NRA Board member loses his Gun Store

Status
Not open for further replies.
"There should be no more burdensome Federal regulation of those stores than there are for book stores or newspaper stands."

But there are. It's a fact of life and all the wailing about what should be won't change it and get him off the hook. He screwed up. All the gnashing of teeth about the history of the evil BATFE won't help him. It's reality check time. And the dealer in question was unable to document the whereabouts of quite a few guns after multiple warnings. I have trouble getting very worked up about it, after all there are thousands of dealers who manage to keep their books straight.

As far as changing the system goes, I'm working on my NRA ballot now. How about you?

John
Member www.vcdl.org
 
But notice that the carrying of arms, pre-Civil War, was not considered the problem, but rather the carrying of concealed arms. This was a time when honest people went about openly armed, while concealing an arm was an indication of criminal intent. It was the act of concealment that was prohibited in law, not the carrying.
 
But notice that the carrying of arms, pre-Civil War, was not considered the problem, but rather the carrying of concealed arms. This was a time when honest people went about openly armed, while concealing an arm was an indication of criminal intent. It was the act of concealment that was prohibited in law, not the carrying.
Click to expand...

So you do agree with these laws about firearms, even though some people could see concealment laws as 'infringing' (infringeing?) about how/where you can keep/bear arms?

-Colin
 
Abrams acknowledged in court papers that his 2,000-square-foot store on Harford Road might have had problems in the past. His six employees have had to fill out as many as nine forms for a single customer who wants to buy more than one handgun at a time, Abrams said yesterday. His store sells about 3,000 firearms a year.

I'm sorry to be suspicious but nine handguns at a time is a little funky to me. I've seen studies that indicate that a good proportion of the straw man sales comes from a small percentage of gun stores.
 
GEM, I'm not sure they meant 9 guns at a time. It all depends on how you count the paperwork. I thought the number seemed high when I read it too, but:

The 4473 is one form. "Multiple Sale of Handguns" paperwork could be another form, but it is filled out in triplicate, so we could be up to 4 "forms" right there, all for two handguns purchased at the same time.

If you got really creative, logging the guns out in a bound book could be considered "completing a form." Since there are at least 2 guns being sold, you could call it 2 more forms. Now we are up to 6. that's a stretch, I admit, but it is possible they counted like this.

I only have to fill out forms required by the Feds, as Texas doesn't have any special requirements. I don't know, but I bet Maryland probably has some state level paperwork that also needs to be filled out. If any of those are in duplicate or triplicate you could get up to 9 forms in a hurry, and still only be selling two guns at a time.
 
but I bet Maryland probably has some state level paperwork that also needs to be filled out
Click to expand...


Correct, and many gun shops will have you sign a paper saying that "you plan to do no harm or commit no crimes with the firearm you are purchasing" or some crap like that.
 
So you do agree with these laws about firearms, even though some people could see concealment laws as 'infringing' (infringeing?) about how/where you can keep/bear arms?
Click to expand...
The law you mention was not Federal anyway, so has little to do with the topic at hand. I have asserted that the ATF, an agency of the US government, lacks the authority to enforce laws designed to prevent or reduce crime. I have also asserted that they lack the authority to enforce laws regulating firearms ownership or sale, unless the sale is by a business for the purpose of profit and the sale was across State lines. Then, they may regulate so as to make said transaction LESS BURDENSOME. If the purpose is safety, crime prevention or reduction, it is null and void.

Laws requiring open carry, such as the one you referenced, would fit into the category of crime prevention or reduction, making it strictly in the purview of the States. States and cities, I would argue, have the authority (assuming it's consistent with a State's Constitution) to require open carry, as this does not actually infringe on the unlimited right to carry any arm, any time, any place. It only states that you cannot do so in a secretive way, which, at the time of that piece of legislation, was associated with criminality. Not the carrying of the guns, but the concealment of them from common view.
 
A law's a law - federal, state, or city. I live in a city, a state and a country, thus I agree to abide by them. If I do not like them, I go by the proper means of changing them (voting, etc) or move.

Are you suggesting that you can ignore/break any law that you feel doesn't fit into an appropriate certain category of city, state or federal jurisdiction?

