• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

ATF multiple purchases form

Dr. Fresh

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
390
Location
, ,
imported post

So I know dealers are required to report multiple handgun sales to the ATF. My question is this: what authority does the ATF have in this regard? Can they legally demand to see the firearms?
 

Richard6218

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
649
Location
LaConner, Washington, USA
imported post

I haven't heard of this but it seems it would be easy to circumvent: just buy the guns from different dealers. But seriously, have you seen any reference to federal law supporting this alleged requirement? Unless they can demonstrate that one exists I would discount it.
 

cynicist

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2008
Messages
506
Location
Yakima County, ,
imported post

Did you read about this in a news article from another state?

From what I know, the ATF knows about each handgun sale anyway, whether or not there is a state or federal law that requires it.

Does anyone here seriously think those NICS forms you fill out when you buy a gun don't end up in a database somewhere? (They spied on freakin' church groups for not thinking the Iraq war was a good idea. Sent actual AGENTS to spy on old ladies for not agreeing with the then-present administrations foreign policy- you seriously think they're not already keeping track of you?)

The federal government has never been bound by federal law, whether you would use the Clinton or Bush administrations (or both!) as the example; they don't have to follow it.
 

Richard6218

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
649
Location
LaConner, Washington, USA
imported post

cynicist wrote:
Did you read about this in a news article from another state?

From what I know, the ATF knows about each handgun sale anyway, whether or not there is a state or federal law that requires it.

Does anyone here seriously think those NICS forms you fill out when you buy a gun don't end up in a database somewhere? (They spied on freakin' church groups for not thinking the Iraq war was a good idea. Sent actual AGENTS to spy on old ladies for not agreeing with the then-present administrations foreign policy- you seriously think they're not already keeping track of you?)

The federal government has never been bound by federal law, whether you would use the Clinton or Bush administrations (or both!) as the example; they don't have to follow it.
Point is well made. The forms have convinced some otherwise well-informed people that there is in fact a national gun registry because they believe that the purpose of the form is not just for the background check but to register the firearm. Well, no, there isn't any line on the form for thatkind of detailbut at the very minimum they know whether you're buying a "handgun" or a "long gun" because the dealer has to answer that questionwhen they call in the BG check. So they must think I'm some kind of right-wing extremist gun nut because I've bought three handguns since election night. :celebrate
 

JimMullinsWVCDL

State Researcher
Joined
Jan 25, 2007
Messages
676
Location
Lebanon, VA
imported post

18 U.S.C. § 923(g)(3)(A) requires FFLs to complete the multiple handgun transfer report section of Form 4473 when that FFL transfers more than one handgun to a single person within a 5 business day period (defined by the FFL's business days).

18 U.S.C. § 923(g)(3)(B) requires state and local law-enforcement agencies that receive copies of these reports to destroy them within 20 days if the transferee is not prohibited by law from possessing or receiving firearms and to certify compliance to the Attorney General once every 6 months.
 

Richard6218

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
649
Location
LaConner, Washington, USA
imported post

WVCDL wrote:
18 U.S.C. § 923(g)(3)(A) requires FFLs to complete the multiple handgun transfer report section of Form 4473 when that FFL transfers more than one handgun to a single person within a 5 business day period (defined by the FFL's business days).

18 U.S.C. § 923(g)(3)(B) requires state and local law-enforcement agencies that receive copies of these reports to destroy them within 20 days if the transferee is not prohibited by law from possessing or receiving firearms and to certify compliance to the Attorney General once every 6 months.

WV, thanx for the research on that. I was just too lazy to go look it up for myself :uhoh: (Actually I'm BZ planning my trip to Phoenix for the NRA convention :))

This does confirm my thought that one could buy one gun from a dealer then go across the street and buy another one. The two dealers don't need to know about each other's transactions. (Unless there's a question on the form about other purchases, which would blow the whole thing) That's a bit of a hassle but it avoids this stupid requirement.
 

sirpuma

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2007
Messages
905
Location
Deer Park, Washington, USA
imported post

Thanks WVCDL, I just saw this thread. Also WA has a handgun sales form that has to be filled out for every handgun sold. So if you buy 3 pistols from one dealer in a 5 business day period you'll have 3 4473's 3 state pistol transfer forms and 1 federal multiple pistol transfer form. I think you can fit up to 5 pistols on the federal multiple pistol form.
 

joeroket

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
3,339
Location
Everett, Washington, USA
imported post

sirpuma wrote:
Thanks WVCDL, I just saw this thread. Also WA has a handgun sales form that has to be filled out for every handgun sold. So if you buy 3 pistols from one dealer in a 5 business day period you'll have 3 4473's 3 state pistol transfer forms and 1 federal multiple pistol transfer form. I think you can fit up to 5 pistols on the federal multiple pistol form.
Is it 5 days because of the waiting period? What if you have a CPL and purchase 3 in 5 days?
 

