You can email FFLs now??

Status
Not open for further replies.

Zundfolge

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
10,757
Location
Wichita, KS
So I've set up this trade deal with a gentleman in South Carolina and when I asked him to send me his FFL he told me that he saw somewhere that you could email them now.

Well I figured he was mistaken so I had him mail it to me ... which he did.

Anyway, tonite he figured out where he heard about emailing FFLs.


from here: http://www.ordnanceoutsellers.com/index.htm


So what's the deal? Is this legal now? If so that's pretty freakin' cool!
 
The site I linked above claims "FFLS MAY NOW BE RECEIVED VIA FAX OR E-MAIL PER NEW ATF REGULATIONS!"

I've emailed them to ask about this "new ATF regulation" so I'll post any response I get here.


I just don't see the ATF ever doing anything to make the lives of gun owners even slightly easier.
 
We haven't heard anything of this from the BATF&E.

I have just spent the better part of an hour scouring atf.gov for anything that would point to this being a fact and I've come up empty.
 
I dunno, but I'm suspicious. ATF even advises NOT signing your original so as to be able to sign each copy in a non-black color that shows it's an original signature. Of course, the whole "problem" of forged FFLs is, IMO, a fake issue just to create another hurdle in gun trading.

TC
 
With EZ check, you can verify that an FFL is current and valid. It seems to me that a fax or Email copy is just as good as a mailed copy. After all, how do you know the signature is valid....you have nothing to compare it to. I put a lot more faith in EZ check (maintained by ATF) than a copy of what may or may not be a real license, signed by what may or may not be the licensee. Give me 30 minutes and I bet I can create a fake FFL, copy it and sign it in blue ink and you'd never suspect it is not real. But if you use EZ check, you'd know it was fake right away. The whole signed copy thing is pretty weak I think.

Frankly, if you are selling guns and shipping based entirely on a signed copy, I consider that irresponsible when EZ check is available.

I have also heard that ATF has changed the requirement to "fax and Email is OK as long as you verify with EZ check". I have also seen several gunbroker auctions stating this in the descriptions. I haven't been able to find the ATF law anywhere either so until then I'll continue to get a signed copy AND verify with EZ check.
 
No such regulation

There is no such new regulation. The requirement for a certified copy of the license in transfers between licensees is stated in the Gun Control Act. It order for there to be a change, the law would have to be ammended and the regulation change would have to be published in the Federal Register. I check the Federal Register at work every day looking for items that affect my employer. I also check for any new firearms related changes and have not seen anything changing the current requirement.
 
It is increasingly common in other fields to scan signed documents and email them as a secure PDF attachment. The Federal Courts accept document transmission this way now. I wonder if this will be the way of the future for FFLs.
 
BTW, you can verify an 01 FFL on EZ Check, but not an 03 C&R FFL. I keep several copies to send out to whom it may concern.....original is quite "safe". :p
 
There may or may not be a new regulation, but if there isn't there should be. I'd rather get a FFL number over the phone and verify it with the ATF on EZ check than rely solely on some piece of paper that may or may not be real. Even if it's real, how do I know the guys license is still valid and wasn't revoked last week?

My advice is get the number however you feel most comfortable, signed copy if you must, but no matter what use EZ check. BTW, the way I read the ATF rules, the requirement for having a signed FFL in hand applies to dealers shipping guns, not non-licensees. Nobody gets a FFL from a manufacturer when they send a gun back for repair do they? Manufacturers are just ordinary FFL's when it comes to recieving guns based on how I read the laws.

The whole point is to know you are shipping to someone with a valid FFL..what better way than checking with the ATF's database.
 
If the ATF didn't have its head up its rear, they would make it to where you could call the FFL with your FFL number, the sending FFL could type it into EZCk, and then print out a dated confirmation. When the JBTs show up to look at records, the dated confirmation along with corresponding shipping info would be the best thing available.
 
Here's my coorespondence with Ordnance Outsellers:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: email FFLs?
From: Zundfolge
Date: Mon, May 09, 2005 9:07 pm
To: [email protected]

On your site you claim that "FFLS MAY NOW BE RECEIVED VIA FAX OR E-MAIL PER NEW ATF REGULATIONS!".

What new regulation is this? I would like to be able to site this new
regulation when I try to convince my local FFL to let me email his
paperwork.

Thanks,
Zundfolge


-------- Reply --------

Zundfolge-

Have him call his ATF field agent.

If he doesn't want to do that, inform him that he's not the one 'taking a risk' by receiving paperwork via fax.

Thanks!

James
o2
 
If I give someone my FFL to email to another FFL it would have to be scanned in.

Photoshop could make it very simple for the facts on the license to be altered.

There are enough ignorant people out there, with FFLS, that I could see a bunch of them falling for the fake FFL and sending weapons to someone without my knowledge and in turn making things really bad for me.
 
