Quick Question

[solus]

It must be a government-issued document, one that is normally used for identification. It does not have to be issued by the State in which you are buying the gun. Hell, I used an Egyptian passport once! The instructions give a specific example about using a driver's license from one State to purchase in another.

An ID from another State usually won't prove your residence. (For military, it often does.) But, it can.

Some FFLs will be skiddish about two residences. They may not sell you a gun out of an abundance of caution and a lack of knowledge that the possibility is legal. Just get a document (government-issued) in your name with your out west address. That, combined with your retired military ID, ought to do the trick. As long as you and your family are still making a home out west, you can legally, and with a clear conscience, while you are staying there, claim "Out West" as your State of residence. Like I said, some FFLs will be skiddish. You may have to shop around. Exchange firearms counters routinely handle such transactions and have wide experience with accepting what the 4473 calls "alternate identification," so they shouldn't even flinch.

Pay not attention to the gentleman who is not knowledgeable of procedures vetted by our corporate lawyer.

so instead of following the ATFs guidance you are following those produced by the BX's corporate staff and continuing to give out firearm purchasing information without providing any type of cite...outstanding...

as stated previously, it must be a "...combination of valid government-issued documents to satisfy the identification document requirements of the Brady Act. The required valid government-issued photo identification document bearing the name, photograph, and date of birth of the transferee may be supplemented by another valid, government- issued document showing the transferee's residence address." 18 U.S.C. 922(t)(1)(C): IDENTIFICATION OF TRANSFEREE

and you are right i am the individual who lacks the knowledgeable aspects of firearm transfers.

ipse

 

[solus]

FEDERAL FIREARMS REGULATIONS REFERENCE GUIDE - 2005 (don't know if this is the most current issue first one to pop up on a Google search)

http://www.atf.gov/files/publications/download/p/atf-p-5300-4.pdf

Page, page 135 and 136.

what you cited is the current document used as the FFL reference which lists the different components of the GCA as well as providing ATF rulings and state specific criteria.

for example, OC the firearm transaction record is covered by the GCA under 18 USC 922(f)(1)(C) AS WELL as 27 CFR 178.24 and the ATF Ruling 2001-5 on page 135 of the book instead of rummaging through gaggles of statutes and other documents.

ipse

 

[eye95]

I haven't tossed anyone on ignore in a while, but everyone else in the thread seems to be satisfied with my citations. So, if a certain poster wonders why he won't be receiving any more replies to his ignorant rants, his lying about what I said about electric bills, and his incessant bellyaching, it is because his crap has become invisible. I will continue to answer the adult posts of others.

 

[solus]

that's a shame as you shall miss out of informative stuff...but go do what you have always done...

ipse

 

[Grapeshot]

I don't understand the dissention and rancor of the Ohio section of ODCO. It is disappointing that we cannot be cordial and helpful. This thread has been very painful to watch evolve...way more painful than it has to be. I thing we can help individuals understand the regulations and be helpful members of the community, rather than stick our flag in the hill and challenge others to come and take it.

--snipped-

Well said - appreciate it too.

Be both cordial and helpful, please.

 

[Hareuhal]

Be both cordial and helpful, please.

Pft, don't hold your breath. This section has more bickering, arguing and drama than you'll find in any highschool in the world.

& to think these are grown men.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Grapeshot]

The comment you deleted had nothing to do with the moderation. Indicating so is a lie.

The comment was merely my opinion on what was and was not cordial in this thread.

This comment is about moderation. You deleted a post about cordiality, while letting others stand. Bias.

Feel free to delete this one too--and to include a comment that I do not like your moderation. However, I would appreciate if you would remove the false editorial comment from your last bit of immoderation.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Not so, you selectively edit/misquote.

"Apart from .... and....... these last three posts, the exchange has been quite cordial", which tellingly included that of a Moderator endorsing the request.

The admonition will stand.

 

[eye95]

Allow the above to stand, and honesty prevails. I fear it won't stand long.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

 

[SteveInCO]

The unfortunate side effect of deleting offending posts is that bystanders can't actually judge whether the deletion of that particular post was warranted, much less whether it was more or less obnoxious than other posts that were allowed to stand.

Unfortunately there's no way to solve that that wouldn't be exploited by true jerks to get to fling their poo at the wall and see it stick, forever.

 

[Grapeshot]

The unfortunate side effect of deleting offending posts is that bystanders can't actually judge whether the deletion of that particular post was warranted, much less whether it was more or less obnoxious than other posts that were allowed to stand.

Unfortunately there's no way to solve that that wouldn't be exploited by true jerks to get to fling their poo at the wall and see it stick, forever.

With all due respect, such is not a bystander's decision - OCDO is first private property and administered in accordance with the owners rules and intents, to which we all agree to buy registering and posting here.

 

[SteveInCO]

With all due respect, such is not a bystander's decision - OCDO is first private property and administered in accordance with the owners rules and intents, to which we all agree to buy registering and posting here.

I certainly cannot affect the board's decision, it wouldn't be my place to--and certainly I didn't mean to imply it was. But I'd still be interested in figuring out if I would have made the same decision. A lot of the criteria used to make decisions are inherently at least somewhat subjective.

Anyhow, I am also not claiming a "need to know" or a "right to know", just saying I am curious.

 

[Grapeshot]

I certainly cannot affect the board's decision, it wouldn't be my place to--and certainly I didn't mean to imply it was. But I'd still be interested in figuring out if I would have made the same decision. A lot of the criteria used to make decisions are inherently at least somewhat subjective.

Anyhow, I am also not claiming a "need to know" or a "right to know", just saying I am curious.

To satisfy the curious, the rules and called decisions are intended to keep the forum focused on the reason for its existence, maintaining good order, restricting/correcting errant users/posters, etc........while not hanging our linen in the front yard.

Also, not meaning to be flip, moderation is not a popularity contest. We do have the opportunity to make a lot of friends along the way though.

Enjoy and carry responsibly

 

[SteveInCO]

Enjoy and carry responsibly

To take a commonly quoted line completely out of context: Early and often!

OK that reminds me, time to check the Illinois forum.