Ship firearm for repair to 'smith.

[obm]

The Clerks Handbook specified that it should be 'in-operable'.

the fedex clerk in two different cities told me i needed to remove the firing pin. i didn't believe them and i called the fedex 800 number and they told me the same thing. that's why i use UPS. they don't require this extra step.

 

[saltydog452]

The Supv informed the Clerk that customers and potential customers did not have access to in-company literature. He copied the page off the Fed Ex web site and gave her a copy for future reference.

I dunno. Anyhow its off to Rogers Precision.

salty.

 

[EOD Guy]

Interestingly enough, I did have to send a Kel-Tec back to the factory for a check up. They, the Kel-Tec factory told me to label it as machine parts, even though and entire gun was sent in, complete, in the box, NOT taken apart.

THEY advised me to break the rules.....

You were shipping to an FFL, so there was no legal requirement to inform the carrier you were shipping a firearm. It would not be legal to mail the handgun, however.

 

[deadin]

You were shipping to an FFL, so there was no legal requirement to inform the carrier you were shipping a firearm.

This is something that has been beat around the bush quite a bit on the gun boards and I am still somewhat confused.

I agree that 478.31 appears to say that a non-licensee does not need to notify if shipping to a licensee.
OK. However, in the FAQ section of the BATFE website (B7) and (B8) is the following:
(B7 USPS) restricts mailing to a non-licensee to someone in the mailers own State and limits mailing to long guns only. Limits handguns to common carrier only for non-licensees. (No mention of notification)
(B8 Common Carrier) basically says the same thing, plus it clearly states that Federal Law requires the carrier be notified.

????? Has anyone ever gotten a clarification, in writing, from the BATFE on this apparent discrepancy? I understand that 478.31 is the regulation, as written. I also understand that the FAQ’s are based on the “findings” which is the way they have chosen to enforce the regulations.

Bottom line, to me, is that I can mail (USPS) a longgun to a non-licensee within my own State without notification. Common carrier requires notification for any firearm shipment, anywhere.
I would imagine that if one were busted on the “notification” bit, they would stand a good chance of beating it in court because of the discrepancy, but also would have to be willing to go to court.

§ 478.31 Delivery by common or contract
carrier.
(a) No person shall knowingly deliver or
cause to be delivered to any common or
contract carrier for transportation or shipment
in interstate or foreign commerce to
any person other than a licensed importer,
licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or
licensed collector, any package or other
container in which there is any firearm or
ammunition without written notice to the
carrier that such firearm or ammunition is
being transported or shipped:


(B7) May a nonlicensee ship a firearm
through the U.S. Postal Service?
A nonlicensee may not transfer a
firearm to a nonlicensed resident of
another State. A nonlicensee may
mail a shotgun or rifle to a resident of
his or her own State or to a licensee
in any State. The Postal Service recommends
that long guns be sent by
registered mail and that no marking of
any kind which would indicate the
nature of the contents be placed on
the outside of any parcel containing
firearms. Handguns are not mailable.
A common or contract carrier must be
used to ship a handgun.
[18 U.S.C. 1715, 922(a)(3), 922(a)(5) and
922 (a)(2)(A)]



(B8) May a nonlicensee ship a firearm
by common or contract carrier?
A nonlicensee may ship a firearm
by a common or contract carrier to a
resident of his or her own State or to
a licensee in any State. A common or
contract carrier must be used to ship
a handgun. In addition, Federal law
requires that the carrier be notified
that the shipment contains a firearm
and prohibits common or contract
carriers from requiring or causing any
label to be placed on any package
indicating that it contains a firearm.
[18 U.S.C. 922(a)(2)(A), 922(a) (3),
922(a)(5) and 922(e), 27 CFR 478.31 and
478.30]

 

[saltydog452]

I didn't mean to open a large can of worms when I originally posted the question. Mostly, I was trying to 'do the right thing' but flat didn't know exactly what that was.

There are several folks here in THR, FFL and non-FFL, who have bought and sold firearms. I was looking for their input.

Apparently the folks who wrote the Fed Ex Handbook and placed the instructions for the receiving clerk, and telephone 'help' line, weren't on the same page as the folks who wrote the 'Information For Shippers' on the Fed Ex Web page.

I suspect that it might have been intentional. It does create lots of wiggle room.

But, as the Supv informed the clerk here in Dallas, 'the customers and potential customers do not have access to that (meaning the Handbook)'.

He copied the page off the Fed Ex Web page that delt with firearm shipments, gave her a copy, and instructed the lady to use published guidelines rather than the Handbook (which I figure has limited, internal distribution).

Anyhow, no harm done and it should be at Rogers Precision in a couple of hours.

I do wish these carriers would get their collective tales straight. As I mentioned, it does create lots of wiggle room. And an equal amt of room for a sender to make a mistake.

salty.

Edited to add:

There was a bit of humor involved in this. I red'd several stares as well as blank looks from a few other customers. It seems that they were a bit confused to see a guy at the service counter fiddling around with a sidearm.

sd.

 

[EOD Guy]

???? Has anyone ever gotten a clarification, in writing, from the BATFE on this apparent discrepancy? I understand that 478.31 is the regulation, as written. I also understand that the FAQ’s are based on the “findings” which is the way they have chosen to enforce the regulations.

Yes, I have. The letter I received from BATF Hq stated that notification was required only if shipping to a nonlicensee.

 

[deadin]

Yes, I have.

.

That's good news. Now if we could just get them to post it on the BATFE website so all of these "opinons" on what is legal and what isn't could be settled. (Or at least rewrite FAQ B8.)

 

[EOD Guy]

That's good news. Now if we could just get them to post it on the BATFE website so all of these "opinons" on what is legal and what isn't could be settled. (Or at least rewrite FAQ B8.)

Here is a link to the reply letter I received.

http://fyad.org/5gee