Dr. Fresh

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
390
Location
, ,
imported post

Here's the thing. I'm graduating college in a couple of weeks, and my father might be giving me two handguns.

He lives in Texas, so a FTF transfer would be illegal. I don't want the ATF knocking at my door over this. I've heard on other forums that they tend not to care, but that sometimes they actually do follow up with the owner.

I was just curious if I can legally tell them to buzz off and leave me alone.

EDIT: There's really only one dealer in my area.
 

Nosrac

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2008
Messages
305
Location
Lakewood, Washington, USA
imported post

joeroket wrote:
sirpuma wrote:
Thanks WVCDL, I just saw this thread. Also WA has a handgun sales form that has to be filled out for every handgun sold. So if you buy 3 pistols from one dealer in a 5 business day period you'll have 3 4473's 3 state pistol transfer forms and 1 federal multiple pistol transfer form. I think you can fit up to 5 pistols on the federal multiple pistol form.
Is it 5 days because of the waiting period? What if you have a CPL and purchase 3 in 5 days?


My FFL wanted me to wait 3 more days so he didn't have to fill out the form since I had a transfer 2 days earlier and another gun came in sooner than I had expected.CPL won't matter you still have FMPTF.
 

Dr. Fresh

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
390
Location
, ,
imported post

sv_libertarian wrote:
I think there are exceptions for transfers between direct family members.
Federal law unfortunately makes no exceptions. No interstate transfers of handguns without a dealer, period.

As for the ATF form, there's no exception to that either that I know of.
 

sirpuma

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2007
Messages
905
Location
Deer Park, Washington, USA
imported post

Dr. Fresh wrote:
Here's the thing. I'm graduating college in a couple of weeks, and my father might be giving me two handguns.

He lives in Texas, so a FTF transfer would be illegal. I don't want the ATF knocking at my door over this. I've heard on other forums that they tend not to care, but that sometimes they actually do follow up with the owner.

I was just curious if I can legally tell them to buzz off and leave me alone.

EDIT: There's really only one dealer in my area.
No, if he was SELLING you the pistols, a FTF transfer would be illegal. However, if he's GIFTING them to you a FTF would be ok. The ATF and all these laws covers Interstate Commerce. A gift is not commerce.
 

sirpuma

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2007
Messages
905
Location
Deer Park, Washington, USA
imported post

Dr. Fresh wrote:
sv_libertarian wrote:
I think there are exceptions for transfers between direct family members.
Federal law unfortunately makes no exceptions. No interstate transfers of handguns without a dealer, period.

As for the ATF form, there's no exception to that either that I know of.
That's if you're shipping them. If you two go meet somewhere and he just gives them to you, then it's not a sale. A gift is treated different the FFL would only be needed if he shipped them to you and the 5 days more than one pistol still applies.
 

Dr. Fresh

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
390
Location
, ,
imported post

I'm 99% sure the ATF doesn't care if money exchanges hands. It's still an illegal transfer. Here's what their FAQ has to say:

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/faq2.htm#b2

"From whom may an unlicensed person acquire a firearm under the GCA? [Back] A person may only acquire a firearm within the person’s own State, except that he or she may purchase or otherwise acquire a rifle or shotgun, in person, at a licensee's premises in any State, provided the sale complies with State laws applicable in the State of sale and the State where the purchaser resides. A person may borrow or rent a firearm in any State for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes."
 

Richard6218

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
649
Location
LaConner, Washington, USA
imported post

sirpuma wrote:
Dr. Fresh wrote:
sv_libertarian wrote:
I think there are exceptions for transfers between direct family members.
Federal law unfortunately makes no exceptions. No interstate transfers of handguns without a dealer, period.