Ever read Du Contrat Social by Rousseau?

-Colin
 
A law's a law - federal, state, or city. I live in a city, a state and a country, thus I agree to abide by them. If I do not like them, I go by the proper means of changing them (voting, etc) or move.

Are you suggesting that you can ignore/break any law that you feel doesn't fit into an appropriate certain category of city, state or federal jurisdiction?

Ever read Du Contrat Social by Rousseau?

-Colin
Click to expand...
I am suggesting that there comes a point where it is one's solemn duty to ignore and violate the law. It was the solemn duty of every German to ignore the law against hiding Jews, for example.

Yes, I have read Rousseau. I do not like the man, or his philosophy. Nor, more importantly, do I agree with him. I much prefer Edmund Burke.
 
A question....

What happens if a gun dealer receives firearms, but neither puts them in inventory or records them in the bound book? The impression I am receiving is that if a gun dealer makes no record of receiving firearms, and they aren't on physical display at the store, then for all intents and purposes they don't exist in the shop owner's inventory nor in his possession. Is this incorrect thinking?

Also, I'm wondering what one is supposed to do if there is an unjust/immoral/bad law in existance and regardless of what one does to change it, nothing changes, rather things increasingly become worse as more laws build upon that law? If one is suppose to petition the law makers to change it, yet the words fall upon apparently deaf ears, is one jsut supposed to accept the law(s) then? Or is it better to resist wherever, however and whenever possible?
 
+9.8, Hawkeye and Sinister and others

I think I speak for the majority when I say the ATf needs to be armbarred, and/or triangled.
 
Whether or not any of you agree with the NRA member losing his shop because of the law, keep in mind that he voluntarily agreed to play by the legalities/rules of the federal government when he applied for his FFL. He didn't play right and so he got kicked out of the game.

Funny, I can't recall ever seeing anything in the Constitution about gun stores.

While folks may think the firearms laws are not legal, the interpretations of those laws by the government have held up in the courts time and time again.

Funny thing, while folks like to broadcast the battle cry of the 2nd Amendment about the right to keep and bear arms not being infringed, they don't complain much about the fact that guns are not given away free by the government to those who want them. If a person has to purchase a gun, then his rights to keep and bear arms is being infringed by financial constraints. Said folks also to gripe too much about the fact that kids are not allowed to purchase firearms and take them to school or other places. The 2nd Amendment does not stipulate for when it is supposed to go into effect and obviously if kids can't take guns to school, their rights are being further infringed.

For argument's sake, keep in mind that the Revolutionary War was NOT faught solely by adult males,

For those of you who denote the parallels of when the Declaration of Independence was written and the situation today and are advocates of ignoring laws and/or are considering a Declaration of Independence from our federal government, then you will be not following the Constitution you hold so dear and committing treason (Art. 3 Sec. 3).

Of course, when those of you decide to treat the US Gov. as the colonists did the King of Great Britain, at the point in time you separate, then the Constitution of the United States of America no longer applies to you in regard to your so-called rights.

Abrams acknowledged in court papers that his 2,000-square-foot store on Harford Road might have had problems in the past. His six employees have had to fill out as many as nine forms for a single customer who wants to buy more than one handgun at a time, Abrams said yesterday. His store sells about 3,000 firearms a year.
Click to expand...

Let's see, assuming a 40 hour work week for 52 weeks a year gives you 2080 hours of business time. The number of hours may be higher, but erring on the side of caution, I will use the lower number of 2080 hours. That means they are selling at an average pace of 1.5 guns per hour. That is not a blistering pace.
 
Let's see, assuming a 40 hour work week for 52 weeks a year gives you 2080 hours of business time. The number of hours may be higher, but erring on the side of caution, I will use the lower number of 2080 hours. That means they are selling at an average pace of 1.5 guns per hour. That is not a blistering pace.
__________________
Click to expand...

I don't really disagree with you, but I'm in the mood to nitpick :)neener: )...

Your formula doesn't include the amount of time it takes a large dealer like Abrams to pack, transport and unpack his inventory to travel to and from all of the gunshows that he attends, which is most shows in the Baltimore area.

