USA TODAY: Feds issue 4,000 orders to seize guns from people who failed background checks

Status
Not open for further replies.

taliv

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 23, 2004
Messages
28,762
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...eople-who-failed-background-checks/901017001/

wow

If the background check is not complete within the 72-hour time limit, federal law allows the sale to go forward. ATF agents are asked to take back the guns if the FBI later finds these sales should have been denied.

In addition to the public safety risks, the ATF agents tasked with retrievingthe banned weapons from unauthorized gun owners across the country are exposed to potentially dangerous confrontations.

"These are people who shouldn't have weapons in the first place, and it just takes one to do something that could have tragic consequences," said David Chipman, a former ATF official who helped oversee the firearm retrieval program. "You don't want ATF to stand for 'after the fact.'"

Chipman, now a senior policy adviser for the Giffords Law Center which advocates for more gun restrictions, called the retrieval process "uniquely dangerous." "They are very aware of the inherent risk to law enforcement officers when they (seek) a firearm retrieval,"

ya think?

Yet in 2004, the Justice Department's inspector general found that the ATF's retrieval efforts were plagued by staffing shortages, technological inefficiencies and a general lack of urgency that resulted in recovery delays of up to a year.

"ATF agents did not consider most of the prohibited persons who had obtained guns to be dangerous and therefore did not consider it a priority to retrieve the firearm promptly,'' report concluded.

if the ATF didn't consider them dangerous, maybe they shouldn't be confiscating them. hmm...

can you imagine buying a gun and then a year later having an ATF swat team show up to confiscate it? presumably without compensation. though the article doesn't mention it, one imagines they would have some sort of search warrant and confiscate all the guns they find, not just the one on the NICS check.

I'm a little surprised they didn't get shot at a few times during the obama admin.
 
I thought the background check was destroyed after it went through the nics system. I know the paper copy stays with the FFL, but I thought the digital bg check was flushed somehow? Am I missing something or should we be asking why the check still exists?
 
It has more to do with firearms transferred to buyers after the 72 hour period with no response from NICS.
They actually never received the “go ahead”.
 
Yet in 2004, the Justice Department's inspector general found that the ATF's retrieval efforts
That was 13 years ago!!

I'd imagine there will be a lot closer examination of the background process after the guy who shot up the TX church was found to have not been eligible to purchase firearms. Tis a case of just doing a better job with the rules we already have.
 
I am an extremist, I admit it.

There should be no background checks at all. Owning and carrying a gun is a right.

Here in Wyoming you can buy a used gun with cash and no background check, load it, put it in your pocket and walk away.

The sky doesn't fall.
 
I want to know what crazy FFLs are risking the media exposure and litigation of releasing a firearm without an approval coming back first?
I buy lots of guns and there are at least a ten local shops I deal with regularly, many of whom know me on a first name basis. I have a spotless criminal record, yet still get one or two conditionals a year. NONE of those dealers will let me pick up a weapon until they get the approval back.
In one case I had to wait two weeks. During that two weeks, I purchased two other guns at other shops, and the approvals came back in minutes. Go figure.
Its annoying, but, ultimately, I would rather they make me wait a little longer than allow a nut job to take delivery of a firearm and go do something stupid with it which makes the rest of us look bad and give the antis more ammo against us.
 
I want to know what crazy FFLs are risking the media exposure and litigation of releasing a firearm without an approval coming back first?
I buy lots of guns and there are at least a ten local shops I deal with regularly, many of whom know me on a first name basis. I have a spotless criminal record, yet still get one or two conditionals a year. NONE of those dealers will let me pick up a weapon until they get the approval back.
In one case I had to wait two weeks. During that two weeks, I purchased two other guns at other shops, and the approvals came back in minutes. Go figure.
Its annoying, but, ultimately, I would rather they make me wait a little longer than allow a nut job to take delivery of a firearm and go do something stupid with it which makes the rest of us look bad and give the antis more ammo against us.
If there is no response within 72 hours, the gun can (should) be turned over to the buyer. It basically defaults to an approval.
 
I had a gun shop give me a gun once when they weren't supposed to. (Charge dropped as it had no merit) I was stupid at the time and didn't realize what my legal limitations were. The ATF actually called ME, and told me to take the handgun back to the store, which I did the next day. That gunshop had issues throughout the years....
 
Do those checks just stay in limbo then? To be reviewed at a later date?
I think what’s happened is the FFL releases the firearm, and later, sometimes much later gets the denial, but as they only have to wait the 72 hours, a non-response becomes a de facto “approved” at the time...
 
Spruce Sniper writes:

The ATF actually called ME, and told me to take the handgun back to the store, which I did the next day. That gunshop had issues throughout the years....

How was the store about refunding your money?
 
Are the firearms being purchased recorded along with the BG check submission? I thought they were not included in the check request.

If not, then I assume the ATF must then contact the FFL to see if, in fact, any firearm (or firearms) was transferred, and what it was, in order to seek retrieval. Is this correct?
 
Oh no, I know they CAN do so, I'm just saying all the FFLs I deal with WON'T (as a store policy), deliver a weapon until they get an approval. I would think this would be normal business practice elsewhere, but if some shops want to risk it, well.......

Where's the "risk"? After 72 hours with no response, they are free to give you your firearm. There is no "risk" on their part -- most especially if they knew you personally.
 
Where's the "risk"? After 72 hours with no response, they are free to give you your firearm. There is no "risk" on their part -- most especially if they knew you personally.
The risk is of civil litigation. Even if a shop follows all the rules and gets an approval, it has become standard practice for shooting victims lawyers to name the selling dealer, firearms distributor, and gun manufacturer (and anyone else tangentially involved who has money) as defendants in their wrongful death suits.
It would go worse for the shops settlement amount (cuz, once again its all about the Benjamin's) if they were able to argue that the shop was negligent in delivering the weapon to someone who wasn't supposed to have it, despite the fact that they were perfectly within their rights to do so.......:(:mad:
 
Flechette said:
Here in Wyoming you can buy a used gun with cash and no background check, load it, put it in your pocket and walk away.
It doesn’t have anything to do with whether it’s a used gun or not. And Wyoming doesn’t have any special firearm laws that exempt them from federal firearm laws.

In accordance with federal law, all dealers in the US (including in Wyoming) must sell all their firearms to non-dealers using form 4473, and the buyer must either pass a background check or provide a federally-approved carry permit proving they previously passed a background check (the latter isn’t allowed in every state; it depends on state law and whether the carry permit meets federal guidelines).

And in accordance with federal law, a private individual in Wyoming can sell or gift their guns without any paperwork or background check required, provided the transfer is done in-state between two residents of that state, the transferor has no reason to believe the transferee is a prohibited person, and provided the transferor isn’t in the business of selling firearms.

Some states further regulate these in-state private transfers, but most — including Wyoming — don’t.
 
Last edited:
What about in the case of someone who gets denied due to some clerical error?

And what about someone who is appealing a denial?

Suppose they already own weapons, are those confiscated too?
 
I think a lot of "delays" and "computer shutdowns" are just their little way of reminding us who is In Charge.

But errors do occur. I was denied a Secret security clearance because they did not check beyond names. And I have a fairly common name. Took my agency installation manager and I don't know how much higher up the chain of command to get it straightened out and me cleared to do my job.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top