MD and MSP geting Heat from the FBI and ATF

Cmoney · Apr 10, 2013

SigDog said:
Gordnfreman, personally, you've convinced me that it's legal to release it after the 7 day wait, but I still don't think that the vast majority of dealers will be convinced by Joe Citizen walking in and making the same argument that it's okay.
Unless they have a letter from MSP on MSP letterhead saying that it's okay, they just won't do it.
I'd love to be proven wrong on this one.

No, you're probably right, but for those people who have a regular FFL, who they have bought from multiple times, once the FFL becomes aware and confident that release (after 7 days) is at his discretion, he will probably be willing to release to these guys who've bought multiple guns from him over the years.

If the word about this really gets out then yes, I bet some FFLs will do it for everybody because it will drive up business.

Gordnfreman · Apr 10, 2013

ShallNotInfringe said:
I am very glad you have worked this out with your FFL. Any way we can make this a more statewide practice? Are you suggesting each of us takes up this discussion with the FFL we are dealing with? I think there is an implied "or else" coming out of MSP. You may have found the key, and true the letter of the law says it's OK, which I have read and agree with (in fact, have also for months), but I think it comes down to an implied fear that other bad things could happen to an FFL (microscope up their behind even if they are totally legit) that is driving this compliance with the gentleman's agreement.

Let me end by saying I am totally jealous

*** We are now entering a phase where we must sleep with one eye open at all times ***

Thanks for the friendly words!

As far as a state wide practice, I don't think the ATF consider it their job to educate all the FFL'S on the regulations. The ATF provides them with a copy of The ATF Firearms Regulations Reference Guide. It is up to the FFL to read it and educate themselves. It is all right there on page 55 in black and white. They can read it, ask their own lawyer and/or call their ATF guy.

Yes, I would discuss it with your FFL. Thats what I did, once he read the actual law he got right on the phone to his ATF contact. The law says what it says, nothing more, nothing less. Apparently, the ATF Legal Dept. has recently read the law also, and agrees.

I have not heard anything in the way of "implied or else". Haven't heard any fear of the MSP, maybe some fear of the ATF.

There are a number of FFL'S here who have read and understand the "Brady Act" and the 3 day window, cleared it with their ATF guy and are transferring at their discretion.

It is my opinion that the 3 day rule language was included in The Brady Act to prevent what is happening here with the MSP backlog. Imagine if the Fed and State had no limitations on the time it takes to process background checks. The whole country would be in the same situation as Marylandistan. I would guess that is why so many states have chosen to not be the POC for NICS. Their lawyers read the Brady Act and understood what it said. They could see past the end of their nose, considered all the unintended consequences of becoming the POC and decided they did not want to have to process within 3 days.

Of course this all just my opinion again with a fact or two thrown in

Gbh · Apr 10, 2013

SigDog said:
Since it would be at the "discretion" of the LGS, I don't believe that many would take the risk.

I don't blame them for not wanting to take the risk. "Discretion" should not even be in the mix on an issue like this.

Either the state and federal laws say they CAN or the laws say they CAN'T. "Discretion" causes a doubt that should not exist, causing many dealers to err on the side of caution. If the Feds say it's OK, MSP needs to concur and get the doubt eliminated for the FFL stuck in the middle.

Lou45 · Apr 10, 2013

ricanmd said:
Did he get anything written from the ATF that we could take to our FFLs?

THIS ^^^^

If it is written on ATF letterhead (paper in my hand) and signed by the ATF Baltimore Field Office Director and specifically addresses the "scenario" we are experiencing in this State (MD) regarding the regulated firearms applications backlog with MSP, in conjunction with MSP, I'll start releasing regulated firearms immediately upon receipt thereof.

buzzsaw · Apr 10, 2013

Please post the letter up for the rest of us too - I'd love to take one into Hendershot's and get my lower out of their safe before May.

ricanmd · Apr 10, 2013

Lou45 said:
THIS ^^^^

If it is written on ATF letterhead (paper in my hand) and signed by the ATF Baltimore Field Office Director and specifically addresses the "scenario" we are experiencing in this State (MD) regarding the regulated firearms applications backlog with MSP, in conjunction with MSP, I'll start releasing regulated firearms immediately upon receipt thereof.

Are you saying that the MSP would have to sign off on this ATF interpretation of the law before you would release anything? If so, why would you think the MSP would do such a thing. They have the power to do this now w/o the ATF. :confused:

Ab_Normal · Apr 10, 2013

Lou45 said:
THIS ^^^^

If it is written on ATF letterhead (paper in my hand) and signed by the ATF Baltimore Field Office Director and specifically addresses the "scenario" we are experiencing in this State (MD) regarding the regulated firearms applications backlog with MSP, in conjunction with MSP, I'll start releasing regulated firearms immediately upon receipt thereof.

Would a bound publication by the ATF with the signature of the ATF director inside do?

Pay close attention to the bolded parts. The MSP is the POC for the NICS check. Just like calling the FBI to do a NICS check on a non-regulated firearm, the time you contact the MSP for them to initiate the NICS check (and their state check) is the date of contact. NOT when they decide to get back to you. It spells it out and explains it even more in the instructions on the 4473.

Pub 5300.4 Page 55:

§ 478.102
Sales or deliveries of firearms on and after November 30, 1998.
(a) Background check. Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer (the licensee) shall not sell, deliver, or transfer a firearm to any other person who is not licensed under this part unless the licensee meets the following requirements:
(1) Before the completion of the transfer, the licensee has contacted NICS;
(2) (i) NICS informs the licensee that it has no information that receipt of the firearm by the transferee would be in violation of Federal or State law and provides the licensee with a unique identification number; or
(ii) Three business days (meaning days on which State offices are open) have elapsed from the date the licensee contacted NICS and NICS has not notified the licensee that receipt of the firearm by the transferee would be in violation of law; and
(3) The licensee verifies the identity of the transferee by examining the identification document presented in accordance with the provisions of § 478.124(c).
Example for paragraph (a).
A licensee contacts NICS on Thursday, and gets a “delayed” response. The licensee does not get a further response from NICS. If State offices are not open on Saturday and Sunday, 3 business days would have elapsed on the following Tuesday. The licensee may transfer the firearm on the next day, Wednesday.
(b) Transaction number. In any transaction for which a licensee receives a transaction number from NICS (which shall include either a NICS transaction number or, in States where the State is recognized as a point of contact for NICS checks, a State transaction number), such number shall be recorded on a firearms transaction record, Form 4473, which shall be retained in the records of the licensee in accordance with the provisions of § 478.129. This applies regardless of whether the transaction is approved or denied by NICS, and regardless of whether the firearm is actually transferred.

buzzsaw · Apr 10, 2013

I think the big concern is trying to alleviate any FFL fears that they will get a hammer dropped on them. If something comes from the big boys to alleviate that, I would imagine that would be a lot more alleviating than an opinion on legal readings from the rest of us.

L0gic · Apr 10, 2013

buzzsaw said:
I think the big concern is trying to alleviate any FFL fears that they will get a hammer dropped on them. If something comes from the big boys to alleviate that, I would imagine that would be a lot more alleviating than an opinion on legal readings from the rest of us.

Define big boys. If I'm reading the above correctly, the ATF is saying they can release after 3 days or when State law allows after contacting the POC for a NTN. State law says no sooner than 7 days. So if 4/1 you bought regulated and your FFL contacted MSP on that day and had not heard anything back come 4/4 then come 4/8 you are out the door with your firearm.

Doesn't the first F in FFL stand for Federal? So I'm guessing its BATFE that issues a dealer their FFL and if they are saying you are in the clear that really should be the end of it.

Ab_Normal · Apr 10, 2013

buzzsaw said:
I think the big concern is trying to alleviate any FFL fears that they will get a hammer dropped on them. If something comes from the big boys to alleviate that, I would imagine that would be a lot more alleviating than an opinion on legal readings from the rest of us.

The publication I quoted from above has the signature of the director of the atf and I don't imagine they get much bigger than that.

Ab_Normal · Apr 10, 2013

L0gic said:
Define big boys. If I'm reading the above correctly, the ATF is saying they can release after 3 days or when State law allows after contacting the POC for a NTN. State law says no sooner than 7 days. So if 4/1 you bought regulated and your FFL contacted MSP on that day and had not heard anything back come 4/4 then come 4/8 you are out the door with your firearm.

Doesn't the first F in FFL stand for Federal? So I'm guessing its BATFE that issues a dealer their FFL and if they are saying you are in the clear that really should be the end of it.

Actually it is 3 or 7 state business days so if you go with 6 and 10 that should cover most every situation including having a holiday thrown in in conjunction with a weekend. I think most of us could live with 6 and 10.

L0gic · Apr 10, 2013

Ab_Normal said:
I think most of us could live with 6 and 10.

Considering I'm on day 55 of my 7 day wait, not including two unregulated rifles the dealer wants to do regulated "on the side of caution". Abso-F'in-Loutly.

digital_alchemy · Apr 10, 2013

So, maybe someone could help...

I've been looking through the MD State code Public Safety Title 5 (Firearms) subtitle 1 (Regulated Firearms).

I see the requirements to submit the application but see no mention of the release of a regulated weapon being at the discretion of the FFL on the 8th day.

Would like to know if someone could point me in the right direction. I would like to take this to my FFL in hopes of speeding up the process also.

The above mentioned letter would also be a nice additional piece of documentation.

Thanks

L0gic · Apr 10, 2013

digital_alchemy said:
I see the requirements to submit the application but see no mention of the release of a regulated weapon being at the discretion of the FFL on the 8th day.

MSP don't have a say in it. State law requires no sooner than 7 days, but ATF handbook says that an FFL may release the firearm after they receive an NTN or 3 days have passed since contacting the POC (MSP). It is up to the FFL which is why you don't have consistency with the dealers in MD. Some are releasing after 7 days to repeat customers who have already endured the 60+ day wait while others are saying take a hike until MSP gets the not-dissapproved paperwork back to them.

Had I known in January what I know now, only IP partners would have received my patronage.

Gordnfreman · Apr 10, 2013

Lou45 said:
THIS ^^^^

If it is written on ATF letterhead (paper in my hand) and signed by the ATF Baltimore Field Office Director and specifically addresses the "scenario" we are experiencing in this State (MD) regarding the regulated firearms applications backlog with MSP, in conjunction with MSP, I'll start releasing regulated firearms immediately upon receipt thereof.

i asked my FFL the same question. His ATF guy said it is in writing in ATF Publication 5300.4, page 55, shown above in post #167 by Mr. Ab Normal, and in some of my other posts and different threads.

Gordnfreman · Apr 10, 2013

L0gic said:
MSP don't have a say in it. State law requires no sooner than 7 days, but ATF handbook says that an FFL may release the firearm after they receive an NTN or 3 days have passed since contacting the POC (MSP). It is up to the FFL which is why you don't have consistency with the dealers in MD. Some are releasing after 7 days to repeat customers who have already endured the 60+ day wait while others are saying take a hike until MSP gets the not-dissapproved paperwork back to them.

Had I known in January what I know now, only IP partners would have received my patronage.

Mr. LOgic above is exactly correct! :lol:

Gordnfreman · Apr 10, 2013

f

Ab_Normal said:
Would a bound publication by the ATF with the signature of the ATF director inside do?

Pay close attention to the bolded parts. The MSP is the POC for the NICS check. Just like calling the FBI to do a NICS check on a non-regulated firearm, the time you contact the MSP for them to initiate the NICS check (and their state check) is the date of contact. NOT when they decide to get back to you. It spells it out and explains it even more in the instructions on the 4473.

Pub 5300.4 Page 55:

