Received letter today from BATFE regarding purchase from Diversified Machine

[Bertfish]

Do the police employed by this asshats actually believe they're doing good?

 

[erwos]

Well...the thing they know and the thing they can prove are not necessarily the same thing. They say it's an "illegal suppressor." If I accept their premise I pretty much shutdown a potential defense. I have heard stories of police (I suppose not the AFT specifically), essentially tricking folks into confessing to crimes.

Again: they don't need to make you confess when they already have evidence. They have the sales records (and probably shipping records) of you buying and receiving what they have determined to be an illegal suppressor. They know what you bought. They could charge you tomorrow if they wanted to. The deference that the judiciary gives to the BATFE makes it highly unlikely you are going to prevail in a definition fight - as Sig discovered. Not impossible, but not likely.

And as a matter of principle, why make their lives easy? If people role over every time there is a letter sent out, that gives them unlimited, unlegislated, and probably illegitimate power.

Of course losing the fight has some serious consequences. But, damn it, somebody has to stand up for something.

It's your money and freedom. Go for it.

 

[rbird7282]

Again: they don't need to make you confess when they already have evidence. They have the sales records (and probably shipping records) of you buying and receiving what they have determined to be an illegal suppressor. They know what you bought. They could charge you tomorrow if they wanted to. The deference that the judiciary gives to the BATFE makes it highly unlikely you are going to prevail in a definition fight - as Sig discovered. Not impossible, but not likely.


It's your money and freedom. Go for it.

Problem is that if he bought different parts (not a complete kit) then that is in no way a suppressor.
The ATF plays fast and loose with interpretations all the time, they really need to be reigned in or better yet disbanded altogether.
I know the odds of that are slim.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[babalou]

Not together

Problem is that if he bought different parts (not a complete kit) then that is in no way a suppressor.
The ATF plays fast and loose with interpretations all the time, they really need to be reigned in or better yet disbanded altogether.
I know the odds of that are slim.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That is why 80% kits are sold in pieces or groups.

 

[erwos]

Problem is that if he bought different parts (not a complete kit) then that is in no way a suppressor.

The letter doesn't actually say what the problem parts were. So this may not be limited to kits.

 

[outrider58]

They already have records of you being sent an "illegal suppressor". Turning in the thing they know you bought isn't going to make the situation worse. This is not the first time the BATFE has had people turn in stuff like accidental MGs, and to my knowledge, voluntary compliance has not been met with prosecution (for obvious reasons).

Actually, if we're talking about the OP, he bought the 'kit' after receiving his stamp. As far as I can see(and IANAL), the OP should not have a worry. Diversified Machine, not so much.

 

[erwos]

Actually, if we're talking about the OP, he bought the 'kit' after receiving his stamp. As far as I can see(and IANAL), the OP should not have a worry. Diversified Machine, not so much.

If Diversified Machine shipped him something that the ATF already considered a suppressor, it does not matter if he had his stamp. You cannot use a form 1 to order in a complete SBR, for example; it is permission to MANUFACTURE, not to transfer. If I ship you a Colt 6933 with no form 4, the ATF is going to be busting you and me for it even if you had a form 1 to build an SBR.

The "lol **** the ATF crowd" really does not seem to understand the nuances of the law. I'd strongly advise consulting a lawyer before blowing this off.

 

[Crazytrain]

Again: they don't need to make you confess when they already have evidence. They have the sales records (and probably shipping records) of you buying and receiving what they have determined to be an illegal suppressor. They know what you bought. They could charge you tomorrow if they wanted to. The deference that the judiciary gives to the BATFE makes it highly unlikely you are going to prevail in a definition fight - as Sig discovered. Not impossible, but not likely.


It's your money and freedom. Go for it.

I'm not a lawyer. I suggested that people use a lawyer to talk to these assholes.

AGAIN: THEY say they have the evidence. THEY say THEY have records of what THEY say is an illegal suppressor silencer. Sure, they could charge me tomorrow (well...not actually me...I'm not in this particular game). Hell, they could have come busting in at two AM already. That doesn't mean it's time to turn off the brain.

If you turn it in and say "oops, my bad," you have admitted to an illegal act. It's a confession. If they want to be jerks, there is nothing left for you to do as they hold all the cards and all you can do is beg for mercy. That's why I say to use a lawyer, because they are making up the rules as they go. They have a friendly administration to back them. They have lots of crazy. Do you really believe they will never act in bad faith? Nothing I've seen suggests that. They act in bad faith all the freakin' time. But maybe I'm just stupid.

Somebody, somewhere is going to need to take a stand. I don't have a dog in this particular fight, so it's not me. Perhaps it would be better for someone with a gun loving, conservative set of senators and congressman to attack from the political side (Senator Cruz...this is what I bought...this is what the ATF said I bought...this is the Form 1 I filed in an attempt to be 100% above board...what do you think?). Perhaps it would be best to engage any of the many 2nd amendment rights groups and see what they think, and if they would help.

It's a risk. Everything is a risk.

