• 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.

MWAG call for mowing my lawn

ALOC1911

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2011
Messages
70
Location
Troy, AL
Uh, because it's true? Or do you seriously think that you're required to provide detailed info on the model and serial # just for the heck of it?

4473 does not have a place for model or serial number nor does it even have a place for the manufacturer on it. As far as the gun goes, the only thing it asks for is handgun or long gun.
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
Hmmm, then maybe you can explain to me Section D, #26-30 on this form: http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-4473-1.pdf
The gentleman is aware of what information is transmitted to the ATF and what the disposition of ATF Form 4473 is, correct?

How often do you think the gun shop mails all those 4473's off to the ATF?
Do they do it at the end of each business day? Maybe once a week, or perhaps monthly?
...
Or, maybe those 4473's stay in the dealer's possession until either the store closes (at which time they are boxed up and sent to the ATF) or 20 years passes (in which case the forms are shredded by the FFL).

The only thing the .GOV knows at the time of purchase is the type being transferred i.e. handgun, long gun or other. They are not even aware if the transaction actually takes place as the customer might change his/her mind before the purchase is completed. The FFL can even add firearms of a different designation after the call is made, i.e. calling in for a rifle and then adding a pistol or two to the purchase. They are not even aware of how many firearms are being sold unless there are five or more pistol sales within a 5-day period and then a "Report of Multiple Sale or Other Disposition of Pistols and Revolvers Form No. 1140-0003 (02/29/2012)" is completed.


If 20 years has not passed and the FFL closes, they are supposed to transfer all of the 4473's that haven't expired to the ATF. From someone who has seen the basement of the ATF when Georgia Range and Guns, all he could say was "... if they can find them in that **** hole then... wow!" If more than 20 years has passed, the record may be destroyed/shredded/burned.
 
Last edited:

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
Completely incorrect. First, the form has three choices for type of gun: handgun, long gun, other firearm. Second, after the transaction for the TYPE of firearm is approved by NICS, then the dealer fills in, on the spaces provided on the form, the make, manufacturer and serial number of the gun(s) purchased. I believe there is space for 5 guns on the form itself, and if the purchase is more than 5 guns, the dealer can attach additional sheets to the 4473.

In Washington State there is an additional state form for handguns with all the same info on it as the 4473 - that form is sent to the Department of Licensing which keeps all the info in a database accessible by LEO almost instantaneously. But Washington doesn't have "firearms registration", only "a database of handgun purchases made from Washington dealers".

How does all this registration square with the legislation passed this week prohibiting it? Does it render much of this discussion moot?
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
How does all this registration square with the legislation passed this week prohibiting it? Does it render much of this discussion moot?

A 4473 form, or its state clones like Virginia, is not firearms registration because the forms are kept by the dealer and not by a government agency. Now am I so naive to believe that they couldn't become a form of registration or worse?

Not on your life. I don't trust them one bit to abide by the law or to respect and protect my rights. The move from collecting information at the point of sale by an FFL and to be kept in their facility and under their control to that of governmental examination and in the extreme, confiscation, is not that far fetched and not that much of a move at all.

Government rarely does things in the interest of the People. While it might seem to be so, history doesn't back that perspective up one bit.
 

Nutczak

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
2,165
Location
The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
I call BS on the entire story posted by the OP,

Just too much wrong with it. Registered Handgun? Really, in Ohio? Cop standing on sidewalk and asked OP to walk towards him?

I know people are trying to be nice, but this whole story is just too F'ed up to be believable.................
 

snatale42

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2010
Messages
90
Location
Central VA
Panic is the other person's problem if you are acting within your rights. Conforming to others panic simply encourages them to panic over anything they don't like; its encouraging a bad habit.

