US Citizens can only export 3 firearms?

Perhaps they are talking about a big game safari maybe?

Gee when did this change , in 84 I left with 6 and came back in 91 with 12 . All I had to show was a receipt for the ones I left with and of course the Form 4 for the ones I bought while living in Germany .

So you can only take three guns out of the country at once without some special license. Doesn't particularly surprise me...

"US Citizens can only export 3 firearms?"

No, U.S. persons may temporarily export without a license not more than three nonautomatic firearms in Category I(a) of § 121.1 of this subchapter... if they were manufactured on or after 1899.

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/tex...view=text&node=22:1.0.1.13.62.0.32.17&idno=22

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/tex...&view=text&node=22:1.0.1.13.65.0.32.1&idno=22

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/tex...&view=text&node=22:1.0.1.13.60.0.31.1&idno=22

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/tex...view=text&node=22:1.0.1.13.62.0.32.18&idno=22

probably because i have no need to export my guns anywhere

oh im sorry


what guns

There's all kinds of restrictions on what you can take out of or into the country. This item in particular is obviously designed to keep someone from going on a "safari" with a few dozen guns and 100,000 rounds of ammo that are subsequenlty "stolen" while in that other country.

I'd say that is a fairly accurate assessment.

Yes.

It is rather sad America has given into international pressures to curb the rights of citizens.
There was once a time that what actions Americans took in this country were considered by the government here. What an American did in another country was the concern of the foriegn government. What was brought into the country was a concern, but what was taken out of the country was the responsiblity of the nation it was taken to. Remember the oceans are international territory, so if you want to take guns out into the ocean you should not face more restrictions than just keeping them in the US.


The United States has been influenced by the U.N. (who want to see "small arms" out of the hands of all non military and police) and NATO.
So now the government restricts not only what citizens can do while in the country, but is concerned with what they do out of the country.

In many parts of the world firearms are kept out of the hands of regular people. The UN and these restrictive governments do not want the freedoms of America to make thier way outside of America. So a lot of pressure was put on the American government to curb American's freedoms. Since these restrictions only impact those leaving the country, many Americans did not fight or oppose these restrictions.

I still feel that the government should only regulate what is brought into the country, not what 'free' Americans take out of the country. That is the responsiblity of the nation they are being taken to if any.
That our government now plays a role in enforcing foriegn oppression even on its own citizens, and that many will excuse that is just sad. But we are now living in the days of global government, where the idealogy of our free nation is less important than international standards of the UN, made up primarily of unfree nations.

"Doesn't effect me, I don't plan to leave." (Apathy in action.)
The proper way to think is along the lines of:
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."

The precedent worries me.

First, if you are headed on a safari (BIG $$), you will want to have a battery of at least three rifles - and maybe a shotgun. And a serious Olympic competitor will be carrying both primary and backup guns.

Second, I worry about this being ratcheted up to two or one gun.

Third, I DO head overseas with up to six firearms. Muzzle-Loaders, but it still can make for trouble if the Customs people don't know the regulations intimately.

You shouldn't have to check out of a country, it is not free.

Check in to one? Certainly.
Requirements to check out though to be compliant with laws should make you feel uncomfortable.

When you can't even sail into international waters without first checking with your nation and getting permission and necessary licenses for items you may have that are legal in your country, you are clearly not considered free by your country.

And clearly your country no longer feels its ideology of freedom and equality trumps the oppression of foriegn locations.
It is funny, America was loved by the world when it was arrogant and felt the American way and American values were the best in the world, second to none. Now that Americans are apologetic and respect the 'right' of foriegn nations to oppress thier citizens in ways against our values much of the world dislikes us and our values.
So we are more PC now, with our government caving to internation pressures, yet more disliked than ever by much of the world.
Irony at its best.

1. It is rather sad America has given into international pressures to curb the rights of citizens.
2. There was once a time that what actions Americans took in this country were considered by the government here.
3. What an American did in another country was the concern of the foreign government.

The above statements taken from an earlier post are slightly out of touch with reality. Kind of indicates the old ugly American point of view.

One thing over looked in the discussion of American Customs is the need of the traveler to verify that where the are going even allows people from other countries to bring guns.

Statement 1. When you leave the United States you need to follow and respect the laws of the country you intend to visit. Even if you do not agree with them.

Statement 2. Still true and getting worse.

Statement 3. Still true. I guess if you violate their laws you will not try and contact the American Embassy, but just show those foreigners what you are made of. (Oh, I forgot you are the foreigner).

I would hope in reporting your guns to customs when leaving on your vacation to Mexico, they would be nice enough to tell you that you will go to prison upon your arrival, as Mexico doesn't allow bringing guns into their country.

