4473's and confiscation?


PDA






TheOtherOne
December 29, 2003, 08:55 AM
I'm wondering if those of us that have legally purchased guns since the inception of these registration forms are doomed in the long run? I know that they've been used in the past to take honest gun owners rifles away (beltway snipers and random AR-15 confiscation?). I'm starting to firmly believe that because all of my guns are registered (I've only started collecting in the last year) that I'll be one of the first forced to turn them in when we eventually go the way of England and Australia.

My real question is now that I own them how can I get them off paper and unregistered so that I can keep them forever? I've heard things like those forms can be destroyed after 7 years, but is that even true and does it ever happen? I've heard that the BATF collects them indefinitely, especially from businesses that have went under.

If you enjoyed reading about "4473's and confiscation?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Graystar
December 29, 2003, 09:08 AM
I don't worry about it. If the government ever tried to go that far the people will simply change it. Just like they did with Prohibition.

Art Eatman
December 29, 2003, 09:30 AM
And now you know why many will only buy from private collections.

:), Art

another okie
December 29, 2003, 09:46 AM
The forms are not destroyed after seven years. They are kept forever. When the dealer closes down the forms are sent to the government, so the reassuring statement I have often heard from gun dealers about how "the form stays right here" is only about half true.

jimpeel
December 29, 2003, 09:56 AM
I believe that they are destroyed after 20 years. The best thing is to buy only from a reputable company that has a good history and isn't apt to go out of business like Big-5, Wal-Mart, Turner's Outdoorsman, etc.

If a business ceases firearms sales, but remains in business, do they keep, or turn in, the 4473s? Is it a choice to do either; or is there some mandatory clause with BATFE that they be turned in at the cessation of firearms sales?

ScottsGT
December 29, 2003, 10:34 AM
Walked into a local gunshop I do business with one day, and there were two ATF agents going thru the 4473's writing down everyones names and type of gun bought. Owner was so pissed he almost shut his doors down right there and told them to take all of the files with them. Don't tell me that they're not keeping up with what we buy. :cuss:

EOD Guy
December 29, 2003, 11:04 AM
The forms are not destroyed after seven years. They are kept forever. When the dealer closes down the forms are sent to the government, so the reassuring statement I have often heard from gun dealers about how "the form stays right here" is only about half true.

The 4473's may be destroyed after 20 years for completed sales and after 5 years if the sale was not completed. [See 27CFR 178.129(b).]

Telperion
December 29, 2003, 11:12 AM
If there ever is some kind of mass, overt confiscation order, I suspect that there will be a lot of suspicious fires and missing records at a lot of shops.

standingbear
December 29, 2003, 11:14 AM
the phone call to get the background check from the ffl when you buy a firearm-sure it helps filter the unmentionables and even the worthy occasionally from purchasing a firearm through that ffl.the same ffl is then given a future visit to inspect the yellow forms & used guns traded from whom ect-seriel numbers ect.its known what guns you have purchased through the ffl holders this way-its why its frowned upon with private sales.yes..we DO have registration.

hillbilly
December 29, 2003, 11:28 AM
When the day comes that wide-scale confiscation begins, it won't matter if they are registered or not.

That day is the day you will need your guns the most.

Americans have a written constitution and long, proud history of ignoring unconstitutional laws, as well as rising up against oppression. You think whiskey drinkers just meekly surrendered their whiskey during Prohibition?

Uh, how many SKS Sporters do you think are still secretly owned in California, even after the attempted registration and confiscation done by that minion of Satan, Bill Lockyer? How many more have been purchased somewhere else and smuggled back into the state?

Even if the mass of Americans are "sheeple" as some derisively like to say, all it would take is about one percent of Americans to violently and aggressively resist confiscation.

They'd have the firepower and the will and the numbers to resist mighty effectively.

In closing, here is my favorite Solzhenitsyn quote. If a bunch of Russian citizens armed with pokers and shovels and axes could have done this, what could a bunch of American citizens armed with rifles and shotguns do?


"And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?

The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!"

hillbilly

SJG26
December 29, 2003, 12:30 PM
Hillbilly said:
"Even if the mass of Americans are "sheeple" as some derisively like to say, all it would take is about one percent of Americans to violently and aggressively resist confiscation.

They'd have the firepower and the will and the numbers to resist mighty effectively. "

Resist??---definitely
Effectively? - not likely.

Confiscation will be methodical, strike teams against single homeowners (imagine the SWAT van pulls up to your home) - the victims later written up as extremists. While some(not all) of us will stand and fight, the majority will sucumb to protect their lives and their families.
WE are not a unified force - only via political might (our votes) can we hope to avoid that scenario.

standingbear
December 29, 2003, 01:01 PM
confinscation is already here-just not on a scale we know and recognize.we shrug our shoulders and give up a few freedoms for the good of the whole.legislation is passed that while at whole seems "good" and "just" but in the minute details, its disguised a small sentance that puts it all in a new perspective.one that is not seen until its ill effects have started being noticed by the few it affects directly at first.you can apply any of the gun laws passed.you can shrug your shoulders and say.."so what,it doesnt apply to my single shot 12 gauge"..it doesnt yet but it will if nobody cares and doesnt vote to change things.we give up alil piece of freedom to be allowed to keep another for the common good.piece by piece..methodical.

oldfart
December 29, 2003, 01:40 PM
Hillbilly asked: "You think whiskey drinkers just meekly surrendered their whiskey during Prohibition?"