Correct, by hiding your gun in the future your becoming part of the problem instead of the solution. That a big step backwards for all who regularly OC!
 

hammer6

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2008
Messages
1,461
Location
Florida
Good day all. Well a couple of weeks ago i was mowing my lawn while open carrying like i always do. I live in a somewhat family oriented neighborhood next to some crackhouses in a place that is commonly refered to as "the hood"(cheap rent). Anyway I was going about my business mowing the lawn with a tucked in flannel and a pair of jeans when the cops come rolling over and told me they got a man with a gun call. I was somewhat surprised but I guess i kinda knew it would happen sooner or later while open carrying. So I respectfully gave the officer my ID and told him that my gun was registered and I am just mowing my lawn. He asked me why I thought i needed a gun to mow my lawn and I told him that i simply always have it on me. The officer was very understanding thankfully and told me that if I wanted to I could tell him to "pack sand" and that it was my right to carry on my property. I told him I would keep it under a cover garment next time since I have a concealed carry permit and I certainly don't want to "induce panic". By the way I live in Columbus Ohio and I've only posted this on open carry forum for I would probably be called idiotic for open carrying anywhere else. Just wanted some feedback thanks guys.

i wouldn't have said my "gun is registered", i wouldn't have given him my id, and i DEFINITELY would not have said, "I will keep it under a cover garment next time since I have a concealed carry permit and I certainly don't want to "induce panic."".

why did you feel it necessary to say and do all that? you're on your property....
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
Just too much wrong with it. Registered Handgun? Really, in Ohio? Cop standing on sidewalk and asked OP to walk towards him?

I know people are trying to be nice, but this whole story is just too F'ed up to be believable.................

I disagree. Judging by the dozens of YouTube videos posted here on OCDO by folks from around the country, this story is all too common.
 
Last edited:

Old Virginia Joe

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
365
Location
SE Va., , Occupied CSA
when you started talking about the right of way, it occurred to me when the cop waved you down from the sidewalk, and you WENT to him, he may have been trying to lure you into the right of way, to get you OFF your private property. I would be careful about stepping out there, as being a set-up!
 

Ruger9mm

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2009
Messages
55
Location
Caldwell ID
For anyone who hasn't seen it

watch the youtube videos titled "Don't talk to the police" done by the law professor and former prosecuting attorney. It puts law enforcement encounters into a whole new light.
 

GhostOfJefferson

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
137
Location
Lewis Center, OH
Like I said the officer was understanding and he did wait on the sidewalk for me to approach so i felt there was mutual respect.He asked for my ID, told me that I didn't need to but I gave it to him anyway. I wanted to cordially end the situation without looking like an ahole. I understand that some people who open carry are kind of shock troopers and love to rile the cops but that's not my personality I would like to just mind my own which I understand can be quite difficult if you open carry. Really, if I had the money I would just move to the country and be alright but I need to go to school and live in the city for a while longer. I know that it's my right to carry but it certainly doesn't feel that way!

Actually the officer seems to have been trying to educate you. Told you that you didn't need to produce ID, told you that you could tell him to "pack sand", told you that you could legally open carry all you want on your property. Why (if you're still on this board) would you ever go through the poor scared puppy routine like you did? The officer was trying to tell you to man up, from what I can tell.

I live just north of Columbus and work in Westerville and I open carry daily. Nobody hassles me at all, including cops. They're being trained to leave us alone, you don't have to continue to roll over and show your belly when they arrive. Know your rights.

Maybe I missed something here though (I'm only a couple of posts down), and perhaps you're no longer posting. Just thought I'd add a perspective from another Ohioan who open carries *all over the place* and not just his lawn. Take the cop at his word next time, and don't pre-emptively offer to "cover it up".
 

Dieselcrawler

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2010
Messages
41
Location
New Martinsville, WV
I have read thru this entire thread, skimed some of the post that seemed to be going a little overboard with the whole 'what were you thinking, why would you ever do THAT' kind of comments, and have to commend the OP... I would hope that I would react as calmly as he did, I doubt I would have when I was his age. It is a fine line between being respectful and not makeing the encounter worse than it needs to be, and sticking to our rights, down to the letter of the law. I understand that volentarily giving them up is a bad thing, that it empowers the LEO involved, but there is some value in being willing to cooperate. Short term loss for a long term gain, as in being polite and respectful during the interaction the OP was telling us about will likely ease future events for him, he now has a reputation of polite and respectful, and will likely be under LESS scrutiny from LEO... it's about building good realationships.