§ 478.102
Sales or deliveries of firearms on and after November 30, 1998.
(a) Background check. Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer (the licensee) shall not sell, deliver, or transfer a firearm to any other person who is not licensed under this part unless the licensee meets the following requirements:
(1) Before the completion of the transfer, the licensee has contacted NICS;
(2) (i) NICS informs the licensee that it has no information that receipt of the firearm by the transferee would be in violation of Federal or State law and provides the licensee with a unique identification number; or
(ii) Three business days (meaning days on which State offices are open) have elapsed from the date the licensee contacted NICS and NICS has not notified the licensee that receipt of the firearm by the transferee would be in violation of law; and
(3) The licensee verifies the identity of the transferee by examining the identification document presented in accordance with the provisions of § 478.124(c).
Example for paragraph (a).
A licensee contacts NICS on Thursday, and gets a “delayed” response. The licensee does not get a further response from NICS. If State offices are not open on Saturday and Sunday, 3 business days would have elapsed on the following Tuesday. The licensee may transfer the firearm on the next day, Wednesday.
(b) Transaction number. In any transaction for which a licensee receives a transaction number from NICS (which shall include either a NICS transaction number or, in States where the State is recognized as a point of contact for NICS checks, a State transaction number), such number shall be recorded on a firearms transaction record, Form 4473, which shall be retained in the records of the licensee in accordance with the provisions of § 478.129. This applies regardless of whether the transaction is approved or denied by NICS, and regardless of whether the firearm is actually transferred.

Hello Mr. Ab-Normal,

How many times is this going to have to be repeated?

Thanks for posting with the with the bold parts. I just highlighted and scanned it in my posts.

Maybe it will be easier to read and understand this way.

Again, I take my hat off to you!

digital_alchemy · Apr 10, 2013

L0gic said:
MSP don't have a say in it. State law requires no sooner than 7 days, but ATF handbook says that an FFL may release the firearm after they receive an NTN or 3 days have passed since contacting the POC (MSP).

I understand the federal requirements and can find them written...

What I can't find is the "no sooner than 7 days" written in the MD law.

The only reference to 7 days that I can find is this:

§ 5-122. Disapproval of firearm application

(a) Grounds. -- The Secretary shall disapprove a firearm application if:

the Secretary determines that the firearm applicant supplied false information or made a false statement;

the Secretary determines that the firearm application is not properly completed; or

the Secretary receives written notification from the firearm applicant's licensed attending physician that the firearm applicant suffers from a mental disorder and is a danger to the firearm applicant or to another.

(b) Notice. --

If the Secretary disapproves a firearm application, the Secretary shall notify the prospective seller, lessor, or transferor in writing of the disapproval within 7 days after the date that the executed firearm application is forwarded to the Secretary by certified mail or facsimile machine.

After notifying the prospective seller, lessor, or transferor under paragraph (1) of this subsection, the Secretary shall notify the prospective purchaser, lessee, or transferee in writing of the disapproval.

The date when the prospective seller, lessor, or transferor forwards the executed firearm application to the Secretary by certified mail or by facsimile machine is the first day of the 7-day period allowed for notice of disapproval to the prospective seller, lessor, or transferor.

Gordnfreman · Apr 10, 2013

Gbh said:
I don't blame them for not wanting to take the risk. "Discretion" should not even be in the mix on an issue like this.

Either the state and federal laws say they CAN or the laws say they CAN'T. "Discretion" causes a doubt that should not exist, causing many dealers to err on the side of caution. If the Feds say it's OK, MSP needs to concur and get the doubt eliminated for the FFL stuck in the middle.

The "discretion" I don't think is the problem. All that does is give the FFL the ability to not release to someone they do not know, have not done business before, looks shady to them, is lying, etc. etc. etc. and to use their discretion in whom they release to before getting a NICS number.

Ab_Normal · Apr 10, 2013

digital_alchemy said:
I understand the federal requirements and can find them written...

What I can't find is the "no sooner than 7 days" written in the MD law.

The only reference to 7 days that I can find is this:

If the Secretary disapproves a firearm application, the Secretary shall notify the prospective seller, lessor, or transferor in writing of the disapproval within 7 days after the date that the executed firearm application is forwarded to the Secretary by certified mail or facsimile machine.

That confirms the point even more! The MSP is required to notify the seller within 7 days for a disapproval but not for an approval (not disapproved). So just like the instructions state, if you don't hear back within 7 days you are de facto approved by the lack of being disapproved in the required time period.

I'm having a hard time understanding what is so difficult about this.

MD and MSP geting Heat from the FBI and ATF

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Active Member

Active Member

Ultimate Member

R.I.P.

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Ab_member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ab_member

Ab_member

Ultimate Member

Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Member

Active Member

Ab_member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics