Emergency BATFE rule proposed

From Wiki:


They certainly don't have a very good track record, so it's especially surprising they're at it again. One would think they'd learn from their past mistakes.

Thundar said:

The draft demand letter:

Dear Federal Firearms Licensee:

The Federal firearms law provides that when required by letter issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), licensees shall submit to ATF all records information required by the GCA or such lesser information as may be specified in the letter. The information requested must be provided in the format specified and for the periods and at the times specified in the letter. 18 U.S.C. 923(g)(5), 27 C.F.R. 478.126.

As part of the Southwest Border Firearms Trafficking/Violence Initiative, ATF is requiring
licensed dealers and pawnbrokers in California, Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico to submit information concerning multiple sales of certain rifles. You must submit to ATF reports of multiple sales or other dispositions whenever you sell or otherwise dispose of, at one time or during any five consecutive business days, two or more semi-automatic rifles capable of accepting a detachable magazine, and with a caliber greater than .22 to an unlicensed person.

This requirement becomes effective upon receipt of this letter and you are required to submit these multiple sales reports for a period of 1 year.

The required information must be submitted on ATF Form 3310.12, Report of Multiple Sales or Other Disposition of Certain Rifles, no later than the close of business on the day the multiple sale or other disposition takes place. We have enclosed a copy of Form 3310.12 with this letter.

Additional forms may be obtained from the ATF Distribution Center, 1519 Cabin Branch Drive, Landover, MD 20785, (301) 583-4696, or online at www.atf.gov.

Be advised that, in addition to the information required by this letter, licensees are still required to submit reports of multiple sales or other dispositions when the licensee sells two or more pistols or revolvers, or any combination of pistols or revolvers totaling two or more to an unlicensed person at one time or during any five consecutive business days. 18 U.S.C. 923(g) (3). Reports of multiple sales or other dispositions of handguns must be reported on ATF Form 3310.4, Report of Multiple Sale or Other Disposition of Pistols and Revolvers, and must be submitted separately from the information required by this letter.

If you have any questions, please contact the National Tracing Center at 1-800-788-7133.

Link: http://www.gunleaders.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/FFLs-Letter.13Dec10-Rifles.pdf

Click to expand...

Just to be clear, the above form has been posted on ATF's website as a DRAFT. That form has NOT been approved for use by OMB as of 01/18/11.

Comments close 02/14/2011 on this - act now

If you haven't already commented on the ATF multi-rifle sale registration scheme, Please take a few minutes to do so.

Through January 12th, here is all who commented in opposition as well as a link to those who support it.
http://www.gunleaders.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=79


Here are some suggested comments:



I am writing to oppose the so called emergency information collection request to register multiple sales of certain rifles with BATFE as described in FR Doc. 2010–31761 from the 12/17/2010 Federal Register. http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-31761.pdf

This information collection is both illegal and unnecessary. *Further there is no justification for any “emergency” implementation as reported by the Washington Post:
White House delayed rule meant to stop gun flow to Mexico, Washington Post, Dec. 17, 2010, On-line edition:
( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/17/AR2010121706598.html ).

* *The regulation proposed is outside the statutory grant of authority to record information about multiple sales of firearms. *Title 18 U.S.C. § 923(g)(3)(A) specifically grants the authority to collect multiple sale information on handguns and revolvers. *Other firearms are excluded and there is no implied authority to extend this reporting requirement to rifles or any other type of firearm.

This attempt by ATF is universally and overwhelmingly opposed by citizens
and their congressional delegations. See
http://rehberg.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=26&parentid=5&sectiontree=5,26&itemid=1584
http://www.gunleaders.com/Baucus_TesterltrtoBATFE122310.pdf
http://www.gunleaders.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/senateatfletter020111.pdf
* *”FFL” holders are already required by law to respond to BATFE requests for information on firearms distribution pursuant to criminal investigations: *Title 18 U.S.C. § 923(g)(7).
* *The regulation contains no provision for the destruction of information collected, which establishes a nationwide registry of “certain types of firearms” as proposed. Because of this the regulation as proposed is illegal under Title 18 U.S.C. § 926(a). *”No such rule or regulation … 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, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established.”

There is a grave potential for this information collection to unduly burden citizens who are collectors or must obtain purchase permits at the local or state level to possess firearms. The proposed regulation does not say what the agency intends to do with the information but ostensibly it would be for criminal investigations. Subjecting law abiding gun owners to this type of investigation under the guise of “information collection” is an overt attempt to prevent them from exercising their 2nd Amendment rights to purchase and own firearms.

<name>
-------------------------------------------------
Or - use NSSF's comments - or use NSSF's comments
http://www.nssfblog.com/atf-to-require-multiple-sales-reports-for-long-guns/

or both, but please comment in opposition to this ATF scheme.

OC for ME said:

Form 4473, Section D, 26-30

Form 4473, Section D, 28, no serial number use NSN or N/A

Manufacturer model numbers will tell you the exact configuration of guns now-a-days. Example: Savage Arms Hunter Series 111 GCNS. .270 or .30-06, bolt action, detachable box magazine. The only thing the PN does not tell you is caliber, but this gun comes in only two calibers.

Form 4473, Section D, 26-30

Form 4473, Section D, 26-30

Form 4473, Section D, 26-30.

Form 4473, Section D, 26-30 has been around a very long time and folks have been putting up this de facto federal level gun registration for just as long even while touting the repeal of state level gun registration laws.

Not a lot I can say against this.

Click to expand...

Form 4473 Section D 26 -Manufacturer and/or importer
Form 4473 Section D 27 - Model
Form 4473 Section D 28 - Serial Number
Form 4473 Section D 29 - Type (pistol, revolver,rifle, shotgun, receiver, frame, etc.)
Form 4473 Section D 30 - Caliber or gauge

Manufacturer/ Importer number might tell you what the configuration of the firearm was when the serial number was stamped/engraved, but that does not tell you what the configuratioon was when you transferred it.

Example: I have two Yugo SKS rifles with importer serial numbers. No way to tell from the bound book or a form 4473 which one of the two was capable of receiving detachable magazines and which one had an attached magazine.

OC for ME said:

Form 4473, Section D, 26-30

Form 4473, Section D, 28, no serial number use NSN or N/A

Manufacturer model numbers will tell you the exact configuration of guns now-a-days. Example: Savage Arms Hunter Series 111 GCNS. .270 or .30-06, bolt action, detachable box magazine. The only thing the PN does not tell you is caliber, but this gun comes in only two calibers.

Form 4473, Section D, 26-30

Form 4473, Section D, 26-30

Form 4473, Section D, 26-30.

Form 4473, Section D, 26-30 has been around a very long time and folks have been putting up this de facto federal level gun registration for just as long even while touting the repeal of state level gun registration laws.

Not a lot I can say against this.

Click to expand...

Coming from a guy who used to fly (navigate) military aircraft around the world while digging through more than two feet of 8-1/2" x 11" regs governing every facet, I'd say the feds are making this far more complicated than is necessary.

How about this?


There! That's simple enough, and even in compliance with some paperwork reduction act enacted a few years back. If I'm not mistaken, it'll even fit on a single piece of paper, rather than 2-1/2 feet.