Conspiracy Theorist?
I felt most of your post talked in circles so I found it very difficult to follow. However, the trust allows multiple people to possess the item requiring the tax stamp, it doesn't circumvent it. It does not cover unlawful use, be it as described in the trust, or as described in local, state, or federal law. I am confident if you did a quick search you would've found the answers quicker than it took you to post your speculation.
Given this is text I want to add that I am not trying to be rude. Just hopefully providing statements based on facts.
Sorry I missed this, my post was not so much of speculation as to an argument that may be justified to pierce that vail of assumed immunity.
I understand, without research, that several parties may be enjoined to a Trust, I really don't see that as an issue, one or many, no difference really. The point I'm making is that it is the Trust that holds the license, the tax stamp, the permission to own, not the Trustee(s) or Beneficiaries. Acts by persons can only be in compliance with the Trust Articles, use outside of those instructions is when you take on personal liability, acting outside of the Trust.
I would stress again, your jurisdiction has a lot to do with the administration of such a Trust, federally as well as by State law. AND, no germane Trust off the internet will be in compliance with all jurisdictions!
I never took your comment as being rude, thank you, to be honest, I'm flying by the concept of internet legal advisors selling crap to the masses because they can't do any better where they would otherwise practice. I see most as failed ambulance chasers or who can't sell life insurance as estate planners. Seriously, there are some really sorry folks who passed a Bar Exam.
A Trust might be the perfect vehicle for some, certainly not all, as those promoting them would have you believe. Trusts are "over sold" to the public, most folks do not need one. I'm sure this is just another example of judicial marketing and sales.
The Trust owns the license, has been granted permission to own, however you want to look at it, the Trustee is only an agent of the Trust, the only power, rights or privileges of a Trustee are those specifically granted by the Trust documents, no more, no less and specifically stated. Reread my initial post on the issue and it should be clear.
You mentioned several users, as if others may use the weapon, is this not possible if you held the stamp personally and others used the weapon while under your control? I think others could. I'm not seeing any advantage to others being involved, if there is, please describe the advantages.
Again, bottom line, I see no advantage in Trust ownership over individual ownership, being insured, and more complications with the Trust. I suppose that's the whole point.