As for the ATF form, there's no exception to that either that I know of.
That's if you're shipping them. If you two go meet somewhere and he just gives them to you, then it's not a sale. A gift is treated different the FFL would only be needed if he shipped them to you and the 5 days more than one pistol still applies.
Here's a scenario for you, and I'm most interested to hear the answer:

My son was transferred from WA to CA and he left his pistol with me for safekeeping. Now he decides he wants it down there, so I drive it down to Portland and deliver it to his sister. She will then take it to him in CA, making sure that it's locked in the trunk of her car to comply with CA law. So the question is this: even though my son is legally the owner of the weapon,wouldFederal law deem these two transfers to be illegal? Note that there has been no consideration given in either transfer because the two carriers (me and my daughter) are constructively no more than agents for the lawful owner. But would the Feds see it that way, and consider only the issue of constructive possession?

I've been puzzling over this for several weeks.
 

Dr. Fresh

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
390
Location
, ,
imported post

Richard6218 wrote:
sirpuma wrote:
Dr. Fresh wrote:
sv_libertarian wrote:
I think there are exceptions for transfers between direct family members.
Federal law unfortunately makes no exceptions. No interstate transfers of handguns without a dealer, period.

As for the ATF form, there's no exception to that either that I know of.
That's if you're shipping them. If you two go meet somewhere and he just gives them to you, then it's not a sale. A gift is treated different the FFL would only be needed if he shipped them to you and the 5 days more than one pistol still applies.
Here's a scenario for you, and I'm most interested to hear the answer:

My son was transferred from WA to CA and he left his pistol with me for safekeeping. Now he decides he wants it down there, so I drive it down to Portland and deliver it to his sister. She will then take it to him in CA, making sure that it's locked in the trunk of her car to comply with CA law. So the question is this: even though my son is legally the owner of the weapon,wouldFederal law deem these two transfers to be illegal? Note that there has been no consideration given in either transfer because the two carriers (me and my daughter) are constructively no more than agents for the lawful owner. But would the Feds see it that way, and consider only the issue of constructive possession?

I've been puzzling over this for several weeks.

I would think since he's the actual owner of the pistol, you should be fine. I'd be more worried about CA law than Federal law.
 

Richard6218

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
649
Location
LaConner, Washington, USA
imported post

Dr. Fresh wrote:
Richard6218 wrote:
sirpuma wrote:
Dr. Fresh wrote:
sv_libertarian wrote:
I think there are exceptions for transfers between direct family members.
Federal law unfortunately makes no exceptions. No interstate transfers of handguns without a dealer, period.

As for the ATF form, there's no exception to that either that I know of.
That's if you're shipping them. If you two go meet somewhere and he just gives them to you, then it's not a sale. A gift is treated different the FFL would only be needed if he shipped them to you and the 5 days more than one pistol still applies.
Here's a scenario for you, and I'm most interested to hear the answer:

My son was transferred from WA to CA and he left his pistol with me for safekeeping. Now he decides he wants it down there, so I drive it down to Portland and deliver it to his sister. She will then take it to him in CA, making sure that it's locked in the trunk of her car to comply with CA law. So the question is this: even though my son is legally the owner of the weapon,wouldFederal law deem these two transfers to be illegal? Note that there has been no consideration given in either transfer because the two carriers (me and my daughter) are constructively no more than agents for the lawful owner. But would the Feds see it that way, and consider only the issue of constructive possession?

I've been puzzling over this for several weeks.

I would think since he's the actual owner of the pistol, you should be fine. I'd be more worried about CA law than Federal law.
Thanks for that. I have already gone to the California board and asked questions about their law and the greatest concern seems to be about what is considered "concealed". We have solved that by putting a cable lock on the pistol and keeping it in the trunk. And she won't be in possession of any ammo or magazines, so she should be ok as to CA law. I have a couple guys on the California board to thank for guidance on that.
 

just_a_car

Regular Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
2,558
Location
Auburn, Washington, USA
imported post

Richard6218 wrote:
Thanks for that. I have already gone to the California board and asked questions about their law and the greatest concern seems to be about what is considered "concealed". We have solved that by putting a cable lock on the pistol and keeping it in the trunk. And she won't be in possession of any ammo or magazines, so she should be ok as to CA law. I have a couple guys on the California board to thank for guidance on that.
Also, I would suggest putting it in a sealed package addressed to him. That way it's very apparent who the owner is and that she is only a "carrier" as a UPS or FedEx truck driver would be.

IANAL.
 
Top