When I went to Saudi Arabia in 1993 a British national had been sentenced to 10 cuts with a sword for insulting a Saudi cab driver. The British government was able to get the sentence changed to immediate expulsion, revocation by the Saudis of his work visa, and ordered to never return.

I have traveled overseas for work quite a bit and found going to the State Department web site can give you a wealth of information before you travel. Includes recommendations of immunizations you should get, some required by other countries, some that are recommended. Did you know a malaria shot was recommended for Saudi Arabia?

I traveled overseas this past July with five firearms. Like Mike OTP they were muzzleloaders, but the point is when I went in to see Customs before my trip to get the form signed & stamped it wouldn't have made much difference, as the agent who inspected the guns wouldn't have known a Springfield '61 from a Springfield M1-A. There was no mention of any 3-gun export limit, this is the first I've heard of it. This held true for all the Customs, TSA, DSH, & Police who also saw the guns at various points along the way. They were all courteous & helpful, but when it comes to firearms knowledge ignorance is apparently universal!
The form in question is a CBP Form 4457 'Certificate of Registration For Personal Effects Taken Abroad' & is put out by the Department of Homeland Security. It isn't designed specifically for firearms, & can be used for expensive items such as cameras, laptops, etc. were you need to prove prior ownership to avoid paying duty on returning to the U.S.
Since 2001 I have traveled overseas with guns on three occasions, & only bothered with the 4457 on this last trip, & really it is only needed to get the guns back into the country, it is of little use overseas....at least in the countries I've been to as they have issued a temporary firearms licence for the duration of my stays showing the guns I had imported. However, it did seem to 'smooth' the process with U.S. Customs when I re-entered the country so, for that reason alone, I'd do it again next time.
Also, even though the form is called a 'Certificate of Registration.....' there is only one copy, & that is the one Customs stamps & hands back to you, so I don't see any fear of backdoor registration here.

ChukpikeI was simply saying I do not think it is the responsibility of our nation to police what its citizens who are supposedly free to come and go do in foriegn locations. If the citizens break the law in another nation it is the responsibility of that nation to punish those within its borders who broke the law.

Now it is still helpful if the US government sticks up for an American sentenced to something our values say is barbaric. We are Americans, we are powerful and we used to believe our way was the best way. Being PC and respecting the idealogy of everyone else in the last several years has not made us any more respected, as I said since our society has become less arrogant and free we are even less respected around the world. So clearly being apologetic for our values does not win any hearts and minds. Why do it?

Many nations have barbaric laws, and yes it is wise to research them.
A number of nations for example have the death penalty for even tiny amounts of controlled substances like marijuana. Possession or even framed possession ( individuals being able to just plant a joint on a person to have them killed is a rather scary thought) could result in your death in such a place.

In others you can have your hand chopped off for stealing. Visit an outdoor market, have a problem with the translation and not pay the right thing, and walk off, then have them call the police? No more hand for you.

In others, like the Saudi Arabia you mention it can be the dealth penalty for DUI. Have a drink with dinner and then drive somewhere and just get stopped? Death penalty.

So yes you should remain informed. Yes your government should stick up for you in some cases, and let you be punished in others. That is a discretion that should be based on the ideology we have in this nation compared to what someone is charged with elsewhere.
It may sound like a double standard, because it is. We and our beliefs on freedom and equality that we stand for are better than anywhere else in the world. If you are apologetic about that, I pity you.
Americans have a proud history, and rights and idealogy they were once proud of and not ashamed to be arrogant about around the world.
Most of the world looked up to America, and many traveled long distances leaving most of what they knew behind to share in what those beliefs have created.


I am not saying it is not very helpful if customs informs people of the laws, or makes information available on websites. I am saying it is wrong for our nation to itself punish its citizens for what may or may not even be a violation at thier destination, and to hold its citizens to the ideology of foriegn nations in American borders.

If someone wants to travel to some part of Africa or Southeast Asia where firearms are technicaly this or that legaly, but the actual local enforcement in reality is different, our government should not restrict them.
There is a number of places in the world that have official laws, and then different levels of enforcement in different regions (though they may treat a percieved 'wealthy' foriegner differently and hold them to different standards.)


In America the law is often the law. That is not reality in some of the world where outlawing everything but then discretionarily allowing something different is normal. That is what some unfree nations do, they have huge discretionary enforcement by outlawing everything under the sun, and only strictly enforcing some things and not others as they see fit.
That means everyone is technicaly a law breaker, giving the authorities discretion to do as they wish, but only certain 'real' laws are strictly enforced.
Yet strictly following every law on the books is not expected or reality for most of the local population.
So that makes it tough from a foriegn location to understand the real expectations of certain societies as it can differ from the official national level expectations.
Yet if you are someone that understands a specific location you have visited many times I say that risk is on you, from that foriegn location. It should not be what your own government thousands of miles away holds you to before you even get there.
In addition this specific topic applies to even destinations that it is perfectly legal. You cannot ship or take with you more than x number of arms legaly.

