ATF House visit part II:
- Thread starter alpha6164
- Start date
- Status
UPDATE:
Well after all this time, the agent calls me today to tell me that they will be stopping by my office. He stated that this is regarding the multiple gun purchases and if I had the guns still with me. I told them yes. He asked if could bring my guns unloaded in the trunk of my car to my office, and I agreed.
They showed up about 15min ago. It was one male and two females. They were very nice. I popped the trunk and they looked at all the four guns and compared the serial numbers to a sheet they had in their hand. Here are the questions that they asked me:
ATF: Are you armed?
ME: Yes, i have a CCW and wearing an ankle rig.
ATF: Ok, thank you for letting us know, just don't reach to your ankle, (chuckle)
ATF: Why do you by the exact same gun multiple times?
ME: I got a great deal on the HK P7s and decided to buy two.
ATF: Do you just collect guns
ME: You can say that
They thanked me for my time and shook my hands and said that if I ever had any gun related questions, to give him a call. And they left.
I am hoping that this is the last time I will hear from them.
I pretty much think not only that it was the multiple hand gun purchase in one that, but the fact that some of the guns were the exact same model. That might have actually been what raised the flag. And this is why some people in this thread have mentioned that they have bought multiple guns on the same day but different brand/models and were not contacted.
I hope this helps out, but I wanted to share the latest stuff with you guys.
Well after all this time, the agent calls me today to tell me that they will be stopping by my office. He stated that this is regarding the multiple gun purchases and if I had the guns still with me. I told them yes. He asked if could bring my guns unloaded in the trunk of my car to my office, and I agreed.
They showed up about 15min ago. It was one male and two females. They were very nice. I popped the trunk and they looked at all the four guns and compared the serial numbers to a sheet they had in their hand. Here are the questions that they asked me:
ATF: Are you armed?
ME: Yes, i have a CCW and wearing an ankle rig.
ATF: Ok, thank you for letting us know, just don't reach to your ankle, (chuckle)
ATF: Why do you by the exact same gun multiple times?
ME: I got a great deal on the HK P7s and decided to buy two.
ATF: Do you just collect guns
ME: You can say that
They thanked me for my time and shook my hands and said that if I ever had any gun related questions, to give him a call. And they left.
I am hoping that this is the last time I will hear from them.
I pretty much think not only that it was the multiple hand gun purchase in one that, but the fact that some of the guns were the exact same model. That might have actually been what raised the flag. And this is why some people in this thread have mentioned that they have bought multiple guns on the same day but different brand/models and were not contacted.
I hope this helps out, but I wanted to share the latest stuff with you guys.
Harley Quinn
Member
Hi,
Did they ask to see your ccw permit, passport, and other various Identification? How about your ankle gun? What is it you carry there?
Did they ask to see your ccw permit, passport, and other various Identification? How about your ankle gun? What is it you carry there?
hotpig
Member
Since you were not buying the guns as a straw purchaser you made their day easier.
HARLEY QUINN said:
No they did not ask to see my CCW, they also did not ask to see the ankle rig. They just jokingly said don't reach for your ankle. if they had done their job, they should know that i have a legitimate CCW. Maybe actually thats why they asked? You have to realized they know that I am an M.D. and they showed up at my medical practice. They definitely did not look worried that I was going to shoot them in front of my medical practice
Also the fact that I called them right away and cooperated with everything probably helped. I carry a Kahr PM9 in a Ken Null ankle rig that is very comfortable and can wear it all day at work. I wear a dress shirt tucked in dress pants so thats the only option. I can't freak out my patients. WHen I am out with an untucked shirt I always wear my HK P7 in a crossbreed setup. You can't have a more reliable and accurate gun than the P7.
gunsmith
member
great
now we will have two more pages of debate
I was thinking about buying several of the same kinds of guns because in NV if you use one in S/D
they confiscate it untill you're proven innocent...also spare parts, when teotwawki happens I want to have 100 AK's.
now we will have two more pages of debate
I was thinking about buying several of the same kinds of guns because in NV if you use one in S/D
they confiscate it untill you're proven innocent...also spare parts, when teotwawki happens I want to have 100 AK's.
Scorpiusdeus
member
Alpha, first off let me say, GREAT!!! I'm glad it worked out for you. I suspected that would be about it, but I confess that even I thought it might be a little more intense.