I carry daily. I carry concealed. I read post on this fourum to gain knolage, and often get a good laugh. I carry concealed for personal and professional reasons. I am a local business owner, and in a small town, the last thing I need is for my business to suffer because I choose to open carry, and get the repuation of 'that gun nut'... out of respect, I conceal my weppon, carry it everywhere I can legelly do so, and am prepaired for the situation if I would need it. I realize that I lose the effect of a bad guy perhaps not being deterred if he were to see my weppon before hand, but at least I have it! Better than thoes who would ridicule me for having it in the first place, and not have their own as well, my parents are a good example. I am armed, and will be happy to do my part to protect as needed should the situation arrise, no matter who they are, or what their opinions are before hand.

We all have to look at the bigger picture... and it's a different picture for all of us. My bigger picture is not hurting my business reputation, so I/we am/are sucessful, but also being able to protect myself, my family, and friends as needed. If my work situation were diffrent, I would likely open carry... if other things, like my ablity to keep my job, make money and support my family were not adversly effected.

OP: Well done, carry as you see fit. Do what you are comfortable with, but carry. THAT is the main point, CARRY. We can all squabble about it, should have done this, should have done that, but in the end, we all are united by the fact that we all should carry, the best way we can.
 

jrob33

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2010
Messages
60
Location
oklahoma
OP, it seems some people assume that because you cooperated with an officer you were "intimidated" or scared. it sounds to me like the cop more or les knew the law, he ASKED for your ID, even told you you didnt have to produce it, he told you you were free to tell him to kick rocks etc. You CHOSE to cooperate and interact with a police officer, that does not (in my book ) turn you into some kind of traitor to the OC cause.

Its funny that some here always say a right not exercised is a right lost, however some of those same people seem to forget that you have the RIGHT TO CHOOSE to interact with that officer or not, you exercised your right to choose, and you chose to engage in a consentual encounter, I guess with that quote some are only referring to the rights THEY like, and dont wnt you to exercise your other rights....Kinda Ironic huh?

generally speaking if a cop is calm and cordial, and tells me up front that he knows I can tell him to beat it, then theres really no reason for me to be the confrontational one,(hes already stated he knows hes not in charge) it kinda takes some out of the steam out of the OC'ers are mature, rational, calm, average citizens argument when we are the ones PROVOKING confontation...now let a cop march onto my lawnd start demanding my ID, and trying to throw his weight around and you can bet ill be ill be the first one on the phone to a lawyer..

obviously just my 2 cents, and Im sure I will win no popularity contests around here. But hey the good news is my state is soon to be OC! time to renew my prepaid legal membership lol
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
<snip> Kinda Ironic huh?
....uh, no, not ironic.

generally speaking if a cop is calm and cordial, and tells me up front that he knows I can tell him to beat it, then theres really no reason for me to be the confrontational one,(hes already stated he knows hes not in charge) it kinda takes some out of the steam out of the OC'ers are mature, rational, calm, average citizens argument when we are the ones PROVOKING confontation...now let a cop march onto my lawnd start demanding my ID, and trying to throw his weight around and you can bet ill be ill be the first one on the phone to a lawyer.
The Op'er accept(s)(ed) the premise that prompted the LEO to even make contact, on private property, in the first place.

You, accept the premise also. The LEO had zero authority to make contact, on private property.

Now, the officer could have thought, after he rolled up and observed the potential 'perp' for a few moments, that a armed individual was illegally mowing someone else's yard. I guess anything is possible....

The op is not about the response citizen chose, you are correct there, the citizen can respond as they choose AFTER the illegal contact by LE.

The OP is about the mind-set of LE that prompted the LEO to even stop and make contact that required/forced a citizen to choose any type of response.
 

jrob33

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2010
Messages
60
Location
oklahoma
suppose it depends on your personal definition of Irony, I find it Ironic that people who swear by the catch phrase of "a right unexercised is a right lost" would by and large jump on the OP when he simply exercised his right to CHOOSE, that right is every bit as fundamental as the second amendment, but it seems that many here beleive others should only exercise the rights that THEY like. So by the catch phrase if everyone went along with the prevelant attitude about any subject and didnt EXERCISE their RIGHT to choose for themselves would that NOT be a right unexercised..therefore "lost"?


