PDA

View Full Version : Visit from government agent a week after handgun purchase?


Stewbacca
04-28-2012, 11:21 AM
Hey all,
New here and had a question. One of my friends told me that the other day he had a visit from a government agent (he's not sure which one, I'm guessing ATF) regarding his recent purchase of a glock. He said the agent was asking why he made the purchase, who lived in the house with him and where he kept the firearm. The pistol was a completely legal purchase and he waited his 10 days to take it home. Brought the gun home Friday and was paid a visit on Wednesday.

Is this SOP after a purchase? Is it legal? I know the shop he made the purchase at just had ATF there doing an audit or something. Should I expect the same visit after I bring home my new pistol on the 30th?

Thanks
Stewbacca

OCArmory
04-28-2012, 11:23 AM
Not something that normally happens. Does a convicted felon of someone of that nature live at the same address?

Stewbacca
04-28-2012, 11:26 AM
No... He does live in Richmond though

SilverTauron
04-28-2012, 11:30 AM
Was the weapon in question used?

If so, it is not uncommon for the ATF to trace a firearm though owners records until they get to the last man in the chain.

SouperMan
04-28-2012, 11:31 AM
Seems kind of odd. Was this your friend's first gun purchase?

Stewbacca
04-28-2012, 11:33 AM
No... It was purchased brand new. He did mention that other family members have had trouble with the law in the past. Could they have been checking if those people could access the gun?

dustoff31
04-28-2012, 11:37 AM
No... It was purchased brand new. He did mention that other family members have had trouble with the law in the past. Could they have been checking if those people could access the gun?

That's quite possible. Especially if those family members are prohibited and use/used the same address. CA has stepped that sort of thing up.

GOEX FFF
04-28-2012, 11:38 AM
No... It was purchased brand new. He did mention that other family members have had trouble with the law in the past. Could they have been checking if those people could access the gun?

Ah now the light shines more brightly.

Yes, it's possible if one of his family members is a prohibited person, they might be checking up to see if they live with your buddy or not and could have access to the pistol.

ETA: ^^ dustoff31's post was quick to the draw

Stewbacca
04-28-2012, 11:42 AM
That does make sense now. I didn't even think about the prohibited family aspect. Thanks guys. And it was his first purchase.

Oceanbob
04-28-2012, 11:46 AM
Too bad your friend didn't ask for ID. (Identification).

I assume he can read?

He might be fibbing with you.

Ripon83
04-28-2012, 11:46 AM
Sounds more like a Parole Officer or state DOJ then feds....less its a federal criminal history some where in the household.

Stewbacca
04-28-2012, 11:52 AM
He said the guy showed ID but he was so nervous he didn't catch what agency. I referred him to this forum too because I have already learned soo much in the few days I've been lurking and gathering info during my 10day wait.

alfred1222
04-28-2012, 12:18 PM
No... It was purchased brand new. He did mention that other family members have had trouble with the law in the past. Could they have been checking if those people could access the gun?

i think you have your own answer...

SilverTauron
04-28-2012, 12:22 PM
Im curious how a Parole Officer would know a relative of one of their subjects bought a firearm.Given the nature of the case it makes sense the ATF would investigate the matter as a possible "straw purchase" situation, being that one way crooks get around the ineffective Brady System is to have relatives and pals buy arms for them.

There is no way to determine how at this point, but I am curious how the ATF was in a position to match the name of the buyer to a relative who's a prohibited person . The 4473 has the name of a buyer, but without detailed comparison to a list of prohibited people there is no way the authorities could establish relation. Assuming the friend has a clear record themselves-which they would to buy the piece to begin with-this means, at some speculative deduction, that the ATF is possibly pulling 4473s from an FFL for en-masse processing.To what end, we will never know here. But there is room for the possibility that the Feds are doing something involving pulling entire stacks of 4473s for comparison to a list. Perhaps tinfoil hat territory , perhaps not. Either way I doubt there will be proven confirmation on this train of thinking.

GOEX FFF
04-28-2012, 12:32 PM
Im curious how a Parole Officer would know a relative of one of their subjects bought a firearm.Given the nature of the case it makes sense the ATF would investigate the matter as a possible "straw purchase" situation, being that one way crooks get around the ineffective Brady System is to have relatives and pals buy arms for them.

There is no way to determine how at this point, but I am curious how the ATF was in a position to match the name of the buyer to a relative who's a prohibited person . The 4473 has the name of a buyer, but without detailed comparison to a list of prohibited people there is no way the authorities could establish relation. Assuming the friend has a clear record themselves-which they would to buy the piece to begin with-this means, at some speculative deduction, that the ATF is possibly pulling 4473s from an FFL for en-masse processing.To what end, we will never know here. But there is room for the possibility that the Feds are doing something involving pulling entire stacks of 4473s for comparison to a list. Perhaps tinfoil hat territory , perhaps not. Either way I doubt there will be proven confirmation on this train of thinking.

I presume just by looking at the last name and city of the legal person person buying on the 4473 and compare that to any prohibited person with the same last name living in the same or nearby city.
I assume when a BGC is run on an individuals last name, the data base shows all prohibited persons with the same last name as well. If the city also matches up with someone with that last name who is prohibited a red flag goes up.

dustoff31
04-28-2012, 12:40 PM
There is no way to determine how at this point, but I am curious how the ATF was in a position to match the name of the buyer to a relative who's a prohibited person . The 4473 has the name of a buyer, but without detailed comparison to a list of prohibited people there is no way the authorities could establish relation. Assuming the friend has a clear record themselves-which they would to buy the piece to begin with-this means, at some speculative deduction, that the ATF is possibly pulling 4473s from an FFL for en-masse processing.To what end, we will never know here. But there is room for the possibility that the Feds are doing something involving pulling entire stacks of 4473s for comparison to a list. Perhaps tinfoil hat territory , perhaps not. Either way I doubt there will be proven confirmation on this train of thinking.

Im thinking the agent was CA DOJ rather than ATF. The link below is some info on CAs Armed Prohibited Person System. They can compile a lot of information. It matches up info from five different computer systems. Perhaps as I mentioned, a prohibited family member used the same address, or names are similar, etc.

http://www.delegata.com/our_solutions/downloads/collateral/20_DOJ%20APPS%20Project%20Profile.pdf

dantodd
04-28-2012, 12:48 PM
My GUESS is that it was a hit on the address either against the address of prohibited persons. Last name could be meaningless in the ceof boyfriend/girlfriend situations.

SilverTauron
04-28-2012, 12:55 PM
I presume just by looking at the last name and city of the legal person person buying on the 4473 and compare that to any prohibited person with the same last name living in the same or nearby city.
I assume when a BGC is run on an individuals last name, the data base shows all prohibited persons with the same last name as well. If the city also matches up with someone with that last name who is prohibited a red flag goes up.

Here's the rub.

Had the Background Check come up with a possible match on the buyer, our Glock owner would have been hit with a "Delay" from NICS. Same from a city or state-mandated background check.

Its unfortunate that the buyer's family members are crooks, but the authorities would have no way of knowing that based off the 4473 alone. That document contains information of the buyer, not his siblings. O.J. Simpson's law abiding sister can buy a gun, and there's no connection to the two on the 4473.

UNLESS someone pulls the document and checks it against a master list of prohibited persons. We now come to the problem of why the Feds would be doing this to begin with, as we have established above that the buyer isn't a crook. If he was, he'd be denied or delayed at Point of Sale.

This brings us to the third problem;if the Feds are pulling 4473s for comparison against a master list, then they must be doing it on a group scale. The stated intent of the 4473 is to enable Law Enforcement to trace a specific firearm in the event its recovered at a crime scene.Without a crime scene , there's no reason for the authorities to intentionally select one specific 4473 run on a law abiding citizen unless that same person committed a crime or is a "person of interest"...in which case they'd be flagged for a delay by NICS, at minimum.

I realize this is speculation, but in evaluation this looks like a case where the Feds are searching an FFL's entire book of 4473s and trying to match a the buyers on the documents to some sort of prohibited list.

Unless some relevant info is missing on the OP's account, that's the conclusion I draw. It could also be a case of the California DOJ poking around.

Stewbacca
04-28-2012, 12:57 PM
I guess my question really boils down to if they can do this or not. If the were checking for a "straw purchase" situation shouldn't they just have the prohibited persons parole officer check in with them not the person who legally obtained the firearm? I hope the do come visit me and ask the same questions cause I'm sure they won't like my answers and I definately won't let them in the house. Why did I purchase it? "because it's my right" where is it kept? "I'm sorry, that's confidential I don't tell people I don't know where I keep my valuables." who lives here? That private and personal. Or would my responses give me issues later?

PolishMike
04-28-2012, 12:59 PM
I would put money on your friend being full of ****.

Stewbacca
04-28-2012, 1:03 PM
Here's the rub.

Had the Background Check come up with a possible match on the buyer, our Glock owner would have been hit with a "Delay" from NICS. Same from a city or state-mandated background check.

