Not a lawyer either, but agree here as well. Plus, I would think, if it is set up correctly, there would be less assets to go after.

I am not a prohibited person, I've paid my taxes and my trust is valid. My concern is that there is almost nothing to review or reference for trust owned NFA firearms that have been used in self-defense. I have silencers and a SBR that I use to go shoot and have fun with, but I personally am not looking to find out how strong my trust is when it comes to legal and political pressure that comes with a court case that involves a firearm that looks a certain way. Then the other part is weather a panel of uninformed jurors can understand a NFA trust, especially when there is nothing to fall back on for guidance, as far as previous cases go. This is about using the best tool for the job to CYA if something goes bump in the night and if that ever were to happen, i am in no way looking to be the one to see how its going to go. So with all of that, i'm waiting for the new rules to go into effect before I go get another SBR and silencer. I am also not concerned about the whole fingerprint and photo thing since I have a CPL (Washington sends your prints to the DOJ when you apply, so they already have them) and I have a drivers licence (so they already know what I look like), so there is nothing new that they are getting.

pacnw- I would think it would be two doors opened instead of one. You as an individual are and always will be held accountable for your actions (good or bad) along with the trust property being used. Just like how bushmaster is still in court over the sandyhook indecent (even though they did absolutely nothing wrong and are in no way responsible for that rifle being stolen) and KAHR got sued because an employee stole a gun off the assembly line and it eventually got used it in a crime. I think it would actually open the door for trust assets to be taken in a civil suit because something it "owns" was used.

I'm the sole trustee and grantor on my trust. I do have a beneficiary of course but those are not considered a "responsible party". So for me my current NFA trust is still good to go post 41f. Pantel Tactical in Renton is getting the Silencer Shop S.I.D. kiosk so taking photos/prints will take like 5 mins, no big deal.

If you want more NFA items post 41f and currently have a NFA trust loaded with co-trustees you don't want to fingerprint then just start another trust with just yourself. Load it up with a bunch of new items, then add your co-trustees when done. Wash, rinse, repeat. You can have as many trusts as you want.

^That is exactly what I was thinking. Second trust, no trustees until after the acquisition(s). I don't see any reason why that wouldn't work.

What about dropping trustees from an existing trust prior to a purchase, then adding them back later? Technically, it's perfectly legal to modify a revocable living trust as often as you want.

Both are perfectly legal options. At the time you submit your form you can honestly say there was no co-trustees with access to the trust assets. Thus no need for additional documentation.

I was buying a second suppressor, Osprey 45K from Jody at Rehv Arms. One of the staff said they are getting a kiosk for taking pictures and fingerprints. That should make thimgs go smoother at Rehv Arms.

I do not give a damn about 41-P or whatever. I have been finger printed and photographed in the past. What difference does it make? I got a passport, doesn't that mean I am registered with the State Department?
Business as usual for me. Not going to stop me or deter me from doing what I want to do in the future.

I'm not concerned about getting photographed or fingerprinted because I've been there, done that as you say. My concern is with the extra hassle factor involved; I also don't like the letter to the CLEO, because I don't think it's any of his damned business.

Kind of like 594 . . . I'm not afraid of a background check, but I despise the hassle that it causes me.

This...

Yes Sir, and not a point of argument and I do agree. But, I am not going to go stick my head in the sand. In my opinion, this is just another form of gun control and a lot of people are not going to go for NFA items because of 41-P and that is a shame. Look at 594, that is a form of gun control as well. several people told me that they basically will not buy guns in the same fashion as before because of no private sale without background checks.

We are continuing to move into dark times for legal gun owners and I suspect it there will be more continued so called 'restrictions' . Legal gun owners must maintain their resolve.

The whole thing is jacked up.