As far as the officers
"premise" Im not sure what point you are trying to make, I said nothing to indicate I accepted anything...even the officer (according to the op) as much as stated he had no legal ground, and he knew it. it would seem to me it was clear from the beginning that the officer knew he had no legal premise, and went out of his way to ensure that the OP knew so as well, The op stated the Officer was polite, not pushy, and not hostile, sounds to me like the officer set the terms very clearly up front, and simply asked the OP for his cooperation and the OP used his RIGHT TO CHOOSE, and chose to cooperate, sure some people would have reacted differently and thats their RIGHT TO CHOOSE, but after screaming about your own rights to choose to Open Carry or not, its down right hypocritical to jump on someone for choosing to handle a situation differently than you would have.

It would seem that individual rights are the most important thing in the world around here until someone is seen as "hurting the cause" then his rights take a back seat.
 

jrob33

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2010
Messages
60
Location
oklahoma
....uh, no, not ironic.


Now, the officer could have thought, after he rolled up and observed the potential 'perp' for a few moments, that a armed individual was illegally mowing someone else's yard. I guess anything is possible....
.

Thats cute but you seem to be blatantly ignoring the fact that the officer was very clear from the beginning that the OP did NOT have to talk to him, and could tell him "to pound sand" The officer never even tried to pretend he had any legal premise for the interaction, he made it clear he was requesting the OPs cooperation in a consentual encounter. I see no problem with officers engaging in consentual encounters with the citizens that are paiod to serve, as long as they are done correctly, and it would appear this particualr encounter was done correctly.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
OCDO's motto of "A right unexercised is a right lost" is self defining; however it is not a commandment. OCDO encourages that one going about their normal everyday business, OC a handgun in a holster as often as possible. Whether you OC, CC or noC may be less important than whether you support the concept.

In consensual stops/conversations such as the OP's, it is not so much what either party said as the underlying message/opinion delivered by the LEO that such conduct is not acceptable/good et al - that in this writer's opinion is unnecessary harassment. It is that to which I object. It is impossible for the officer to completely divorce himself from his official capacity.

How the OP responded is a matter of personal choice and I will not criticize him for his decisions. What we do is to analyze and respond to the event from our own personal experiences and knowledge - that is also what the OP requested.
 
Last edited:

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
<snip> As far as the officers "premise" I'm not sure what point you are trying to make, I said nothing to indicate I accepted anything...even the officer (according to the op) as much as stated he had no legal ground, and he knew it. it would seem to me it was clear from the beginning that the officer knew he had no legal premise, and went out of his way to ensure that the OP knew so as well, The op stated the Officer was polite, not pushy, and not hostile, sounds to me like the officer set the terms very clearly up front, and simply asked the OP for his cooperation and the OP used his RIGHT TO CHOOSE, and chose to cooperate, sure some people would have reacted differently and thats their RIGHT TO CHOOSE, but after screaming about your own rights to choose to Open Carry or not, its down right hypocritical to jump on someone for choosing to handle a situation differently than you would have.

It would seem that individual rights are the most important thing in the world around here until someone is seen as "hurting the cause" then his rights take a back seat.
Perhaps it is due to your MP background that the 'premise' and the point escapes you.

Simply put, the officer knew before he made contact (the 'to contact' or 'not to contact' phase) that he had no legal grounds to make contact, yet he did anyway. The premise is that, citizens and officers accept the 'fact' that the officer knows that he can make contact, and likely believes little if any consequence will follow, where that officer knowingly has no legal grounds to make contact.

Folks walk right past the 'premise' and focus on all of the events that transpire after the officer decided to make a illegal contact.

Every second of the OP was based on the premise that the officer knew he could/would make contact, even though the officer knows and admits that he no legal authority to make contact.

In my view every thing past the actual moment of contact is a byproduct of a faulty premise. It is easy, however, to get caught up in the 'fluff' of the situation and not focus on the underlying issue. I find myself from time to time focusing on the fluff and not the underlying issue.
 
Top