Its unfortunate that the buyer's family members are crooks, but the authorities would have no way of knowing that based off the 4473 alone. That document contains information of the buyer, not his siblings. O.J. Simpson's law abiding sister can buy a gun, and there's no connection to the two on the 4473.

UNLESS someone pulls the document and checks it against a master list of prohibited persons. We now come to the problem of why the Feds would be doing this to begin with, as we have established above that the buyer isn't a crook. If he was, he'd be denied or delayed at Point of Sale.

This brings us to the third problem;if the Feds are pulling 4473s for comparison against a master list, then they must be doing it on a group scale. The stated intent of the 4473 is to enable Law Enforcement to trace a specific firearm in the event its recovered at a crime scene.Without a crime scene , there's no reason for the authorities to intentionally select one specific 4473 run on a law abiding citizen unless that same person committed a crime or is a "person of interest"...in which case they'd be flagged for a delay by NICS, at minimum.

I realize this is speculation, but in evaluation this looks like a case where the Feds are searching an FFL's entire book of 4473s and trying to match a the buyers on the documents to some sort of prohibited list.

Unless some relevant info is missing on the OP's account, that's the conclusion I draw. It could also be a case of the California DOJ poking around.

That's part of it... If there was a delay wouldn't the firearm still be at the ffl and the buyer wouldn't have been allowed to take it home? Why the visit less than a week after the waiting period? And the ffl where it was purchased actually has customers wait 11 days just to be safe

Munk
04-28-2012, 1:13 PM
I've worked with a P.I. doing locates on some pretty shady people. criminal family members are known for using a not-so-criminal family member's address for legal forms and stuff (didn't keep me from finding them though). It's likely that the guy's criminal family member did this, so they were following up to see if he was getting access to a firearm for him.

It could also be entirely unrelated to the guy or his family, and be purely a function of the audit that was performed on the gunshop. If they had done their paperwork incorrectly, they may have just followed the DROS on the paperwork to confirm where the gun wound up. This seems like it would be most likely if other popular firearms had gone missing from the store.

dustoff31
04-28-2012, 1:16 PM
Why the visit less than a week after the waiting period? And the ffl where it was purchased actually has customers wait 11 days just to be safe

Most likely because the buyer wasn't a prohibited person. Nor was he suspected of being a straw buyer.

The DROS from the sale went into APPS, which matched something, name, address, whatever, to a prohibited person, and a CA DOJ agent appears to check it out. ATF, NICS, or 4473's probably never even entered the picture.

Glock22Fan
04-28-2012, 1:45 PM
Maybe I'm paranoid, and I know that when you aren't expecting this sort of visit, it can be hard to not get flustered.

But, I would hope that I would limit my conversation to "Who are you?", "Why are you here?" (and note the response), "No, you cannot enter the house," and maybe "Yes, I bought the gun for myself and I still have it."

Beyond that, you have a slippery slope. Safest would be "I will consider whether to answer your questions or not and possibly agree to meet you again, probably at my attorney's office, to discuss this further."

ScottB
04-28-2012, 2:01 PM
Most LEOs and fedral agents I have dealt with over the years have been pretty quick to offer a business card. If they don't offer, ask for one. If they don't have one, its a red flag for me. At least get the name, agency and badge number (no badge, slam the door and call the police)

grnt
04-28-2012, 2:13 PM
Operation fast and furious California style??????????????

ACfixer
04-28-2012, 3:15 PM
Really, your friend doesn't know which agency but offered this agent info??? Sorry, I call BS. Any agent identifies him/herself and the agency clearly upon contact. THAT is SOP. Either you aren't getting the whole story, or we aren't.

Oceanbob
04-28-2012, 3:37 PM
Most LEOs and fedral agents I have dealt with over the years have been pretty quick to offer a business card. If they don't offer, ask for one. If they don't have one, its a red flag for me. At least get the name, agency and badge number (no badge, slam the door and call the police)

This^^^^

Another idea is to have him call the FFL and ask if anyone's been in contact about him.

I think this is FUD personally.

luckystrike
04-28-2012, 3:39 PM
Yes, standard op procedure after buying ANY firearm in California.

SJgunguy24
04-28-2012, 3:43 PM
Where was the gun purchased? The only reason I've heard of any LEO's visiting people who just bought guns are from PPT's involving multible handguns.

Stewbacca
04-28-2012, 4:56 PM
i have a feeling I wasnt given the whole story. I was more curious to know if I would wind up getting a visit myself. From my understanding he purchased it at Bullseye in San Rafael.