Get some aspirin ready...According to the ATF's NFA handbook: "The definition of a silencer also includes any combination of parts, designed or redesigned, and intended for use in assembling or fabricating a firearm silencer or firearm muffler." So...the way I read this is that the AFT doesn't really think the product in question is a complete "silencer" (God, I hate that term), but merely the parts for a silencer, which, according to this definition, equates to a silencer. If the OP had his Form 1 FIRST, and then bought the parts, it seems that he is doing everything possible to comply. If it is determined that, no, the parts are already a silencer because they are purchased with the intended use of making a silencer, then that suggests that it is impossible to EVER make a silencer as you will at some point need to buy parts to actually build it, and if I read this whole circular reasoning right, you would need to have them Form 4ed first, which would be impossible. I guess doing all the machining locally might be acceptable; except they could say that the hunk of aluminum you just cranked on to your lathe was "redesigned and intended" and do you have a form 4 from the metal yard? I don't know that they are going this extreme, but it seems to me they could decide to.

In any case, rolling over for what is merely an opinion of an out of control agency just means we get more and more and more and more and more. If you bow down to the bully, the bully is just going to get bolder and make your life more miserable. They can define pretty much anything as anything and have. If we bow down to the whims and changing opinions of the bureaucrats we no longer have a representational democracy, we have a tyranny. And do we really want to accept that?

 

[Wolfe006]

So by that definition it would include the 2 inch square “fixture” bought all by its self with the intended use not being suppressor manufacture?

 

[calicojack]

You mean to tell me ATF just blasted out a bunch of letters without checking to see if the recipients had already registered these items?? It is not difficult to get a database query that shows you all of the items in a list not in your database meeting certain criteria. This is incompetence writ large.

 

[calicojack]

If Diversified Machine shipped him something that the ATF already considered a suppressor, it does not matter if he had his stamp. You cannot use a form 1 to order in a complete SBR, for example; it is permission to MANUFACTURE, not to transfer. If I ship you a Colt 6933 with no form 4, the ATF is going to be busting you and me for it even if you had a form 1 to build an SBR.

The "lol **** the ATF crowd" really does not seem to understand the nuances of the law. I'd strongly advise consulting a lawyer before blowing this off.

Ah - I see - so the law states the OP should have known better and is subject to prosecution?

 

[teratos]

You mean to tell me ATF just blasted out a bunch of letters without checking to see if the recipients had already registered these items?? It is not difficult to get a database query that shows you all of the items in a list not in your database meeting certain criteria. This is incompetence writ large.

I’m sure they don’t have access to their own databases.

I don’t break laws. I’m offended when public servants insinuate I do. I, like other NFA owners, have gone to extraordinary lengths, in time, expense and privacy to stay legal with my hobby.

 

[gwchem]

All those poor dogs ...

 

[erwos]

Ah - I see - so the law states the OP should have known better and is subject to prosecution?

The answer is yes. If you are dumb and illegally buy an NFA item by accident, you've still committed a crime. Note that the ATF is providing a mechanism for such people to presumably rectify that mistake without prosection. If you guys want to concoct scenarios where this is some kind of elaborate self incrimination sting operation, that's cool, but if they wanted to get you, they'd be kicking down your door and shooting your dog based on the sales data they seized, not sending letters.

Sent from my SM-G981U1 using Tapatalk

 

[MigraineMan]

If you guys want to concoct scenarios where this is some kind of elaborate self incrimination sting operation, that's cool, but if they wanted to get you, they'd be kicking down your door and shooting your dog based on the sales data they seized, not sending letters.

Yeah ... because the Feds *never* have shown up at someone's door on the basis of online purchasing behavior. (Interestingly ... the Homeland Security guys in this video are out of Detroit, too. Coincidence?)

 

[rseymorejr]

Looks like a classic form letter. I got a similar one a couple weeks ago, although it wasn't from the ATF. They were concerned that my truck's warranty may have expired and wanted to make sure I was covered in the future.

 

[MigraineMan]

Interestingly, if you search Gogle or Youtube for "batfe oil filter" (without the quotes) you get redirected to a bunch of oil-change results. There are plenty of appropriate search results without the forced substitution. Nah, nothing to see here, folks. Go about your business.

 

[Kman]

You mean to tell me ATF just blasted out a bunch of letters without checking to see if the recipients had already registered these items?? It is not difficult to get a database query that shows you all of the items in a list not in your database meeting certain criteria. This is incompetence writ large.

No need to investigate when you've got sheep lining up to confess.

 

[calicojack]

(It's only a matter of time before the other shoe drops with braces, incidentally. Expect to see a bunch determined as stocks outright.)

A little different in this case since buying a pistol brace is not illegal. In this case, they will be forcing gun owners to take the brace off just leaving the pistol tube, not confiscating property, yes? Even so, not good and point well taken.

 

[erwos]

A little different in this case since buying a pistol brace is not illegal. In this case, they will be forcing gun owners to take the brace off just leaving the pistol tube, not confiscating property, yes? Even so, not good and point well taken.

Think of the people who bought complete pistols with one of those on it, though. That would be the risk case.

Sent from my SM-G981U1 using Tapatalk