Trader's Guns in San Leandro CA in trouble with the ATF


PDA






ElTacoGrande
April 3, 2006, 06:28 PM
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/04/03/MNGIKI2J9E27.DTL

The headline says they can't account for 2,000 guns. Truth or fiction? We won't really know until they do a massive audit of their whole biz going back 30 years or so. Either way, big problems for them.

I think they are the largest and busiest FFL in the Bay Area. I've been there a few times and they seemed very strict, and in a hurry (to be honest). Great prices on ammo the few times I have bought it there. They didn't seem like scoff-laws who would intentionally sell guns off the books, but who knows, that kind of thing could go on.

Anyway, I hope they can resolve this in a way that keeps the records in order and lets them stay in business.

Good luck, Trader's.

----------------
Ken Masse for Los Angeles County Sheriff (http://kenmasse.com/)

If you enjoyed reading about "Trader's Guns in San Leandro CA in trouble with the ATF" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
larry starling
April 3, 2006, 06:40 PM
Wow! The ATF seems to be cracking down on a bunch of retailers here lately. One of the large guns stores in my area had a 3 page story in the local paper about the hassle that they are going through right now. Of coarse they were only missing 200 guns.....:rolleyes:

hvengel
April 3, 2006, 06:45 PM
1,767 out of over 300,000 sold since they were required to keep these records (1968 I think). Mind you they are only required to keep these records for 20 years but the audit done by the ATF went back to 1967 (36 years). So any transactions that happened before 1983 they are not required to have records for and I suspect that the vast majority of the "unacounted for" firearms were from before 1983.

ElTacoGrande
April 3, 2006, 06:45 PM
I would bet that it's a paperwork problem. I agree with HVengel, it's probably a problem with some very old sales. As I said, that seems likea strict by-the-books place. They must be making so much money on legit gun sales there's no rational reason for them to sell off the books. But this audit could easily sink their business. They probably couldn't / shouldn't process new orders until this audit is closed and their license is re-activated. That could take long enough that they will be out of biz.

The ATF is shooting itself (and us) in the foot on this. The longer a dealer has been in the biz, and the more transactions they have done, the higher the likelihood that there will be some paperwork errors or audit difficulties. That means it's easy to drive older FFLs out of business, creating an opportunity for lots of FFL turnover. The more FFL turnover there is, the harder it will be to track guns and the more likely FFLs will make mistakes or do the wrong thing or "lose" their bound book when they go out of biz.

Keeping a small number of large, stable dealers in biz, and working with them cooperatively, is the best way there is to prevent FFLs from doing the wrong thing or making mistakes.

D'ohh!

lamazza
April 3, 2006, 07:04 PM
Can an FFL 'lose' their book? Aren't they legally bound to surrender this book when they go out of business?

ElTacoGrande
April 3, 2006, 07:15 PM
Of course they can lose their book, no matter what the law says!

Yes they are required to surrender it, or keep it for 20 years or something. But if there's a big turn over of FFLs, with lots of small ones popping up and going out of biz, that just creates a lot more opportunities for lost books, lost FFLs, off-book sales, etc, etc. I'm just saying that everyone (us, the BATF, the DoJ, Sarah Brady) is best served by having a small number of stable FFLs that play by the rules and cooperate with the ATF, as opposed to having lots of small "garage" FFLs with a high turnover, sloppy procedures, sloppy records and more chance for off-book sales.

Kodiaz
April 3, 2006, 07:24 PM
I don't see anything wrong with offbook sales there shouldn't be a "book" in the first place having less ffl's that will gladly help F-troop with registration doesn't sound appealing to me.

ArmedBear
April 3, 2006, 08:14 PM
In CA, the ATF is not even the official recording agency. There's more (or less) to this than the article says.

If there were an actual problem with the store and background checks, it would be the California Department of Justice investigating.

EOD Guy
April 3, 2006, 10:57 PM
They passed their recent California DOJ audit with flying colors.

BATF can still inspect for Federal violations. Tony has been fighting BATF for 40 years and had won several times.

Wastemore
April 4, 2006, 12:20 AM
In CA, the ATF is not even the official recording agency. There's more (or less) to this than the article says.

If there were an actual problem with the store and background checks, it would be the California Department of Justice investigating.

DOJ will inspect the DROS records, A&D book and repair log and ATF will inspect the 4473's A&D book and repair log.