AJAX22
04-28-2012, 5:06 PM
One possibility is that his name is A known alias of one of his shady family members who has 'borrowed' his identity in the past

It may not have flagged in the dros system, but if the family member was the subject of an active investigation it could have caused additional scrutiny from whoever was investigating

I agree with some of the other posters regarding the odd behavior of the officer/agent.... If he is legit, he should have identified himself better

Librarian
04-28-2012, 7:05 PM
A note: the information which may have initiated action is almost certainly the DROS, which suggests a state or local agent rather than a Federal.

4473 data is not reported electronically.

HellnBack
04-28-2012, 7:14 PM
Yes, standard op procedure after buying ANY firearm in California.


Is it SOP but done randomly? or just for those who had a
"Red flag"?

Stonewalker
04-28-2012, 8:18 PM
Maybe I'm paranoid, and I know that when you aren't expecting this sort of visit, it can be hard to not get flustered.

But, I would hope that I would limit my conversation to "Who are you?", "Why are you here?" (and note the response), "No, you cannot enter the house," and maybe "Yes, I bought the gun for myself and I still have it."

Beyond that, you have a slippery slope. Safest would be "I will consider whether to answer your questions or not and possibly agree to meet you again, probably at my attorney's office, to discuss this further."

Exactly this and nothing else. Any such agent has no legitimate business investigating a gun purchase in this manner. If they want information then they can subpena for it, or call you as a witness in an investigation. Fishing expeditions should not be rewarded.

Paul S
04-28-2012, 8:42 PM
Is it SOP but done randomly? or just for those who had a
"Red flag"?

I wondered the same thing. I've bought many pistols in this state..some rather recently and no on has knocked on my door.

I'd like to believe that rather than being intimidated and answering questions I'd ask who are you and why are you asking questions which I tend to believe are none of your business. A reasonable explanation and further discussion would probably elicit more answers from me...but not until I knew a little more background.

ClarenceBoddicker
04-28-2012, 9:16 PM
It doesn't matter if your buddy is telling the truth or not, here's some solid advice: never "talk" to LE. Only tell them basic required ID info like: name, DOB & SSN. Always approach any LE contact as if they are investigating you for a crime (wrong or right) & STFU. Use your rights. If you are in trouble & get arrested be very careful even when talking you your lawyer. Forget about using a public defender, as they work for the DA & do not have your best interests in mind. Go to some trials & watch where the court employees go to lunch. It's cool to see the DA, PD & judge all sitting at the same booth throwing back drinks (alcohol) while being buddies before the food is served. There has also been many times that the integration room audio recorder has been "accidentally" left on when the suspect & consul have been talking. If it was me, I would figure that there was a vid camera & audio recording going on. Cup your hand over your face & whisper into your lawyers ear. Amazingly in most of the cases of "accidental" privileged conversation recordings, the judge has ruled that no harm was done & shockingly even in some cases the info gets entered into evidence.

ACfixer
04-29-2012, 8:25 AM
i have a feeling I wasnt given the whole story. I was more curious to know if I would wind up getting a visit myself. From my understanding he purchased it at Bullseye in San Rafael.

That was my initial feeling Stew, the lack of knowing which agency it was just caught my attention. I wouldn't sweat it, I've purchased many gun with no follow ups as have most people here I'm sure.

Goosebrown
04-29-2012, 8:32 AM
I was interviewed by the FBI once on a non-gun matter and the guy gave the receptionist a card, gave me a card... It was like he was giving out Subway coupons... They always have cards... Especially when it is a routine thing. Always keep your head on and ask, they expect it of you.

Meplat
04-29-2012, 7:34 PM
Is it SOP but done randomly? or just for those who had a
"Red flag"?


I think that was sarcasm.;)

Meplat
04-29-2012, 7:58 PM
My guess is that this was part of an investigation into a prohibited person (PP), possibly a parolee, who someone wants to hang dirt on really badly. The PP has some connection to the address or the name on the DROS. It can’t be that hard to set up an automatic cross reference system that would scan all the new DROS’ for any such links, as long as you don’t get stupid about it and keep it small; including only the guys you really, really, want to either bust or squeeze for more important info.

His 21yo, live at home, squeaky clean nephew buys his first handgun, at the same time his dad is doing uncle Parolee a favor and helping him get back on his feet. You got lucky and can now suggest to uncle Parolee that it would be better to tell you who his old connection was getting his drugs from than go back to jail, oh, and by the way we have a nice little federal felony strawman prosecution all warmed up and waiting in the wings for your favorite nephew. You know the one, he’s working his way through school waiting tables, so he can make some kind of life for the kid his wife just had.