Data without organization is a set of disparate facts. It is not really very useful to anyone. Add to that the fact that dealers can organize their 4473 in several ways and it becomes less useful. Add to that the most information off the 4473 becomes obsolete within 5 years and the data value is close to nil.
ATF to Push for New Reporting Rules for Dealers
- Thread starter Animal Mother
- Start date
- Status
Why do you think the data is obsolete in 5 years??
My name, date of birth, and the serial number of the gun are pretty much gonna never change.
If Congress passed a law that allowed for gun registration, how quickly do you think the ATF would seize your 4473's and start entering them into a computer database? They already tried this during the Clinton administration, and Congress had to take action to stop it. Would it be difficult to do this? Yes, but it surely is doable. The government processes close to 200 million tax returns each year.
brboyer
Member
Yeah, he is leaving a huge portion of that story out. I cannot foresee any possible way ATF could force someone to provide income verification. They were very, very interested in him.
For something that was not even an investigation, BS!
I'd have to go check, but I thought the law said that the FBI could not keep records of NICS transactions, but I'm unaware of any prohibition on sharing that data with another agency, like say the ATF, that has no such prohibition on retention.
Without the NICS data, ATF would have to physically go to every FFL in the country and then search their own archives from out-of-business FFLs to find every firearm I've purchased. Then again they would miss most of the ones I bought 20+ years ago from still active FFLs. With the data, they would only have to visit the FFLs associated with those records.
Last edited:
No, actually, I'm not, but thanks for implying that I am misleading everyone by selectively telling the truth. Or are you saying that I am lying? And no, they weren't really that interested in me. They did not force me to provide proof of income. I come from a family of attorneys, so the first thing I did was talk to one who is also an FFL and Class III dealer that I was referred to by a moderator of this forum. My attorney advised me to voluntarily provide it. It took over two months for all this to play out and when I finally met with them face to face they checked a few serial numbers on my guns and then told me that they pay money for tips that might to lead to arrests and then said goodbye. I am relaying to you what they told me. By the way, these kind of "check ups" have been common here in Texas since the publicity about the guns going to the cartels.
Last edited:
mgkdrgn
Member
Because it ONLY records sales from FFL's. Most used guns are sold in private sales, no paperwork of any kind. Once you sell the gun you bought from an FFL to another individual, the trail stops there.
Hiring an army of clerks to enter all the 4473's into a database would be a monumental waste of time and effort ... in other words a perfect government program. And would yield the same results as most government programs ... a couple tens of thousands of new government employees, and nothing of any value what so ever to show for it.
People move, so the addresses change. Sometimes to different states, sometimes to different countries.
People get married, divorced or change their name.
People die. I have quite a few 4473s from customers who went to the big range in the sky.
Guns get sold, traded, stolen, lost and destroyed--all without a trail.
I would bet 90+% of the time ATF does a trace on a firearm they hit a dead end for all those reasons.
The only thing the 4473s will do is verify that a person with a given set of characteristics existed at one time and bought a gun at one time. Given this is about half the population of the U.S. there isnt much informational value there.
Further, given that the ATF's registry of Class III weapons is faulty, and they have deliberately made a database over the last 80 years, I doubt a database of regular Title 1's will do much good.
mgkdrgn
Member
Well, ya see the thing is, knowing first hand how 4473 are completed, stored and indexed, and knowing, first hand, what data is transmitted on an NICS check, someone went to a LOT of effort if they were to present you with a list of every gun you bought from any FFL in the last 4 years. They for sure spent a lot of my taxpayer money on someone they "were not really interested in".
That would mean they would have to start with the FFL (and since they don't know which ones .. they would have to check them all), and go through ALL their records, page by page. They simply are not indexed by name ... and the NICS check only records handgun or long gun. Period.
There is data, and there is useful information. 4473's individually, represent data. A warehouse full of 4473's is a lot of data, but -not- useful information
Agreed.
I had a customer who had exactly that happen to him. ATF showed up with a list of guns he had owned and sold. They also knew his address and the name of his dog (no joke). They had been eyeing him for the last 5 years, suspecting him of illegally dealing (he wasn't). Their story was a lot of guns he sold ended up at crime scenes (not his fault).
They had come into my store and taken all my records and gone through them.
In the end he told them he hadn't done anything illegal because if he had they wouldn't be having this conversation, they would be arresting him instead.
I had a customer who had exactly that happen to him. ATF showed up with a list of guns he had owned and sold. They also knew his address and the name of his dog (no joke). They had been eyeing him for the last 5 years, suspecting him of illegally dealing (he wasn't). Their story was a lot of guns he sold ended up at crime scenes (not his fault).
They had come into my store and taken all my records and gone through them.
In the end he told them he hadn't done anything illegal because if he had they wouldn't be having this conversation, they would be arresting him instead.
brboyer
Member
Whatever.
But IMO you have a crappy/lazy attorney if he suggested that you provide financial data to the ATF when under no legal requirement to do so, in this "non-investigation" that they took extreme, most likely unlawful action to obtain information about legal your firearm purchases and personal finances.
But whatever. You are free to do whatever you like.
Well, all I can tell you is that when I met them and provided my records and check stubs, they told me that this was never considered an investigation and that one of their auditors just happen to notice what they considered an above average volume of transfers. The special agent then said that I was further flagged due to not being in their database of employee earnings (which I gather was provided by the IRS). My attorney felt that it was possible that one of the FFLs that I was using was the subject of an investigation. How did they get all that data on the guns I bought? I really don't know. What I do know is that they emailed my attorney a spreadsheet listing make, model, and serial number and said it came from trace data. Honestly, I don't think they really were paying much attention to me. At one point they told my attorney that a gun that was transferred to me was used in a crime and then they later told him that they were mixing it up with someone else.
brboyer
Member
See, now more of the story unfolds.....never said or implied you were lying, just leaving out key information...
Imagine a conversation going something like this:
ATF Agent on phone with IRS Agent.
ATF: Hey Frank, it's Bill over at ATF
IRS: Hey Bill, what can I do for you?
ATF:Well, can you send me over all of the 1040 forms and accompanying documents you have on Mr. Almostfree?
IRS: You doing an investigation or have a warrant?
ATF: Nope, he just buys a lot of guns.
IRS: OK, they're on the way.
ATF: Thanks Frank.
Does this not even remotely concern you? Or throw up huge red flags?
If you check my first post, you'll notice that I mentioned the employment database, so I didn't leave anything out. You also forget that until recently the ATF was under the department of the treasury. You think they don't still share information without a warrant? As I said in my first post and the last post that I made, they told me they checked me out in a database of employee earnings. They did not say who maintained it. I am just inferring.
You know it took me a long time to be willing to talk about this openly. I was just out of college and just getting into a financial position where I could collect all those Smith & Wesson revolvers that I wanted as kid. It scared me to be investigated by law enforcement. I was not doing anything illegal and never thought that I was doing anything remotely close to the line. Then all the sudden I get home from being out on a job for a week and an ATF card is on my door step. I hope it never happens to you. I also hope that it if does you find that fellow firearms owners support you instead of throwing you under the bus and assume that you must be up to more than you are telling. Jeez.
You know it took me a long time to be willing to talk about this openly. I was just out of college and just getting into a financial position where I could collect all those Smith & Wesson revolvers that I wanted as kid. It scared me to be investigated by law enforcement. I was not doing anything illegal and never thought that I was doing anything remotely close to the line. Then all the sudden I get home from being out on a job for a week and an ATF card is on my door step. I hope it never happens to you. I also hope that it if does you find that fellow firearms owners support you instead of throwing you under the bus and assume that you must be up to more than you are telling. Jeez.
Last edited:
brboyer
Member
Whatever dude, did not mean to upset you.
I just cannot fathom waiving my rights and voluntarily cooperating with something like this!
Any interaction I might ever have with ATF will be under a court order, arrest warrant, or other legal framework making my appearance/cooperation mandatory and will never be without competent legal council by my side.
We are each free to live our lives the way we choose.
-Out
Partially true, I do not have to fill out IRS Form 8300, the business does. Then it is to be filed within 15 days of the transaction. Form 8300 is not required to be generated to conduct the transaction, 4473 is. The seller can toss 8300 in the trash 5 years later. The 4473 is retained for 20 years.
The point is that I do not have to get permission before hand to drop 50k on a new truck. I don't have to stand around the showroom waiting for a driving record check to see if I am legal (worthy) to buy the truck. Buying a truck and driving around drunk is easier than getting a firearm to defend yourself. Having a few DUI's on your record will never prevent you from buying a truck. Hell, killing someone with the truck while driving drunk will not prevent you from buying a new truck.
Not a peep without a lawyer and a search warrant. No one iota of cooperation...not one. The ole " I ain't done nothing wrong so I will cooperate" line is exactly what the feds want We The People to do to make their life/job easier. The feds really hate We The People exercising our rights, using the very same legal system against them to maintain our rights. LE will lie, cheat and steal to get any one of us. Courts have given them the go ahead on the lying. Never ever give up your rights, not a single one of them. Make them prove to a judge that they are worthy of investigating you. The redress of wrongs committed by them is not easy, but you must walk that path to send the message that they will not be permitted to trample our rights.
You acquiesced because you had "nothing to fear" because you believed you did nothing wrong. The fact the you did nothing wrong should have strengthened your resolve to not cooperate.
You rolled over dude...another fed got his way and trampled your rights...with your consent.
Your screen name seems to be appropriate.
As I stated, I only provided information under the advice of an attorney. Maybe I did roll over, but I hired the attorney to protect me, and he did.I had to trust that he knew when to cooperate and when not to. Since nothing came of it, I'd say he did OK. If you think taking a hard line against your attorney's advice is a good idea, more power to you. Ok, I'm done. It was not my intent to hijack this thread, rather it was to relate an event that I thought was topical. I certainly didn't expect it to turn into a personal critique. Lesson learned.
Last edited:
brboyer
Member
General Tso
member
I really don't have a problem with it. Most people don't buy 2 guns in 5 days, but if you do, so what. I've bought 2 pistols in the same week with no agents kicking in my door. I would rather use our resources to fight things like the "sporting purpose" clause and other stuff in the 1968 GCA, and making sure we can still purchase hi-cap mags and "assault" rifles. Seriously, if a 23 year old girl walks in and buys 5 AK's, I don't have a problem with the ATF being made aware.
brboyer
Member
I'll take the high-road and not tell you what I think of this comment!
I bought 12 pistols in one day, never talked to the ATF either. I would not have if they'd show up in any case. The issue here is with a presumption of illegal activity! It's just wrong!
In my opinion, and no disrespect intended, you are just the type of gun owner the government likes! You're OK with any restriction that does not involve you personally, or is a just a 'minor' inconvenience, or one that impact just a few gun owners.
Even if we wanted to believe the rest of your story, this part is most likely nonsense because federal law prohibits the IRS from disclosing any tax return information under Title 26, Section 6103 of the US Code. There are a few very narrowly defined exceptions allowing disclosure, but another federal agency wanting to investigate some gun purchases is definitely not one of them.
Bubbles
Member
The notice hit the Federal Register today. The public comment period is open for the next 60 days, though it looks like the ATF wants to implement the new policy effective Jan 5.
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-31761.pdf
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-31761.pdf
- Status