What happens if you leave with three, and return with one? Does Customs check you to see that you bring back what you took?

LAR-15 asked:

So even muzzle loaders require a form to take overseas or to Canada from the US?
That is nuts since the Feds do not regulate muzzle loaders
I could easily see someone on a hunting trip taking more than 3 guns, especially if hunting multiple game species.

Click to expand...

A form was not 'required' to take my MLs overseas but, I believe, it did facilitate getting them back in again. However, on a trip to Canada I did need to get a temporary firearms licence, that was issued the Province I was visiting, to take the guns over the border & it detailed the firearms I had in my posession. This was all done some weeks before I left on the trip, though I now understand that this may be able to be done at the border upon entry. One thing to bear in mind though, is that we were told that our Canadian licences would only be good for the Province that issued them, in our case Ontario, & that we'd have to obtain other permits if our travels took us into other Provinces.
Let me emphasize, at the time I went to Canada (2005), no paperwork was required by the U.S. authorities to take my guns into Canada. Crossing the border with our Ontario-issued paperwork was no big deal, in fact the only delay was the Canadians Customs Officers determining whether or not we should be charged the permit fees for muzzleloaders, as they thought the fees may only apply to modern firearms.
Re-entry into the U.S. (Michigan) was a non-issue as no mention of firearms was involved & we just passed thru the checkpoint.

Blakenzy asked:

What happens if you leave with three, and return with one? Does Customs check you to see that you bring back what you took?

Click to expand...

On my recent trip to Australia, permits were required by the Australian authorities for us to enter with & have posession of our firearms. These permits detailed the types & serial numbers of the guns, as well as any accessories ie, spare parts, extra barrels, etc. This was all checked upon entering the country & again upon leaving. It was explicitly mentioned that we had to take all our firearms & accessories home with us (ie. could not sell or leave anything behind), & severe penalties were detailed for failure to comply. Upon returning to the U.S. I was not asked for my Form 4457 by Customs, but I did volunteer it, & it was my impression that the Officer I dealt with was unconcerned with the number of guns I was returning with & if I hadn't shown him my 4457 he wouldn't have known if I was coming home with the same guns I had taken or not. Again, returning to the U.S. was really a non-issue apart from having to get the guns inspected by TSA for my connecting domestic flight.

First, if you are headed on a safari (BIG $$), you will want to have a battery of at least three rifles - and maybe a shotgun.

Click to expand...

No.

Three rifles are too many for today's African safari - most people believe that a well-chosen two-rifle battery is optimum. A typical combo will be .30/06 and .375 H&H . . . these will cover ALL African big game.

If you're going primarily for elephant, then you may want to use a .416, .458, or something else of the kind for your "heavy" rifle, but the logistics of managing two rifles (and their ammo) are sufficiently complex that you don't want three.

(Plus, if you're flying, you're only allowed to bring 11 lbs of ammo per person along . . . )

HankB, I'd agree with you except that if I'm going on a safari and paying that much money, I'm taking a backup for my heavy rifle. Two to make one. Although I'll concede the case for two heavies and no medium.

And I think Bonza was on my flight to Adelaide

FWIW, I've been out of the country five times with muzzle loading pistols. All wanted paperwork ahead of time, but that was not a big problem - it just takes planning ahead. Australia wants paperwork to LEAVE. PITA...and everyone who competed at the 2008 World Championships thought so. FWIW, France was the easiest...their Customs saw what we had were muzzle-loading and waved us through.

It is rather sad America has given into international pressures to curb the rights of citizens.

Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with international pressures. It has everything to do with the powers explicitly granted to the federal government under our Constitution.

"The Congress shall have Power... To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"

I dislike, as much as anybody, the government's legislative abuse of the Commerce Clause; but regulations concerning the import/export of goods with foreign nations unquestionably falls into the Constitutionally enumerated powers of the federal government.

Mike OTDP, consider what others have said about a three-rifle battery:

"Too many - you never know which one to use. Better the third gun be a shotgun or .22" George Hoffman

"Two is enough." Cotton Gordon

"Not necessary. .22 rimfire or varmint rifle is he likes." Finn Aagard

"Anything more than two guns is a headache." Franz Wengert

"More than two rifles is a headache, and can lead to having the wrong equipment in your hands when a major opportunity arises." Craig Boddington

A .375 & .30/06 were recommended as a two-rifle battery by Peter Capstick - and that's what I found worked for me in Zimbabwe and Zambia. (In RSA for plains game I used a .30/06 rifle & .44 Mag handgun.)

The rules are to provide an exception to ITAR.

You would otherwise need a State Department permit to export ANY modern firearm.