Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 52

Thread: BATFE Requiring Retailers to Report Multiple Long Gun Sales

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Interior Alaska
    Posts
    893

    Default BATFE Requiring Retailers to Report Multiple Long Gun Sales

    I just received this from a 'smith I'm acquainted with in Michigan. I guess the term 'emergency' makes it acceptable any more.

    In my opinion, it seems to run counter to the 1968 GCA's references to there being no federal gun registration (with the exception of class III, etc.)

    http://www.nssfblog.com/atf-to-requi...for-long-guns/

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southwest Alaska
    Posts
    2,145

    Default

    All firearms are registered. Form 4473's have been digitally scanned and stored in the West Virginia facility since 1988. If you filled out papers on a firearm, you are on the list. Period. End of discussion.
    Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence. Albert Einstein

    Better living through chemistry (I'm a chemist)

    You can piddle with the puppies, or run with the wolves...

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Interior Alaska
    Posts
    893

    Default

    I'm well aware of the shift that occurred re. storing hard-copy 4473s and the current storing of that data on discs. But those 4473s aer not required to be submitted until a FFL goes out of buisiness. Those forms are not fior submission until that 'shop' closes.

    No one that I know of has taken serious time and effort yet to contest that violation, either. And when it happens, (assuming it hasn't already) ATFE will likely claim that there's no registration, per se', though anyone with any amount of computer experience knows that once the data is on disc it can be manipulated, etc.

    But that's beside the point. Legal authority to do what's being done is lacking in both circumstances.

    It's akin to saying, "Well, that thief down the road has already broken into my house and catalogued my possessions once, so I guess there's no real harm in them doing it again."

    In the past, hard-copy 4473s arrived in BATFE's hands in a variety of 'conditions,' for long-term storage, too.

    That portion of the 1968 GCA that forbid federal registration has never been struck down or over-turned that I'm aware of. You know of something different??

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Interior Alaska
    Posts
    893

    Default

    BATFE may visit an FFL and -inspect- records, but 4473s are not submitted to BATFE's possession until an FFL closes his/its doors.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    AK
    Posts
    4,034

    Default

    They do know about every transaction though, they get a call, you don't think they record that? Not saying I like the idea, seems un-necessary, just saying, they know how often you buy guns already...

    FYI - In the 7 years I was selling guns I don't recall every having a transaction that would have qualified under this rule. Very few transactions involve multiple guns, and the ones that did were cheap bolt action relics...

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Interior Alaska
    Posts
    893

    Default

    I agree to an extent, limon32. I guess a part of what you've stated is also my point; they're violating their own law while simultaneously mandating that you and I abide by it.

    But I can also assure you that when persons relocate inter-state, and ship guns to themselves via an FFL, or, as is equally common, collect family guns through an estate action following a family death, multiple 4473s are often filed as though there were multiple sales.

    The NICS checks weren't supposed to lead to retention of -any- data. The data reviewed for the NICS check was to be deleted in 24 hours after submission/decision-making, yet there's ample circumstantial evidence that BATFE is, in fact, retaining this data, and not just for handguns.

    The fact is (and I checked with an old acquaintance in that line of work this evening to be certain of this), your 4473s may be shredded after 20 years. So if 'gunshop X' goes out of business after 40 years of operation, the -only- copies of 4473s or any other sales records that specifically identify a particular weapon by serial number, etc., they're legally liable to submit forms for are those for which the transactions occurred within the preceding 20 years. Forms older than that can be burned, shredded, turned into confetti for the parade, etc.

    My point with this issue, aside from letting folks know of the latest (autonomic) decision-making by the feds that may affect their activities and -private- information, is to also once again draw light to the fact that there are a variety of rights that our government routinely quietly treads upon with one foot, while thrusting forth the other in pretentious rhetorical defense of "liberty".

    The more they engage in this sort of activity, involving -any- enumerated or unenumerated rights, the less I trust them, the less I believe them, and the less I'd be willing to buy a used car from them.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southwest Alaska
    Posts
    2,145

    Default

    Go to Gun Owners of America website and learn more about this.
    Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence. Albert Einstein

    Better living through chemistry (I'm a chemist)

    You can piddle with the puppies, or run with the wolves...