So deduct the hours for all of that time and the pace increaces. Add a lot more disorganization from trying to conduct business at a Maryland gun show and the pace becomes a bit more hectic.

Not that I'm defending the guy, nor do I think it's beyond reason to be able to conduct business properly while selling at shows......it seems about a million other vendors can pull it off every year with minimal problems....
 
Funny, I can't recall ever seeing anything in the Constitution about gun stores.
Click to expand...
EXACTLY!! So, where does their authority to regulate the internal operations and record keeping of local gun shops come from? You still need to answer this question?
 
Last edited:
Yesterday I stopped by my local gun store, they have been in business since 1947, I asked them about a shop losing 400+ guns off their books in a three year period.

The owner told me its typical to be unable to account for 1 or 2 guns per year, mainly because of errors recording serial numbers.

They sell about 6000 guns per year.

He said the guy either was selling illegally under the table and too dumb to not enter the guns in the bound book to start with, or were being robbed blind 400+ guns = $200,000 lost.
 
An interesting critique by the Department of Justice of ATF inspections of FFL inventories. Here is an excerpt from the DOJ Executive Digest:

The ATF Does Not Regularly Conduct Compliance Inspections on Active FFLs, Including Large-Scale Retailers

We found that most FFLs are inspected infrequently or not at all. According to the former ATF Director, the agency's goal is to inspect each FFL at least once every three years to ensure that they are complying with federal firearms laws. However, due in part to resource shortfalls, the ATF is currently unable to achieve that goal. ATF workload data show that the ATF conducted 4,581 FFL compliance inspections in FY 2002, or about 4.5 percent of the approximately 104,000 FFLs nationwide. At that rate, it would take the ATF more than 22 years to inspect all FFLs.

http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/reports/ATF/e0405/exec.htm

Link to the complete DOJ report:

http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/reports/ATF/e0405/index.htm
 
What happens if a gun dealer receives firearms, but neither puts them in inventory or records them in the bound book? The impression I am receiving is that if a gun dealer makes no record of receiving firearms, and they aren't on physical display at the store, then for all intents and purposes they don't exist in the shop owner's inventory nor in his possession. Is this incorrect thinking?
Click to expand...

This would work, until a trace was run on a gun. If the dealer sells a gun "off the books" it was still on the books at some point. When the serial number gets stamped at the factory, they enter it into a bound book. When they ship it to a distributor, it gets logged out of the bound book at the factory and logged into the distributor.

At some point it gets to the dealer. It was logged out of somewhere to get to the dealer, whether the dealer logged it in or not.

So if a Glock is found at a crime scene, they call Glock and read off the serial number. Glock then says "we shipped that gun to RSR wholesalers on June 9th, 1998." So they call RSR, who says, "Yeah, that sat in our inventory for a couple months, and then we shipped it to John's Gun Shop in Podunk, TX."

Now they go visit John and check his 4473s. They find that the gun was sold the Citizen A, and they have citizen A's address. They ask Citizen A what he did with it, and he says "Oh, I traded it in for a deer rifle at Bubba's Gun Shop."

Now they go visit Bubba. Bubba doesn't have any record of the Glock on his books. He assumed that since he got it from Citizen A that no one would ever know he had received it, so he kept it off the books and sold it to a friend of his. Unfortunately, there is a 4473 for the deer rifle Citizen A walked out with when he traded the Glock, so Citizen A's story is holding up.

Is there enough evidence to arrest Bubba? Probably not, but perhaps. Would this ever happen if the gun wasn't used in a crime? Probably not. Is it worth it for a dealer to risk keeping guns off the books and possibly spending time in jail? Not to me, perhaps to some other dealers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

G
  • Locked
update,Gun shop lost license, but can sell inventory
Replies
23
Views
2K
gunsmith
G
L
  • Locked
Sanford Abrams making Headlines once again
Replies
0
Views
577
Lambo
L
H
  • Locked
MD: Records show only half of state's gun dealers checked in three years
Replies
4
Views
531
Spot77
S
P
  • Locked
ATF continues to shut down California gun stores
Replies
1
Views
403
Car Knocker
C
L
  • Locked
Gun dealer tied to fatal shooting (MD)
Replies
14
Views
1K
chipperi
C
Back
Top