GF, what's the difference between that and the same thing printed out? The only difference is the extra step of printing it out.

Basically, the only saving grace here is EZCk. Now that we have EZCk, why do we need anything more than a phone call or email with the FFL #?
 
If the ATF didn't have its head up its rear, they would make it to where you could call the FFL with your FFL number, the sending FFL could type it into EZCk, and then print out a dated confirmation. When the JBTs show up to look at records, the dated confirmation along with corresponding shipping info would be the best thing available.

You can't blame the BATF for that. The law (GCA 68) requires a certified copy with original signature for transfers between licensees. I do agree with the concept though. When the law was written, electronic communications were no where near the level they are at today.
 
You can't blame the BATF for that. The law (GCA 68) requires a certified copy with original signature for transfers between licensees. I do agree with the concept though. When the law was written, electronic communications were no where near the level they are at today.
Good point. I'm just as happy to blame the people in Congress. :)

Does anyone have the text to the GCA in a link?
 
A private citizen can send a firearm to a licensee with just the EZ check

All they need to do is "verify the license" using ezcheck and then ship ONLY to the address on the ezcheck site
 
No offense obiwan...and i happen to think you are correct...but it's really only going to be settled when someone cites an ATF regulation or officially issued ATF position/ruling.
 
No offense obiwan...and i happen to think you are correct...but it's really only going to be settled when someone cites an ATF regulation or officially issued ATF position/ruling.

He is correct. There is no legal requirement for an unlicensed individual to obtain a copy of an FFL in any instance. As to showing a regulation to that effect, it is hard to prove a negative. The only reference in either the law or the regulation that requires a shipper to have a copy of the recipient's FFL is when there is a transfer between licensees. See 27CFR 478.94.
 
As to showing a regulation to that effect, it is hard to prove a negative.

Not a regulation, but ATF's answer.

(B3) May an unlicensed person obtain a firearm from an out-of-state source if the person arranges to obtain the firearm through a licensed dealer in the purchaser's own state?


A person not licensed under the GCA and not prohibited from acquiring firearms may purchase a firearm from an out-of-state source and obtain the firearm if an arrangement is made with a licensed dealer in the purchaser's state of residence for the purchaser to obtain the firearm from the dealer. [18 U. S. C 922( a)( 3) and (5), 922( b)( 3), 27 CFR 178.29]


(B17) What recordkeeping procedures should be followed when two private individuals want to engage in a firearms transaction?

When a transaction takes place between private (unlicensed) persons who reside in the same State, the Gun Control Act (GCA) does not require any record keeping. As noted in FAQs B1 and B2, which are posted on this Web site in the "Firearms" section, a private person may sell a firearm to another private individual in his or her State of residence and, similarly, a private individual may buy a firearm from another private person who resides in the same State. It is not necessary for a Federal firearms licensee (FFL) to assist in the sale or transfer when the buyer and seller are "same-State" residents. Of course, the transferor/seller may not knowingly transfer a firearm to someone who falls within any of the categories of prohibited persons contained in the GCA. See 18 U.S. C. §§ 922(g) and (n). However, as stated above, there are no GCA-required records to be completed by either party to the transfer.

For information about any State or local regulations that may govern this type of transaction, it is advisable to contact State Police units or the office of your State Attorney General.

Please note that if a private person wants to obtain a gun from a private person who resides in another State, the gun will have to be shipped to an FFL in the buyer's State. The FFL will be responsible for record keeping. See FAQ B3 (Firearms).

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/faq2.htm#b1
 
Hkmp5sd-

I'm not sure that's the applicable answer.

Clearly a non-FFL can buy a gun from out of state as long as he uses a FFL in his state to recieve, transfer and document.

Clearly a non-FFL can ship a gun to an FFL as long as he uses a common carrier and not the post office. The common carriers willing to do this, like FedEx, require it to be overnight.

Also, it is fairly clear that a FFL is generally required to have a "certified" copy of the license for another FFL he is shipping to. Although the FAQ below kinda clouds that requirement.

The question is whether a non-FFL, who all know can legally ship to a FFL, is also required to have a FFL copy...or can he simply use EZ check.

My take is that as a non-licensee I am allowed to ship to a licensee, but how I verify that he is a licensee is not regulated. I am most comfortable with EZ check and a partial license # by phone, fax, Email or pony express is all I need from a FFL.


(B9) May a nonlicensee ship a firearm by carrier?

A nonlicensee may ship a firearm by 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) and 922( e), 27 CFR 178.31]


(F8) In transactions between licensees, how is the seller assured that a purchaser of a firearm is a licensed dealer?

Verification must be established by the transferee furnishing to the transferor a certified copy of the transferee's license and by any other means the transferor deems necessary. [27 CFR 178.94]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top