  8. #8
    Member Vince's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Fairbanks most the time, Ancorage some of the time,& on the road Kicking Anti's all the time
    Posts
    8,989

    Default

    several years ago i was checked thanks to an over zelioius ex wife,, seems i was supposed to have sme things in my postion that were not legal...

    the Fed, knew that i had purchsed long guns on this date from this dealer.. and hand guns from that dealer on that date... and wanted to know where each of them were along with the others i was supposed to have had... all the way back to my first at age 18 rifle and age 21 hand gun, took about 10 min to open my gun locker and say SEE!??
    "If you are on a continuous search to be offended, you will always find what you are looking for; even when it isn't there."

    meet on face book here

  9. #9
    Moderator hunt_ak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Wasilla--Cantwell Transplant
    Posts
    4,600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nitroman View Post
    Go to Gun Owners of America website and learn more about this.
    Thats it? C'mon Nitro....

  10. #10
    Member Alaskacajun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    318

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vince View Post
    several years ago i was checked thanks to an over zelioius ex wife,, seems i was supposed to have sme things in my postion that were not legal...

    the Fed, knew that i had purchsed long guns on this date from this dealer.. and hand guns from that dealer on that date... and wanted to know where each of them were along with the others i was supposed to have had... all the way back to my first at age 18 rifle and age 21 hand gun, took about 10 min to open my gun locker and say SEE!??
    Double U Tee EFF Over!?

    - Clint
    /_|o[____]o
    [1---L-OllllllO-
    ()_)()_)==)_)

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Sandpoint, ID
    Posts
    1,969

    Default

    This is part of the Clinton (as in Hilary) gun grab. There are certainly guns in Mexico that were originally purchased in the US, but the vast majority came form Africa where you can buy an AK for $50. Even stolen AK's are more expensive than that in the US. I'm waiting for another "assault weapon" ban...it's coming!!

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Interior Alaska
    Posts
    893

    Default

    I would hope that folks don't engage in any over-simplifying with this issue along partisan lines. A closer examination of who in Congress voted in favor of the Clinton (now-defunct) 'Assault Weapons Ban' reveals that a goodly number of republicans voted for that bill, along-side Democrats. The insidfe scoop in 2004 was that GW Bush intended to renew the AWB, but for his campaign handlers' input during that election that his doing so might sufficiently tip the scales among voters.

    My contention with the link above, as well as other mentions in this brief discussion, is that there are laws in existence, aside from the more broad 2nd Amendment, that define the limitations of, or restrictions placed upon, BATFE. And, despite that, there's more than a little history of government doing as they wish where firearms (as well as umerous other rights) are concerned.

    To trustingly say, "Well, I'm sure it's for our own good/safety/well-being/ greater good of the whole/etc. is to ignore the values of many who signed off on the Bill of Rights, and their reasons for doing so.

    Freedom is messy. -All- governments are eventually apt to evolve/devolve to the point in time wherein they are prone to placing convenience and orderliness at a higher premium than other (potentially more lofty) ideals, such as privacy, the presumption of innocense, self-determination, freedom, and other concepts that some of us still hold as paramount.. And, in my opinion, we've entered a period of time wherein apathy, or gullibility, or fear, or basic lack of healthy vigilance and distrust within the generic masses permits actions that would've incited the Founders to raise their voices and rattle some sabres.

    The apparent absence of concern in our country over such actions worries me, whether it be infractions/deviations from the law such as those above, questionable laws such as the USA PATRIOT ACT, or what ever... Any body of authority that demands greater adherence to such valuable principles than it is willing to mandate for itself is well on the way to becoming a system that has a less-than-honorable future.

  13. #13
    Member greythorn3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Chasin the ladys! away!
    Posts
    2,507

    Default

    i purchased a gun from a shop in ohio one time and the guy behind the counter said he had to tell them i was shifty eyed. i dont know what the heck that was supposed to mean.
    Semper Fi!

