PDA

View Full Version : Deleted


blackrazor
07-26-2012, 6:50 AM
Deleted

paul0660
07-26-2012, 6:53 AM
for current licenses, https://www.atfonline.gov/fflezcheck/

Not sure what happens if you input a lapsed one.

EOD Guy
07-26-2012, 7:26 AM
Ask him for the first 3 and last 5 numbers of his FFL.

EBR Works
07-26-2012, 7:40 AM
Contact the ATF:

http://www.atf.gov/contact/

ke6guj
07-26-2012, 7:48 AM
Can't get the numbers, one of the problems is likely that there may have never been a license in the first place. Even if there was an expired license, a person isn't likely to give you any information once they know you suspect them of dealing without a license. What I really need to be able to do is perform a check on someone who claims to have had a license at the time they were dealing, using their name, address, and/or phone number.

you can look up the FFL here, http://www.atf.gov/about/foia/ffl-list.html with just an name and address.

ptoguy2002
07-26-2012, 7:51 AM
I've been told by more than one reputable gun smith that they are not supposed to send a proper copy of their FFL to a non-licensee. But you can request a signature redacted copy be sent (some will still not do this), or at a minimum ask for first 3 and last 5 of their FFL number. There is no reason why whey shouldn't or couldn't give you the number. Plugging these numbers into the ATF EZ check system will give you the expiration date of the FFL and the proper address to ship it to.
If the guy won't give up the numbers for EZ check, to me anyway, that is a problem.

gatesbox
07-26-2012, 8:00 AM
I am modestly curious what the purpose of this inquiry is, i.e. what is your desired outcome.

Hypothetical scenario with most possible problematic elements. Firearm is shipped from out of state to supposed licensee for a transfer. Fraudulent licensee transfers firearm, you take possession. If long gun, as there is no registration requirement, it seems to me the pseudo FFL is in hot water, not the unknowing purchaser. If it was a handgun, again seems like the pseudo FFL is in hot water and buyer may have an unregistered handgun. Worst case scenario fill out a Vol Reg?

I'm just curious what concerns and possible problems the purchaser would be facing.

M. D. Van Norman
07-26-2012, 11:03 AM
If we’re talking about California, there should be a DROS receipt.

Munk
07-26-2012, 11:30 AM
you can look up the FFL here, http://www.atf.gov/about/foia/ffl-list.html with just an name and address.

I use this when I buy from someone on Gunbroker before I send my payment. It's always good to see the store I'm buying from listed here, and that it's the same address my payment is being sent to.

ke6guj
07-26-2012, 1:39 PM
This would be perfect, if only it went back farther. I'm sure these records exist for earlier years though, so I'll call in and check.
you used to be order them on a CD, then they started hosting them on the website in a CSV format but it was sort of hidden. And now, you can just hit the webpage and download back to 2010.

anyways, I'm pretty certain the records are still available without too much hassle.

vincewarde
07-26-2012, 2:34 PM
Definitely not true - and here is how I know that this is the case: For any unlicensed person to ship a firearm, they must have a signed copy of the recipient's FFL. For instance this would be the case if you are shipping a gun to someone for sale, repair or customization (all specifically allowed by federal law). How would an unlicensed person be able to do this without a copy of the FFL? I have done this and you must declare the firearm to the post office and the first thing they asked for was a copy of the recipient's FFL. I believe that UPS has a similar policy and that both are rooted in federal law.

I understand 100% why an FFL would not simply give a copy of their FFL to just anyone. They need a valid reason. This is simple common sense and I would not be surprised if there is a Federal law that requires a valid reason to release a copy of an FFL. My point is simply that there is no blanket rule prohibiting the release of a copy of a licensee's FFL to an unlicensed person.

I've been told by more than one reputable gun smith that they are not supposed to send a proper copy of their FFL to a non-licensee. But you can request a signature redacted copy be sent (some will still not do this), or at a minimum ask for first 3 and last 5 of their FFL number.

CSACANNONEER
07-26-2012, 2:39 PM
Definitely not true - and here is how I know that this is the case: For any unlicensed person to ship a firearm, they must have a signed copy of the recipient's FFL. For instance this would be the case if you are shipping a gun to someone for sale, repair or customization (all specifically allowed by federal law). How would an unlicensed person be able to do this without a copy of the FFL? I have done this and you must declare the firearm to the post office and the first thing they asked for was a copy of the recipient's FFL. I believe that UPS has a similar policy and that both are rooted in federal law.

Please show me the actual law that states this. I've shipped firearms back to manufacturer (they have FFLs) and have never needed a copy of anyone's FFL. I think you are mistaken here. BTW, I've also received firearms in the USPS from non FFLs. Neither one of us was asked or required to provide any type of documentation. Yes, the USPS did know it was a firearm.

ke6guj
07-26-2012, 2:51 PM
Definitely not true - and here is how I know that this is the case: For any unlicensed person to ship a firearm, they must have a signed copy of the recipient's FFL. For instance this would be the case if you are shipping a gun to someone for sale, repair or customization (all specifically allowed by federal law). How would an unlicensed person be able to do this without a copy of the FFL? I have done this and you must declare the firearm to the post office and the first thing they asked for was a copy of the recipient's FFL. I believe that UPS has a similar policy and that both are rooted in federal law.
do you have a cite for that?