Actually, whiskey wasn't a big thing prior to prohibition. Most alcohol was sold as beer or ale. But with the penalty for 3% beer being the same as for 100 proof whiskey, the bootleggers went for the heavy stuff.

If guns are ever outlawed we could expect the same thing. If a single-shot .22 will get you ten years in Club Fed, you might as well have a full-auto AK.

By the way, does anybody have any idea what's being done with all those parts kits that I see at gunshows and in Shotgun News? There must be a big market for dummy Stens.

TallPine
December 29, 2003, 06:16 PM
And some people wonder why anyone would keep a 30 caliber rifle handy for home defense ...

;)

alan
December 29, 2003, 06:33 PM
another okie wrote:

The forms are not destroyed after seven years. They are kept forever. When the dealer closes down the forms are sent to the government, so the reassuring statement I have often heard from gun dealers about how "the form stays right here" is only about half true.

You seem to have forgottem, hand copying of information from 44783's during "inspections" and or the use of portable scanners. The old wives tale you mentioned, never was even "half true".

By the way, how often does one see questions as to RACE, other than on 4473's. Racial discrimination or things that smack thereof, are against the law, or so your congress critter will tell you, assuming that they bother answering questions.

Jeff White
December 29, 2003, 07:10 PM
alan asked;

By the way, how often does one see questions as to RACE, other than on 4473's. Racial discrimination or things that smack thereof, are against the law, or so your congress critter will tell you, assuming that they bother answering questions.

You know as well as I do that RACE is collected on the 4473 because it's a standard criminal identifier. You may move to a new address after you buy a gun, but you will always be the same race. It just makes it easier to track down which alan bought that gun. Full name, race and DOB will get a pretty good ID on someone in most databases used in criminal investigations. Bet you never get them to admit that's what it's there for though. Might make an interesting civil rights lawsuit though....Just why is the government keeping track of what race gunowners are? Might make some people squirm....

Jeff

geekWithA.45
December 29, 2003, 09:43 PM
They're all just tools, they don't alter the fundamental dynamic:

A widespread confiscation program not can, not might, but _will_ result in an unknown degree of bloodshed.

We're Americans, in case anyone hasn't noticed, and ultimately,


http://www.library.northwestern.edu/govpub/collections/wwii-posters/img/ww0207-54.jpg

The real risk isn't that we'll lose our guns.

What we're all working to prevent is the situation where we've got a use 'em or lose 'em scenario.

Gun bigots never really seem to understand that the fact that gun bigots continue to exist is primary proof of our law abiding, life loving natures. It is ultimate proof of our restraint.

All our angst and effort is bent towards one goal:

Fending off the day of "use them or lose them", in whatever form it might take. If we lose them, we lose them for all time, and with them, we fold up the tent of the noble American experiment. That day will end America we know it not only for ourselves but for all future generations unto eternity.

We owe ourselves, our progenitors, and the future not to piss it away.

alan
December 29, 2003, 10:51 PM
Jeff White:

You noted, in response to my post, the following, "You know as well as I do that RACE is collected on the 4473 because it's a standard criminal identifier. You may move to a new address after you buy a gun, but you will always be the same race. It just makes it easier to track down which alan bought that gun. Full name, race and DOB will get a pretty good ID on someone in most databases used in criminal investigations. Bet you never get them to admit that's what it's there for though. You know as well as I do that RACE is collected on the 4473 because it's a standard criminal identifier. You may move to a new address after you buy a gun, but you will always be the same race. It just makes it easier to track down which alan bought that gun. Full name, race and DOB will get a pretty good ID on someone in most databases used in criminal investigations. Bet you never get them to admit that's what it's there for though. Might make an interesting civil rights lawsuit though....Just why is the government keeping track of what race gunowners are? Might make some people squirm....


I intend no disrespect to you sir, however respecting your opening line, it strikes me as the most arrant nonsense. As for your closing, "Bet you never get them to admit that's what it's there for though. Might make an interesting civil rights lawsuit though....Just why is the government keeping track of what race gunowners are? Might make some people squirm....", I get the following thoughts.

1. Is the reader to take it that you think the courts are, or might be trustworthy?
2. People who say that "registration doesn't or won't lead to confiscation", are either fatally ignorant, lying or unaware of contemporary/recent history, for instance, the goings on in Cleveland, OH, New Yersey, New York City and last but not least, California, and I might have missed a couple of others too. By the way, my personal inclination re the "nay sayers" is to say that they are flat out lying.
3. Some people out there need to do one hell of a lot more than "squirm".

Geek with a 45:

Re your contribution, isn't it a damned shame that government sseems so unhappy, or discontent with doing what government was supposed to do, as opposed to what it is doing, acting to diminish the rights and prerogeratives of it's law abiding citizens? By the way, that includes "government" at almost any level one cares to look at, IMO.

Jeff White
December 29, 2003, 11:16 PM
alan,
I apologize I should have added the sarcasm emoticon to my opening line. The only possible reason for race to be on the 4473 is for identification purposes. It surely would have been removed by now otherwise. The standard identifiers to run a person through the NCIC database are Name (first, last, MI) race and DOB.

I think that it's time we used the courts for our purposes, the same way they are used against us. If someone brought suit against the BATF for collecting information on what race a gun buyer was, they would be forced to admit that the purpose of the 4473 is to facilitate confiscation. We could conceivably turn the governments political correctness against them. It certainly wouldn't make BATF look good, keeping statistics on what race gun owners were. Might even get politcal pressure put on them from some of their staunchest allies in congress to destroy their database. You know, the one they deny they have....

It would make some people squirm in that those who think that the 4473 and NICs aren't defacto registration, then why do they need enough information to find you after you've moved. And if they don't intend on confiscation, why do they need to find you. Very few crimes are ever solved by tracing a gun back to it's original buyer. It's not like license plates on a car. The others who it would make squirm are those in the government who would have to answer as to why they are keeping statistics on the race of gun buyers. You're right in that they need to do more then squirm...

Again I apologize for leaving the sarcasm emoticon out of my post.

Jeff

alan
December 30, 2003, 01:00 AM
Jeff White:

If you want a really shinning example of governmenyt baloney at it's finest, consider the following, from Famous But Incompetent, or the Fan Belt Inspectors, whichever you might prefer, thought there are likely other sobriquants that would work as well.

Brady Law stipulated that no records to be kept, except for those of denied purchase applications, and the unique number assigned to approved purchases. Getting "government approval" for the exercise of a constitutional right is sort of interesting, isn't it? Anyhow, our friends at FBI, either wrote, or had written, to their specs. one would assume, the computer programs that run this NICS business.

The following comes from the FBI themselves, the quote isn't exact, but the following hits all the essential notes. The default of the program, EVERY COMPUTER PROGRAM HAS A DEFAULT SETTING is, notwithstanding the requirements of The Brady Law, RETAIN DATA. This is the guts of the program, either written by or for the FBI. FBI has also claimed that in order to remove/change this default, that they would have to shut the entire system down for a period of months, at tremendous cost, thereby shutting off the sale of firearms in the U.S., at least with respect to sales made by FFL's.

Re this example of BLACKMAIL, which is exactly what their tactic amounts to, exactly how long would it take to change a line of code in a computer program? A couple of minutes, I should think, and I have, in the past, instigated and seen accomplished, changes in a computer program. I spoke with the programmer, explaining what I wanted, asking if he could accomplish what was wanted? He thought for a moment, and said that it would take less than ten minutes, which is what it took, less than ten minutes, quite a bit less than ten minutes, as I recall.

So push coming to shove, the standard government tactic still seems to be in use, deny, deny, deny, lie, lie, lie. Interestingly, they don't even lie very well. By the way, your apology is not excepted, given that there was no need for one in the first place. Thanks for the offer though, since I sometimes come across sounding somewhat harsh, or so I have been told.

I for one wonder as to how much a really sharp lawyer would charge, and how much it would ultimately cost to bring a suit such as you suggest. It sounds like something that might prove more thsan a little interesting, particularly if the suit could garner solme serious media coverage, wouldn't that be something to see, media admitting that it too was lying all along, can you picture it??

jimpeel
December 30, 2003, 01:31 AM
... that they would have to shut the entire system down for a period of months, at tremendous cost, thereby shutting off the sale of firearms in the U.S., at least with respect to sales made by FFL's. Not so. According to posters at TFL some time ago, if the NICS computers are down, the law specifically states that an FFL may still sell the firearm in the absence of an NICS check. It then becomes a judgement call.

alan
December 30, 2003, 01:56 PM
jimpeel:

You wrote in response to my comments, "Not so. According to posters at TFL some time ago, if the NICS computers are down, the law specifically states that an FFL may still sell the firearm in the absence of an NICS check. It then becomes a judgement call".

You are right, re the above, however a problem might well arise out of the "judgement calls" that our law abiding FFL might then make, and the attitudes/antics of those good old boys down there at BATF, with or without the "E", to say nothing of whatever the FBI might be up to.

Another thing that bothers the hell out of me is that the FBI lied, cheated and stole, what else is new, then admitted having done so, all the while skating free for bigger and better transgressions. Possibly, I should I refer to their antics as the actions of a major law enforcement agency, enforcing the law? Perhaps, as I grow older, I grow more niave, either that or I suffer a "hardning of the intellect", a loss of mental flexibility, or something of the sort, some things still bother me.

If you enjoyed reading about "4473's and confiscation?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!