I do not understand why seasoned FFL holders hang onto records longer than required by law, they're setting themselves up for trouble.

gunsmith
April 4, 2006, 04:00 AM
when I lived there, the had the most annoying radio station playing.
KOIT with the lamest "soft rock" ever.
How can a reasonable person shop for guns with endless repitions of tracy chapmans "fast car" and BS singing "memories, of the way we were"???
the same crappy music over and over ad infinitum, trying so hard to be inoffensive that it's vile saccarrin sentimentality made me want to murder the dj.

As far as gun stuff and related to gun stuff they were great, but all the rifles are stacked real close together that you can not see the prices and are in the dark behind the counter so you can not really see what your looking at:confused:

but as far as iregularities? They were sticklers for procedure, I allways thought they were being paranoid.

Man, what is the ATF up to??
All I can guess is that they got a huge anal retentive chip on their shoulders

Guy B. Meredith
April 4, 2006, 04:45 AM
As I remarked in a similar thread on TFL, Traders' "sale" prices on the big yellow stickers on their firearms are just the going street price. I bought my 686+ from the previous management of Target Masters in Milpitas for something like $60 less than Traders' price--TM's everyday price vs Traders' sale price.

I have not purchased ammo there, but the only real sales price I've ever seen is on the Hornady LNL I bought in a clearance sale. Oh, yes, and maybe the sales price on Canon safes they advertise every other month and then tell me the sale is almost over so I'd better buy quickly.

Lotsa gang banger look alikes fill the aisle in front of the customer about half the times I stopped by.

No crocodile tears here.

LAK
April 4, 2006, 06:02 AM
ElTacoGrandeI'm just saying that everyone (us, the BATF, the DoJ, Sarah Brady) is best served by having a small number of stable FFLs that play by the rules and cooperate with the ATF, as opposed to having lots of small "garage" FFLs with a high turnover, sloppy procedures, sloppy records and more chance for off-book sales.
This is exactly the direction the change agents want us to go. And once it is just their chosen ;) "stable FFLs" - it is then real easy to progressively shut down the regular commercial supply:

" .... After October, we will no longer be in the business of selling fireams, and instead will be concentrating on our lines of other outdoor and sports equipment".

Actually; we would be better served without the oppressive legislation, regulation, and a renegade tax collection agency.

And it is the larger high volume FFLs that are more vulnerable to this kind of thing. They turn over more employees - who may or may not conduct their own under the table sales, and can not be monitored literally at all times.

-----------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

ElTacoGrande
April 4, 2006, 06:21 AM
a renegade tax collection agency

Well that's the real problem right there.

I would say we should double the salaries of everyone at the ATF, grant them unconditional lifetime full-salary employment, put in a permenant hiring freeze, and take away their powers of arrest and "sworn officer" status.

EOD Guy
April 4, 2006, 08:42 AM
a renegade tax collection agency


What taxes does the BATF collect other than for NFA transfers? :confused:

Don of Kalifornia
April 4, 2006, 10:06 AM
taxes on tabacco and alcohol.

EOD Guy
April 4, 2006, 10:15 AM
taxes on tabacco and alcohol.

That's handled by the Alcohol and Tobacco Trade Bureau in the Department of the Treasury. BATF hasn't been in the tobacco or alcohol tax business for years.

Maybe that's why they have more time to concentrate on firearms dealers.

waterhouse
April 4, 2006, 11:05 AM
1,767 out of over 300,000 sold since they were required to keep these records (1968 I think). Mind you they are only required to keep these records for 20 years but the audit done by the ATF went back to 1967 (36 years). So any transactions that happened before 1983 they are not required to have records for and I suspect that the vast majority of the "unacounted for" firearms were from before 1983.

We are required to keep the records for more than 20 years. We are required to keep 4473s for 20 years. The bound books will still be here after 20 years though.

I would guess that a great majority of the guns that are "missing" are actually accounted for on 4473s. Probably a 4473 was filled out, a NICS check (or whatever CA makes you go through) was passed, the gun left the store, and it was never logged out in the bound book.

When the ATF arrives, they expect every gun that is still on the books to be in the store. Since the gun was sold but not logged out, it is now "missing."

Depending on the number of employees, several of the guns could have been stolen over the years as well.

As for the comments on "garage" dealers and the sloppy paperwork and high turnover. . .I have under 1000 guns go through my hands every year, and every single one of them goes through MY hands. I have no employees and I do all of the paperwork. My signature is at the bottom of every 4473, and I immediately log guns out in the bound book as I file the 4473. I would put my paperwork and inventory up against any major gunstore that has several employees, and I would bet that most kitchen table dealers would have a similar record system. It is much easier to do it right when you are the only one doing it, and it is hard to have employees stealing guns when you don't have employees.

If you enjoyed reading about "Trader's Guns in San Leandro CA in trouble with the ATF" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!