 1, Section 21 of the PA Constitution. Last year, with the assistance of our great friends at USA Chemical, we broke the world record with a 600 lbs binary explosion…just wait to see what we have scheduled for this year. (UPDATE – as a teaser, there will be  a 20MM machine gun and two mini rail guns, one shoots a cyclic rate of 2500 RPM, the other 4000 RPM…and we’re just getting started!).

Located deep in the endless mountains of Pennsylvania (directions below), about 4 hours northwest of NYC, 3 hours north of Harrisburg, PA, in the town of Monroeton PA, 18832, our 2nd annual next evolution machinegun shoot will offer shooting experiences that are not available anywhere else! If you haven’t registered yet, you can do so here! The admission cost is drastically reduced for those registering in advance and you’ll receive updates and notices about special events, shooting experiences and local hotel deals.

The shooting experiences available include:

  1. Main machinegun range, approximately 200 yards long and 75-100-125 yards deep!;
  2. Separate, secluded, silencer-only range (where manufacturers such as Liberty, Sig Silencers, SilencerCo, Thunderbeast…etc will be demoing their products);
  3. 1100 yards range and ability to rent a 50. caliber Barrett;
  4. Engage target while traveling down a zip line;
  5. Engage target while hanging upside down from the inversion wall; and
  6. Go off the grid and engage targets during the assault hike!

Additionally, as ATF has already approved the event as a sanctioned event, there will be a gun show section for vendors to sell firearms and parts! All applicable local, state and federal laws apply, including applicable state tax regulations.

As Firearm Industry vendors, representatives and personalities register, we will post a new article specifying all of those who are set to attend! Last year, the vendors included (and we anticipate them attending this year!):

We also anticipate a number of raffles/giveaways like last year and will post about them as we approach the shoot.

As the sponsors of this event are extremely supportive of the youth-shooting experience, we worked tirelessly with NUMEROUS insurance carriers to obtain coverage for minors to be able to attend. Accordingly, minors will be permitted to attend the event, where those 14 years of age and older accompanied by a parent/guardian will be permitted to shoot, except for machine guns and canons. Those under 14 year of age, who are accompanied by a parent/guardian, will only be permitted to observe. Unfortunately, due to the requirements of the insurance carrier, all minors will have to produce a Government document (e.g. birth certificate, passport…etc) stating their date of birth.

Also, there will be food available onsite!

Accommodations: Special hotel accommodations have been negotiated, which you can find here.

Local Directions: The Shooters Gauntlet, LLC is located on Millstone Road, Monroeton, PA 18332. From the Towanda PA area:

At the intersection of route 220 and route 414, take route 414 west (route 414 begins here) for appx. 2.6 miles. Turn left onto Brocktown Rd. (sign here for RODS GARAGE) for  appx 0.2 miles to Weston Rd, turn right. Continue on Weston Rd. for 1.6 miles, and then turn left over bridge onto Millstone Rd. Follow Millstone Rd appx. 2.2 miles to intersection, turn left over bridge remaining on Millstone Rd. You will see the signs and receive direction from there

NOTE: For the Stone Mountain Machine Gun Event, follow signs for parking when on Millstone Road. There will be parking attendants to assist you. As for the events that take place during the Stone Mountain Machine Gun Event that require 4wd, all transportation to and from those events will be provided. Attendees will not be allowed to drive there own vehicles off road due to high traffic and time constraints.

If you haven’t registered, what are you waiting for?!?! Come on out, get your machinegun on and meet FICG® Chief Counsel and your PA Gun Attorney®, Joshua Prince, as well as, our other FICG® attorneys, while enjoying the rich seclusion that Shooters Gauntlet has to offer.

Brought to you by your PA Gun Attorney® and PA Firearms Lawyer®, as well as, the home of Armor Piercing Arguments®.

Be sure to share this event with your family, friends and anyone you know who loves guns!

Leave a comment

Filed under News & Events, Shoots, Uncategorized

As an FFL, Can You Sell an NFA Firearm Through the Mail?

Often times, Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) inquire as to whether they can sell a National Firearms Act (NFA) firearm through the mail, without the buyer needing to be present. To the surprise of most FFLs, you actually can sell NFA firearms through the mail, provided the purchaser is not otherwise prohibited and is a resident in the same state as the FFL.