  14. #14
    Member GrizzlyH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Wasilla, AK
    Posts
    574

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greythorn3 View Post
    i purchased a gun from a shop in ohio one time and the guy behind the counter said he had to tell them i was shifty eyed. i dont know what the heck that was supposed to mean.
    Wear a shirt. Might draw their attention off your eyes...............lol
    I can do the impossible right away. Be patient, miracles take me a bit longer.

  15. #15
    Member stevelyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Fairbanksan in Aleutian Hell
    Posts
    1,316

    Default

    Typical of the waffen BATFEces thugs to find a non-solution to a non-problem.
    Now what ?

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    AK
    Posts
    4,034

    Default

    He was full of it, they ask a set of scripted questions, they don't care what the dealers opinion of you is. The dealer can still reserve the right to serve you but BATF doesn't want to hear about it, they are quite busy. I've been trying to ensure they are busy this christmas!

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    131

    Default

    To me, this issue is very simple:

    The 1986 Firearms Protection Act clearly forbids this move. To me, this is about the Rule of Law.

    The Attorney General shall give not less than ninety days public notice, and shall afford interested parties opportunity for hearing, before prescribing such rules and regulations.
    They only gave 30 days notice.

    No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners' Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof...
    And it is clearly in violation of the FOPA.

    The Gun Control Act (18 USC 923(g)(3)) which requires registration for multiple handgun sales does NOT extend this authority to rifles.

    Even print media that often favor more gun control admit that this move may be, ahem, "legally challenged."


    NY Times: "The administration must hold its ground and, beginning in January, press the next Congress to remove statutory limitations hampering the A.T.F.s ability to shut down irresponsible dealers near the border and elsewhere. "
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/25/op...sat3.html?_r=2

    WaPo: "It has a point: While Congress authorized the ATF to collect information on handgun sales, it declined to extend the requirement to long guns. A court is likely to be asked to decide whether demand letters may be used to shake loose this information.

    Regardless of the outcome, the administration should continue to look for lawful ways to dam the current of illegal guns, particularly those that are helping to destabilize America's neighbor to the south."
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...122803737.html

    If the administration wants to do this, then the correct method is to get Congress to amend the FOPA and GCA (good luck).

    Alternatively, rather than using a bureaucratic ruling from the ATF, the POTUS could use an Executive Order with his name on the bottom, claiming that there is an existential threat to the nation and this action is necessary to address it. The SCOTUS has hinted in the past that executive orders can exceed their normal limits when there is an existential threat ("The Constitution is not a Suicide Pact"). While I don't think that he has the authority or that these circumstances meet the dire criteria, I'd be interested to see how the case is made that the troubles in Mexico pose an imminent risk of bringing down the US Government or seriously damaging the United States. I think it would be a pretty hard case to make.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    738

    Default

    Considering who is in power it comes as no surprise. Rather than deal with the border problem directly the US citizens get the scrutiny.
    I'm sure there will be a push back shortly from both the NRA and some of the new (63) House members. Obama and his party have demonstrated time after time the ability AND willingness to circumvent the rule of law.

  19. #19
    Member chriso's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Los Anchorage
    Posts
    810

    Default

    This is from a source I trust greatly, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

    "Citing border violence, the ATF has issued an "emergency order" requiring any store that sells more than two rifles within a five-day period to report the names, addresses and serial numbers of those transactions if the firearms are greater than .22-caliber, semi-automatic, with the ability to accept a detachable magazine.

    If it's so important, why didn't Obama allow Congress to vote on it? Because Congress wouldn't touch it. And if it's all in the name of border security, as he insists, why does it apply to every state and not just border states?

    This regulation is expected to take effect Wednesday, January 5th!"

    Of course, they want us to all fax our Senators and Reps immediately, I wish I'd read the thing yesterday... I'm emailing tonight... hope they are wrong about the effective date...

  20. #20

    Default

    I have NOT read the whole thread. Question: What about firearms coming off consignment.......? If I put 8 rifles on consignment, and on two sell, when I take MY remaining 6 rifles home I have to fill out a Form 4473. Do they also report on a different form the return of MY property to BATFE.....?????

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •