NO NICS Checks for MD Dealers for Handguns and Receivers 6/14/2013

jr88 · Jun 14, 2013

Ranchero50 said:
I'm honestly not sure if that email is a good or bad thing. Probably a bad thing for the FFL's that were 'misusing' the system...

I don't think "misuse" is a fair term. FFl's in this state are going through hell lately, and it won't get better after October 1.
35 free states in this country allow FFL's direct access to the NICS system for handgun purchases.We just happen to live in a state where the .gov thinks they are God and makes themselves POC for the NICS. As Md. residents who pays federal taxes which fund the FBI run NICS system, why can't we utilize the system our tax dollars fund? The way the letter threatens the FFls with fines for misuse really upsets me. I'm sure it comes down to dollars,and someone figured out if all 40K backlogged Md. apps required the FBI to do the NICS then it would burden their allotted staff. I say eliminate waste of having the FBI,ATF and MSP all spend time overseeing our 2nd amendment rights. Are they really "helping US Citizens" or trying to control and manipulate us.
What ever your opinion, it won't be long before there won't be hardly any FFls left in Md. and almost no firearms legal to purchase, so then there won't be anymore "misuse"!

DC-W · Jun 14, 2013

I guess my hopes of possibly acquiring another receiver before this mess starts have been dashed.

spfrazierjr · Jun 14, 2013

What complete bs. Anything we can do legal wise about this now? Can the court cases start now, or do they still have to wait until the law goes into effect?

Mr H · Jun 14, 2013

Someone explain, please, how all of a sudden FFLs were able to CALL in and go online for handgun checks?

If that is accurate (and I have nothing to doubt it), then earlier this month someone, somewhere, hit the checkbox on the FBI end of the world. Now, it's been unchecked.

I tend to believe this wasn't accidental.

Now, the good news...

Again, this seems to have absolutely no bearing on "8th day releases". That's a Maryland Law thing, which MSP has admitted they have no control over.

I'm going to stick to my word, and let my 1911 rot in jail, though....

May 6th and still counting, at an "early release" FFL... where I'm hoping they are handling the backlog equitably.

clandestine · Jun 14, 2013

Word spreads about who releases guns after 8 days. When a 77r is sent to the MSP is sits in a stack for almost 70-90 days now before ANY background check is performed.

Dealers know this and were simply adding a layer of security to try and prevent bad people from buying a gun knowing they could lie on the 77r/4473 and get a gun in 8 days. That means prohibited people will have possession of a gun for 50-80 days before the MSP even knows about it for dealers that do no check whatsoever.

While this is the MSPs fault, they WONT get the blame. Once the first prohibited person does something bad after getting a gun in 8 days with no background check the DEALERS will have BATFE, MSP, the Media, and every anti gun Politician calling for their heads. Its going to be bad for the dealers.

clandestine · Jun 14, 2013

Word spreads about who releases guns after 8 days. When a 77r is sent to the MSP is sits in a stack for almost 70-90 days now before ANY background check is performed.

Dealers know this and were simply adding a layer of security to try and prevent bad people from buying a gun knowing they could lie on the 77r/4473 and get a gun in 8 days. That means prohibited people will have possession of a gun for 50-80 days before the MSP even knows about it for dealers that do no check whatsoever.

While this is the MSPs fault, they WONT get the blame. Once the first prohibited person does something bad after getting a gun in 8 days with no background check the DEALERS will have BATFE, MSP, the Media, and every anti gun Politician calling for their heads. Its going to be bad for the dealers.

Lou45 · Jun 14, 2013

erwos said:
I agree with you. This is a HUGE problem, and shame on the FFLs who were playing games with the system in order to bypass it.

That said, it seems to me like the BATFE is unaware that MD basically told FFLs to phone NICS for handgun checks.

Yep, MSP indicated if we choose to release before the 77R comes back, they recommended the use of the FBI NICS check for the guns being released.

I don't know of any FFL's that "abused" the system; when I call FBI NICS on a "handgun", I say "handgun" when asked type of firearm. At no point do I say it was a consignment.

Abacab said:
Maybe FFLs should just forego the check and send the thing out the door. It is the state's problem.

This ^^^ is basically what is happening now.

frogman68 said:
Personally I think the MSP condones the FFL's calling NICS it ensures at least a "minimum" check was done.
This came from either gansler or mom

I don't know about the "Gansler or MOM" thing, but MSP did make the recommendation of doing as such. Guess we can only call in on "Long Guns" now; no NICS check on the remaining types (oohhhh, the irony).

aquaman · Jun 14, 2013

This is all a sham to prevent people from buying soon to be banned firearms before Oct 1.