27 C.F.R. § 478.96 states that where the firearm is being provided to resident of the same state as the FFL and who is not prohibited, the FFL may sell a firearm that is not subject to the provisions of 27 C.F.R. § 478.102(a) to a non-licensee who does not appear in person. Section 478.102(a) requires a National Instant Check System (NICS) background check on most transactions; however, there is an exception, pursuant to subsection (d)(2), if  “The firearm is subject to the provisions of the National Firearms Act and has been approved for transfer under 27 CFR part 479.” Thus, Section 478.96 would apply and allow the FFL to transfer the firearm to the purchaser, who is a resident of the same state, without the purchaser having to be present.

However, pursuant to Section 478.96, the FFL has certain additional requirements to perform this type of transaction. Specifically, the purchaser must provide to the FFL an executed Form 4473, as provided for by 27 C.F.R. § 478.124, and attach “a true copy of any permit or other information required pursuant to any statute of the State and published ordinance applicable to the locality in which he resides.”

Furthermore, the FFL MUST “prior to shipment or delivery of the firearm, forward by registered or certified mail (return receipt requested) a copy of the record, Form 4473, to the chief law enforcement officer named on such record, and delay shipment or delivery of the firearm for a period of at least 7 days following receipt by the licensee of the return receipt evidencing delivery of the copy of the record to such chief law enforcement officer, or the return of the copy of the record to him due to the refusal of such chief law enforcement officer to accept same in accordance with U.S. Postal Service regulations.”

Lastly, the original Form 4473, and evidence of receipt or rejection of delivery of the copy of the Form 4473 sent to the chief law enforcement officer must be retained by the licensee as a part of his/her/its required records. After completing this step, the FFL can now send the NFA firearm to the purchaser, provided that there are no separate state law requirements. Some states, such as Pennsylvania, require additional state forms to be completed, depending on the type of NFA firearm (e.g. if it constitutes a “firearm” under Pennsylvania law, then a Record/Application of Sale form would have to be completed).

Accordingly, while an NFA transfer can occur without the instate purchaser being present, there are additional obligations placed upon the FFL and the purchaser may not be happy with the additional information being provided to his/her CLEO. Thus, it is a best practice for an FFL to only conduct in-person transfers, unless you are familiar with the requirements and have put in place procedural safeguards to ensure that none of the additional requirements are overlooked.

Leave a comment

Filed under ATF, Firearms Law

MASSIVE UPDATE – FICG/Shooter Gauntlet’s Next EVOLUTION MachineGun Shoot!

As our viewers are likely aware, Firearms Industry Consulting Group (FICG)® (FICG®), a division of Prince Law Offices, P.C., and Stone Mountain Tactical, LLC will be hosting our next EVOLUTION of our machinegun shoot at The Shooters Gauntlet on April 30th and May 1st, in celebration of the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution, and Article 1, Section 21 of the PA Constitution. If you missed our blog post, you can find out all about the shoot (except for what’s below) here.

When we first announced the shoot, separate new machinegun and silencer ranges had just been completed at Shooters Gauntlet specifically for our shoot. Due to overwhelming demand, we have already outgrown the new ranges! As a result, the silencer range is being moved to the recently completed machinegun range (approximately 100 yards wide and 50 yards deep) and a NEW machinegun range is being built, which will be approximately 200 yards wide and 100-125 yards deep! We also understand that one vendor is providing a vehicle to be shot at, blown up and run over with a tank! There are also rumors of a flamethrower…and we’re not done yet! (Don’t forget about all the other shooting experiences, including the zip line, the inversion wall, the assault hike, and ability to shoot on the 1100 yard range and rent a .50 Caliber Barrett)

We have also posted some of the names of the major manufacturers/vendors (and Industry representatives) that will be in attendance, including

If you haven’t registered, what are you waiting for?!?! The admission cost is drastically reduced for those registering in advance and you’ll receive updates and notices about special events, shooting experiences and local hotel deals.

Brought to you by your PA Gun Attorney® and PA Firearms Lawyer®, as well as, the home of Armor Piercing Arguments®

Leave a comment

Filed under Firearms Law, Shoots

Attempt to Prevent ATF-41p and to Fund Federal Firearms Relief Through Omnibus Appropriation Bill Failed

As many of our viewers are aware, we were closely following H.R. 2578, as it contained two pro-Second Amendment provision, namely Amendment 302 and Amendment 320.

Amendment 302 provided “that such funds appropriated for BATF shall be available to investigate or act upon applications for relief from Federal firearms disabilities under United States Code”

Amendment 320 provided ATF was prohibited from “the use of funds to propose or to issue a rule that would change the Chief Law Enforcement Officer certificate requirement with respect to purchase of suppressors and other firearms regulated by the National Firearms Act.”

Unfortunately, these Amendments were stripped from the final bill – HR 2029 – Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016. As a result, you will not find any text related to Amendment 320 and the text in relation to federal firearms relief remains the same as it has since 1992 –

Provided, That none of the funds appropriated herein shall be available to investigate or act upon applications for relief from Federal firearms disabilities under section 925(c) of title 18, United States Code

As the Obama Administration has pledged to work through the Holiday Season on new regulations to limit our Second Amendment rights, including in relation to ATF-41p, we now need to be prepared to bring the FIGHT to ATF, when they implement a final rule regarding 41p.

We put a LOT of blood, sweat and tears into our initial Comment, as well as, our Supplemental Comment. We have over 400 hrs into them that we did pro-bono. Unfortunately, with the magnitude of this type of litigation, we need funding.

While we understand that it is tough this time of year to donate to a cause, anything you can offer would be greatly appreciated. We are attempting to reach our goal in advance of any final rule being promulgated in relation to 41p, so that we can immediately take action, including filing for a preliminary injunction in an attempt to prevent any final rule from being implemented during the litigation.

For more info and to donate see www.FightATF41p.com and our Press Release.

5 Comments

Filed under ATF, Firearms Law, Gun Trusts, Uncategorized

Shocking Statements/Concessions by ATF at the NRA Firearms Law Seminar

Today, at the NRA Firearms Law Seminar in Nashville, Tennessee, NFA Branch Attorney William (Bill) Ryan spoke about Gun Trusts. Before we get into some of his somewhat shocking statements/concessions that are clearly contrary to ATF’s prior positions, it was interesting that he started out by saying that, in his opinion, the largest cause of the backlog at the NFA Branch is the submission of non-attorney drafted trusts and fill in trusts, which result in a high number of error letters due to their invalidity. He actually stated that he HIGHLY advised that attorneys handle the drafting of the trusts because of the plethora of issues the NFA Branch has to contend with in relation to the non-attorney drafted trusts. For some statistical background, he stated that in 2003, there were 45 trust applications. In 2012, there were 36,000 trust applications. He also reaffirmed that trusts can own any type of firearms, both Title 1 and Title 2 firearms.

Comments Regarding ATF 41P

ATF Attorney Ryan stated that ATF is “still sorting through the comments filed in opposition to ATF-41P” and that he still has a number of them to review. Since ATF is still sorting through the issues presented in the comments, they cannot have drafted a final rule taking into account those comments/issues and cannot have responded to the comments/issues. More importantly, once a draft final rule is prepared with responses to all the issues raises, it will have to go up to the Chief Counsel’s Office. While he said he had no idea when to expect ATF to take any action, it clearly seems based on his comments that the action date of May 2015 will be pushed back at least another six months.

More importantly, in response to a question of what happens when the executor of an estate is a prohibited person, Attorney Ryan responded “He can’t possess it.”  Which is obviously correct. However, the questioner then said but how do you know because no background check is performed and he could be in possession of that firearm as a prohibited person. Attorney Ryan responded, “It is on that person to know that as well.HOLD ON.

The entire putative premise for ATF-41P was that prohibited persons were gaining access to NFA firearms. Now, when presented with a question of a prohibited executor coming into possession of NFA firearms, the ATF is perfectly comfortable relying on the prohibited executor not to possess the firearms in the estate but is not perfectly fine with relying on a prohibited settlor or trustee not to possess the firearms in a trust? Say what?!?! ATF just undermined its entire premise for ATF-41P. I guess it is time to submit another supplemental comment in opposition to ATF-41P. (By the way, there is nothing prohibiting the submission of additional comments even after the comment period has closed and there is case law, depending on the status of the administrative agencies promulgation of a final rule, that requires the agency to consider them and respond to them. So, yeah, continue submitting comments!)

Comments Regarding Person Under the GCA vs. NFA

Further solidifying my argument that a trust can manufacture a machinegun, as it is not a person under the GCA but is a person under the NFA, he acknowledged, including in the presentation slides, that the definition of a person under the NFA includes a trust but under the GCA, a trust is not included. Specifically, he declared “This explains why a trust can have NFA firearms but a trust can’t be licensed under the GCA. It’s not a person and cannot be a licensee; only an individual [sic] can be a licensee.” (I believe he meant only a “person” can be a licensee, referring to the definition of a person under a GCA).

This extremely problematic for ATF given its prior position that putatively it can pierce through the trust to a person. If it can pierce through the trust to an individual (or other entity defined as a person under the GCA), then it cannot deny a trust an FFL. WHOOPSIE. It’s a shame that this issue hasn’t been raised in the litigation that has been filed utilizing my argument, as it has been a longstanding issue, which will result in a win for the Industry regardless of how the court decides the issue (assuming it is properly litigated).

9 Comments

Filed under ATF, Firearms Law, Gun Trusts

Did ATF Approve Your Making of a New Machinegun and Then Rescind It? Contact Us To Discuss

As many of our viewers are aware, on May 14, 2014, I wrote an article: Did ATF’s Determination on NICS Checks Open the Door for Manufacture of New Machineguns for Trusts? At that time, I submitted a paper Form 1 for a minigun, as eFile was not currently available. Several weeks later, eFile would come up and several individuals submitted eForm 1s, utilizing the argument I put forth in my article, to make new machineguns. As paper forms are taking 6+ months, but eFile Form 1s are only taking 30-45 days, several individuals have reported receiving approvals to make a new machinegun. Yesterday, ATF decided to rescind those approvals and started calling individuals to inform them of the rescission.

Some have reported receiving eFile notices from ATF stating the change in determination. ATF’s humorous basis is allegedly:

 THE GUN CONTROL ACT OF 1968 (GCA), AS AMENDED, PROHIBITS ANY PERSON FROM POSSESSING A MACHINEGUN NOT LAWFULLY POSSESSED AND REGISTERED PRIOR TO MAY 19, 1986. SEE 18 U.S.C. § 922(O). THE GCA DEFINES THE TERM “PERSON” TO “INCLUDE ANY INDIVIDUAL, CORPORATION, COMPANY, ASSOCIATION, FIRM, PARTNERSHIP, SOCIETY, OR JOINT STOCK COMPANY.” SEE 18 U.S.C. § 921(A)(1). PURSUANT TO THE NFA, 26 U.S.C. § 5822, AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS, 27 C.F.R. § 479.105(A), ATF MAY NOT APPROVE ANY PRIVATE PERSON’S APPLICATION TO MAKE AND REGISTER A MACHINEGUN AFTER MAY 19, 1986.

THE FACT THAT AN UNINCORPORATED TRUST IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE DEFINITION OF “PERSON” UNDER THE GCA DOES NOT MEAN THAT AN INDIVIDUAL MAY AVOID LIABILITY UNDER SECTION 922(O) BY PLACING A MACHINEGUN “IN TRUST.” CONSEQUENTLY, IN TERMS OF AN UNINCORPORATED TRUST, ATF MUST DISREGARD SUCH A NON-ENTITY UNDER THE GCA AND CONSIDER THE INDIVIDUAL ACTING ON BEHALF OF THE TRUST TO BE THE PROPOSED MAKER/POSSESSOR OF THE MACHINEGUN.

We have discussed these rescission with several individuals and are looking at filing suit against ATF over them. If you received an approved Form 1 to make a new machinegun and have subsequently received notice from ATF that they are rescinding it, contact us to discuss your legal options.

3 Comments

Filed under ATF, Firearms Law, Gun Trusts