Firearms Records to ATF?

[Speedo66]

This article in the NY Times about a firearm recently involved in a crime states that the dealer who originally sold it sent all his records to ATF where they were able to ID the purchaser.

Seems like a great way to track owners.

Wait, aren't they not supposed to do this?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/30/nyregion/30gun.html?ref=nyregion

 

[oneounceload]

When I had a FFL years ago you were required to keep all of your records until the time came when you were no longer a FFL; then you sent them to the BATF. Supposedly, they went into storage somewhere in that vacuous system known as the federal gov't

 

[DMK]

Wait, aren't they not supposed to do this?

They aren't allowed to keep a database of firearms owners. However, they are allowed to keep the 4473 forms and the dealer bound books. That's different (according to the ATF).

 

[TexasRifleman]

Wait, aren't they not supposed to do this?

As I understand it they are not supposed to enter them in a database, but they can search them manually.

Not sure I believe they are abiding by that, but I think that's what the law is.

 

[dogtown tom]

Nowhere did that article say the records were Form 4473's. The main reason being 4473's weren't around in 1949. Remember, you could buy a gun mail order and have it shipped to your door until the GCA of 1968 put an end to that.

All that happened was ATF did exactly what we want them to do. They took the serial number of the gun, called S&W, found out where it had been shipped and started their investigation there. It dead ended until someone found the police report of a lost gun.

Nowhere does it mention anything about gun registration by ATF, only their investigative work.

Put the tin foil back in the pantry.

 

[DMK]

Nowhere did that article say the records were Form 4473's. The main reason being 4473's weren't around in 1949. Remember, you could buy a gun mail order and have it shipped to your door until the GCA of 1968 put an end to that.

If the gun went through a dealer, it was still recorded in their bound book (which apparently the ATF now has).

 

[dogtown tom]

DMK Quote:
If the gun went through a dealer, it was still recorded in their bound book (which apparently the ATF now has).

The article is poorly researched (as usual). It implies that ATF found the records as supplied by the gunshop- but when was the last time you heard of a gunshop keeping police reports of a gun that was lost twenty odd years later? It doesn't happen.

The was no requirement for a bound book as this firearm purchase was nineteen years before the GCA '68. FFL's and bound books were not required until 1968.

 

[pharmer]

"As I understand it they are not supposed to enter them in a database, but they can search them manually.

Not sure I believe they are abiding by that, but I think that's what the law is."

When I surrendered my FFL in 1995, I sent the bound book and all 4473's to the ATF Falling Waters VA facility. They made no secret that they were computerizing the records. The agent I spoke to said they had 40 million at that time. When asked about the accuracy he stated that even if people move or sell the guns the info is very "useful." Joe

 

[jarhead]

I owned a shop a few years ago and when I closed it up I shipped all of my 4473’s to ATF… a couple of years later, the ATF called me to see if I still had copies of my log books because they were investigating a case for the IRS.

I told the agent that I had properly shipped all of my records to them and he said that they are all stored in a warehouse and he said if his office “worked around the clock for 2 years, we’d still never find them” and it was much easier to see if I still had copies of my records (I did and sent them over to his office).

Things may have changed in the last couple of years, but I would imagine the backlog and difficulty of trying to read old handwritten firearm logs would be a tedious lengthy process for the ATF… unless they had “motivation” from higher up.