I know people that send guns to companies like Glock, S&W, Ruger, etc all the time and don't have copy of the FFL. I know of people that have don't private party transactions through a receiving FFL and the FFL did not have to send a copy of the FFL to the shipping party first.

ptoguy2002
07-26-2012, 3:11 PM
Definitely not true - and here is how I know that this is the case: For any unlicensed person to ship a firearm, they must have a signed copy of the recipient's FFL.
Yeah, you are going to need a cite for that. Won't find one, because its wrong.
Sorry.
The best you can do is numbers and EZcheck.

EOD Guy
07-27-2012, 7:45 AM
Definitely not true - and here is how I know that this is the case: For any unlicensed person to ship a firearm, they must have a signed copy of the recipient's FFL. For instance this would be the case if you are shipping a gun to someone for sale, repair or customization (all specifically allowed by federal law). How would an unlicensed person be able to do this without a copy of the FFL? I have done this and you must declare the firearm to the post office and the first thing they asked for was a copy of the recipient's FFL. I believe that UPS has a similar policy and that both are rooted in federal law.

I understand 100% why an FFL would not simply give a copy of their FFL to just anyone. They need a valid reason. This is simple common sense and I would not be surprised if there is a Federal law that requires a valid reason to release a copy of an FFL. My point is simply that there is no blanket rule prohibiting the release of a copy of a licensee's FFL to an unlicensed person.

Wrong on two points. The only time an FFL has to be sent to the shipper is when the transfer is between licensees. An unlicensed person has no need for a copy of the recipient's FFL. The second error is that there is no legal requirement to declare a firearm at the Post Office or, for that matter, at any other shipper if you are shipping to a licensee.

vincewarde
07-27-2012, 3:50 PM
OK everyone........

I have no doubt that if you are shipping to an address that belongs to a manufacturer they won't ask for it (say, Remington or Ruger). But every time I have shipped to a gunsmith, rather than a manufacturer, the gunsmith supplied a copy of his FFL AND the post office asked me for it when I shipped the firearm. I don't know if they would accept a printout from ATF's license check website, but they have always demanded a copy of the receiving FFLs license.

That said, after spending an hour researching this, I think you are all right as far as the statute law is concerned. I stand corrected, HOWEVER.....

A Google search of he Gunbroker forums reveals that it is very common for both USPS and UPS to demand a copy of the recipient's FFL when an unlicensed person ships to a licensed person. I find this understandable, given that the recipient is required to be licensed by Federal law. There is no way I am going to knowingly receive a firearm - or ship one - without evidence that the recipient has a valid FFL. No one wants to be in a position where their defense against a felony is, "he told me he had an FFL". I wonder if there is any "case law" on this.......

In the past, this could only be accomplished with an copy of the license. Now that anyone can check a license online via ATF's system, this clearly is not necessary. A printout should be enough to prove that the recipient has a license. I'll try using a printout the next time I need to ship something modern that is not covered by my C&R.

ke6guj
07-28-2012, 9:22 AM
in that case, you'd want to check to see if they were an FFL and were also a registered CA dealer. If they weren't a CA dealer, they couldn't register the firearms, even if they had an FFL.

ke6guj
07-28-2012, 9:31 AM
How do you check whether someone was licensed by the state of CA? Is there a hotline for making requests for these records with the DOJ?

I would probably start wtih these numbers, http://oag.ca.gov/firearms/contact

General Information
Phone: (916) 227-7527
Fax: (916) 227-7480

Firearm Dealer Licensing
Phone: (916) 227-2153
Fax: (916) 227-1021

other than that, I dunno.

tenpercentfirearms
07-29-2012, 8:50 AM
Definitely not true - and here is how I know that this is the case: For any unlicensed person to ship a firearm, they must have a signed copy of the recipient's FFL. For instance this would be the case if you are shipping a gun to someone for sale, repair or customization (all specifically allowed by federal law). How would an unlicensed person be able to do this without a copy of the FFL? I have done this and you must declare the firearm to the post office and the first thing they asked for was a copy of the recipient's FFL. I believe that UPS has a similar policy and that both are rooted in federal law.

I understand 100% why an FFL would not simply give a copy of their FFL to just anyone. They need a valid reason. This is simple common sense and I would not be surprised if there is a Federal law that requires a valid reason to release a copy of an FFL. My point is simply that there is no blanket rule prohibiting the release of a copy of a licensee's FFL to an unlicensed person.

There is no requirement that FFLs provide non-licensees with a copy of their FFL. The postal service can ask for a copy if they wish, but they are not a licensee and I won't be providing one for them either. They can use 9-77-01627 to confirm I am a licensee with the EZ Check system and my shipping address.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=381561