For those among us who see black helicopters everywhere and fear the arrival of the Soldiers of ZOG, were you beaten, threatened, tricked, or abused? Are you now being followed? Did they implant a microchip in you? Do you feel you may have been rendered unconscious and taken to the mother ship?
Oh and last but not least, were either of the two female Jackbooted thugs HOT???
For those among us who see black helicopters everywhere and fear the arrival of the Soldiers of ZOG, were you beaten, threatened, tricked, or abused? Are you now being followed? Did they implant a microchip in you? Do you feel you may have been rendered unconscious and taken to the mother ship?
Oh and last but not least, were either of the two female Jackbooted thugs HOT???
People, having been and FFL, and dealt with ATF a lot in the last 20 years, you need to understand something. Just like the police, chances are the ATF agent knows nothing about you - whether you are a good guy ot a scumbag. Rememeber, LEO get lied to almost every day.
I can cite many cases where people bought multiple handguns to resell the often to prohibited persons. That ios one of the rerasons for multiple sales checks - which predate the Brady law by a long time.
The first check you have to pass whenever dealing with any law enforxcement agency is the attitude test. If you start off actng like a criminal, that is how you are going to get treated. If they are out to get you, you are basically screwed anyway. If you are responsing to questioning, you always have the right to not answer. If you are not under arrest, you can always leave. If you are arrested, ask for a lawyer.
It's simple.
I can cite many cases where people bought multiple handguns to resell the often to prohibited persons. That ios one of the rerasons for multiple sales checks - which predate the Brady law by a long time.
The first check you have to pass whenever dealing with any law enforxcement agency is the attitude test. If you start off actng like a criminal, that is how you are going to get treated. If they are out to get you, you are basically screwed anyway. If you are responsing to questioning, you always have the right to not answer. If you are not under arrest, you can always leave. If you are arrested, ask for a lawyer.
It's simple.
hotpig
Member
They did not need to see his ID or permit since they would have already checked that basic information. The only question would be if he is working was he carrying a fire arm at that time.
hotpig
Member
The guys I work with normally have on jeans or khaki pants. The guy that oversees the task force stays in his office and wears a suit.
Ding ding ding! That's what I said in the first thread about this.
Buying more than one of the same model at the same time will often create a visit from the ATF. They basically just want to make sure you're not selling them on the street or something. While it is still somewhat of an invasion of privacy.... I think that was the last you will hear from them. They saw you're a doctor, you're not a criminal, and you gave them a reasonable reason to purchase more than one of the same model.
I'll be surprised if you hear from them again.
It worked out about like I expected. Routine check and no big deal. I'm glad.
Re a comment above:
Wrong, as others noted above.
Ask Jim Brown, the (then) Louisiana Commissioner of Insurance, who went to the pen for lying to FBI agents during an unsworn (and unrecorded; his word against theirs as to what was said) interview.
See U.S. v. Brown, 303 F.3d 582 (5th Cir. 2002).
Many others have gone down on the same charge, under 18 USC 1001.
The statute is broad and applies to oral interviews with FBI, ATF, etc., as well as statements on government forms such as tax documents or a 4473. Prosecutions for lying on a 4473 are not uncommon.
The lie must be "material," which is a question for the jury. U.S. v. Gaudin, 515 U.S. 506, 115 S.Ct. 2310 (U.S. 1995). And it'll cost you many thousands of $$$ to get to the point where they decide that issue.
The moral: Don't lie to the feds. Or, if you ask Jim Brown: Don't even talk to the feds.
************************
18 U.S.C.A. § 1001
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully--
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. If the matter relates to an offense under chapter 109A, 109B, 110, or 117, or section 1591, then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be not more than 8 years.
(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial proceeding, or that party's counsel, for statements, representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding.
(c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to--
(1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a matter related to the procurement of property or services, personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch; or
(2) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.
Re a comment above:
Wrong, as others noted above.
Ask Jim Brown, the (then) Louisiana Commissioner of Insurance, who went to the pen for lying to FBI agents during an unsworn (and unrecorded; his word against theirs as to what was said) interview.
See U.S. v. Brown, 303 F.3d 582 (5th Cir. 2002).
Many others have gone down on the same charge, under 18 USC 1001.
The statute is broad and applies to oral interviews with FBI, ATF, etc., as well as statements on government forms such as tax documents or a 4473. Prosecutions for lying on a 4473 are not uncommon.
The lie must be "material," which is a question for the jury. U.S. v. Gaudin, 515 U.S. 506, 115 S.Ct. 2310 (U.S. 1995). And it'll cost you many thousands of $$$ to get to the point where they decide that issue.
The moral: Don't lie to the feds. Or, if you ask Jim Brown: Don't even talk to the feds.
************************
18 U.S.C.A. § 1001
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully--
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. If the matter relates to an offense under chapter 109A, 109B, 110, or 117, or section 1591, then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be not more than 8 years.
(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial proceeding, or that party's counsel, for statements, representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding.
(c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to--
(1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a matter related to the procurement of property or services, personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch; or
(2) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.
Could also be a quiet area with not much for the ATF to go about doing 'legitimately', so they try and make work for themselves so that they can get promoted out of a backwater. Maybe he joins up to kick down doors and he's bored - he must be, if he's focusing on someone who evidently isn't doing anything.
Or, he's anti-gun in a pro-gun area. It doesn't matter what the composition of the surrounding area is; they're federal agents and they're not necessarily locals themselves.
alpha, I have been following this thread with interest and I think you handled it very well.
But why (rhetorical question hat on) in the world would it be necessary for 3 agents to do this kind of check. Holy cow, our tax dollars at work.
But why (rhetorical question hat on) in the world would it be necessary for 3 agents to do this kind of check. Holy cow, our tax dollars at work.
hotpig
Member
Maybe it was because they were meeting a person that they knew would have guns, Duhh
Harley Quinn
Member
Alpha,
Thanks for the information, I hope you are not going to buy anymore multiple buys...LOL...
Good luck.
HQ
Thanks for the information, I hope you are not going to buy anymore multiple buys...LOL...
Good luck.
HQ
Langenator
Member
CCW permits and carrying concealed, with or without a permit, is a matter of state and/or local law, and I'm not sure even the ATF can do anything about it. Probably the most they could do is detain you in place and call the locals.
Asking if he's carrying is just a routine thing done for officer/agent safety.
And if he actually was a criminal and packing, I'm sure he wouldn't have told them anyway, and they wouldn't have had probable cause to search him.
Templar223
Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2005
- Messages
- 309
Hmm... Maybe things have changed since 97ish when I bought SEVEN of the exact same handgun in one transaction and didn't get a visit from the ATF, but I've gotta think there's more here than a mult. purchase involving two of the same gun.
Maybe it's your ethnicity. Maybe it's the area. Maybe it's the dealer you got them from.
Somewhere though, there's more going on than buying two P7s at the same time.
John
redneckrepairs
Member
- Joined
- May 3, 2005
- Messages
- 1,117
Glad it all worked out well Alpha . I suspect you are correct on a " flag " being thrown on multiple handguns of the same make/model . In this time of elevated awareness , and given the proclivity's of the set of agency's that fall under " homeland security " quite possibly the first thought was that someone was equipping a team with pistols for whateaver reason . We dont know what other " intel " went into the decision to check you , but the agent did mention to your lawyer there were reasons beyond a simple multiple purchase if i am not mistaken . I am in no way suggesting that the other reasons had to do with you personally. Rather that they could have some intel of a cell formed or forming in the area from a variety of " credible" sources ranging from intercepted emails to some scumbag street informant who is in a bind .
Harley Quinn
Member
I have to figure you are on a list now, and going to be watched. I'd say it is a thing about home security. From what you have mentioned it fits.
London just had that att. bombing and it was a doctor, close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades they say, might be a slow day and needed some lines on the log. Or you are being profiled.
Not to worry when you are clean as you seem to be. But I would take it as a precaution to what does occur now.
Those who think these folks doing their job and commenting about what jerks they are, you are wrong in my opinion.
It is easier to get material to make bombs than it is a gun, but it is always something in CA that gets a red flag (multiple buys).
HQ
London just had that att. bombing and it was a doctor, close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades they say, might be a slow day and needed some lines on the log. Or you are being profiled.
Not to worry when you are clean as you seem to be. But I would take it as a precaution to what does occur now.
Those who think these folks doing their job and commenting about what jerks they are, you are wrong in my opinion.
It is easier to get material to make bombs than it is a gun, but it is always something in CA that gets a red flag (multiple buys).
HQ
kermit315
Member
maybe they dont have the staff to check every multiple purchase, so they check a set percentage and he popped up in that. it would explain why some people get checked and some dont.
- Status
