PPT and lock sales.....???

[ssteve]

I am told that on a ppt there needs to be a record of a lock sale... However I have completed ppt's through several ffl's that never required a lock sale.. So whats protocol for ppt's?

[Baconator]

Depends in the ffl

[ssteve]

What do you mean? Thought a law was a law?

[kemasa]

There does not need to be a lock sale, but there has to be a lock provided with it. CA requires a lock or a safe, but Federal law, which has not be documented as required, requires that the FFL provide a lock or safe, so it is unclear as to what exactly they mean. The BATF attorney claims that the FFL has to provide the lock or safe, such that the buyer having a safe is not enough. Also, since there are not document requirements written, I was told that the BATF agents can only do something if they actually see it for themselves (no documentation requirements).

If the firearm comes with a lock, that is good enough. Otherwise you need to have bought a lock within 30 days (which the Feds claim is not good enough as the FFL has to "provide" the lock). If you have a lock that you can give to the FFL in advance, the FFL could provide you with a lock when you pick it up and also you could fill out the safe affidavit to make the state happy, instead of a receipt.

[Baconator]

What do you mean? Thought a law was a law?

The law says that as long as the lock is on the approved list of devices it should be ok. If it isn't on the list you can bring one as long as it was purchased in the last 30 days, with receipt. Some ffls don't care about the first part and want to still you the lock.

[Librarian]

The BATF attorney claims that the FFL has to provide the lock or safe, such that the buyer having a safe is not enough.

I can accept that a BATFE attorney might say such a thing.

But, even with my own oft-repeated admonition that applying logic to gun laws leads only to headaches, the idea that an attorney could say one needs to buy a new 30 cubic foot safe with every handgun purchase (locks? don't believe in'em, and US Code says safes qualify) is beyond comprehension.

Like the Queen in Alice in Wonderland, perhaps lawyers practice believing "as many as six impossible things before breakfast".

[kemasa]

Yep, but the funny thing is that the BATF is supposed to publish the rules, which they have failed to do in many years. The law takes about a lock or safe being provided, but it really does not say by who. If the person comes in with a lock or signs a statement that they have a safe, that should be enough, but as you say logic and laws don't do together.