Mr H · Jun 14, 2013

aquaman said:
This is all a sham to prevent people from buying soon to be banned firearms before Oct 1.

IMO, it's even simpler than that.

It's about MSP trying to wring every last bit of control they can out of the process (and Curran & Co. trying to disarm you). If they could do it with single shot rifles, they would.

Was the FBI complicit?? Can only speculate, and I won't.

yournamehere · Jun 14, 2013

Forgive the newb question,I do not understand how this will make a defacto ban on a suppressor. Is it not possible for the MSP to run the NICS check?

AntiGun · Jun 14, 2013

If long gun checks increase will there be an equivalent 'warning you are bucking historical trends' letter?
We are seeing unprecedented sales so expecting previous trends is Ludacris (yeah,yeah).

The FFL's of Maryland are sitting under the sword of Damocles.

If there was a misrepresentation by an FFL then let them specifically pay the price for a transgression. Leave the others alone.

clandestine · Jun 14, 2013

yournamehere said:
Forgive the newb question,I do not understand how this will make a defacto ban on a suppressor. Is it not possible for the MSP to run the NICS check?

The MSP signs off on individuals when they apply with a Form 1 or Form 4. The buyer pays the MSP FIRST before submitting to the BATFE/NFA Branch. Once BATFE signs off on the stamp no more checks need to be done.

When a person uses a NFA Trust to acquire a Suppressor vis Form 1/Form 4 they bypass the MSP and don't submit fingerprints or passport photos to the NFA Branch. Once the tax Stamp is approved on a NFA Trust, per the NFA handbook, the Trustee picking up the NFA device must undergo a NICS Check before they can take the Device.

A Silencer is listed as "Other" on the 4473 and with this new document from the FBI/NICS Center they won't likely allow a check to be performed on a Trustee trying to pickup a silencer.

Mr H · Jun 14, 2013

Repeat after me...

lu di crous

ludicrous

Other than that, you're right on the mark.

yournamehere · Jun 14, 2013

clandestine said:
The MSP signs off on individuals when they apply with a Form 1 or Form 4. The buyer pays the MSP FIRST before submitting to the BATFE/NFA Branch. Once BATFE signs off on the stamp no more checks need to be done.

When a person uses a NFA Trust to acquire a Suppressor vis Form 1/Form 4 they bypass the MSP and don't submit fingerprints or passport photos to the NFA Branch. Once the tax Stamp is approved on a NFA Trust, per the NFA handbook, the Trustee picking up the NFA device must undergo a NICS Check before they can take the Device.

A Silencer is listed as "Other" on the 4473 and with this new document from the FBI/NICS Center they won't likely allow a check to be performed on a Trustee trying to pickup a silencer.

Thank you.

ShallNotInfringe · Jun 14, 2013

Thanks for explaining that suppressor angle. The gun grabbers just keep finding new and inventive ways to infringe on our 2nd amendment rights.

Hey, look on the bright side, now all the other "gun grabbers" can go back to the backlog threads and stop the BS on FFL's.

( Thank you Clandestine. I feel much better now

)

mxrider · Jun 14, 2013

While this appears to close the door for dealers to run their own NICS, it does not, however, stop them from legally releasing prior to receiving the 77r from MSP. While a setback to the progress that has been made, we still took 3 steps forward.

clandestine · Jun 14, 2013

Pistol Gripped Shotguns are "Other" as well.

RedBaron1 · Jun 14, 2013

So if my form 4 is already at batfe, and I am not using a trust...I'm still good right?

jvegas · Jun 14, 2013

Pretty sure this is just directed at a few dealers who were running their own NICS check on regulated gun and saying they were running it on "other" or "long guns" when in fact it was for a handgun.

clandestine · Jun 14, 2013

RedBaron1 said:
So if my form 4 is already at batfe, and I am not using a trust...I'm still good right?

Yes because a NICS isn't required for individuals.

NO NICS Checks for MD Dealers for Handguns and Receivers 6/14/2013

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Active Member

Banana'd

AR-15 Savant

AR-15 Savant

R.I.P.

Ultimate Member

Banana'd

Active Member

.

AR-15 Savant

Banana'd

Active Member

Lil Firecracker

Former MSI Treasurer

AR-15 Savant

Member

Ultimate Member

AR-15 Savant

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics