4473

[Rudi]

I have not seen this, but it was covered in detail on Armed America Radio. The AFT has added questions to the 4473 form.
1. Asks if you live in a city/ county/ unknown.
2. A question regarding ammo.
Has anyone seen this new form? Looks like they are up to something.

 

[44Aficianado]

The two questions I noticed are “Do you reside in: [] City Limits [] County [] Other” and “Do you intend to resale this firearm?: [] Yes [] No “. I didn’t see any question regarding ammunition.

 

[robertrwalsh]

Same with me. I just filled one out three or four weeks ago. No ammo question that I remember.

 

[Bozz10mm]

Maybe they are preparing for ammunition background checks.

Preventing Straw Purchases

Two more questions have been added to Section B (21b and 21c) to confirm the purchaser is not buying the firearm for a prohibited party.

21b: “Do you intend to purchase or acquire any firearm listed on this form and any continuation sheet(s) or ammunition, for sale of other disposition to any person described in questions 21(c)-(m) or to a person described in question 21.n.1 who does not fall within a nonimmigrant exception?”
21.c.: “Do you intend to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm listed on this form and any continuation sheet(s) or ammunition in furtherance of any felony or other offense punishable by imprisonment for a term of more than one year, a Federal crime of terrorism, or a drug trafficking offense?”

 

[Racer X]

no combination of questions will have any real effect if they don't prosecute people who lie on a 4473. It is literally a signed confession.

 

[deadin]

“Do you intend to resale this firearm?: [] Yes [] No “.

How can you truthfully answer this question unless you have specified in your will that you are to be buried with it?

 

[Truckman]

How can you truthfully answer this question unless you have specified in your will that you are to be buried with it?

Because of the way it's worded...If you die still owning it, then it's obvious you told the truth...If you trade it or give it away, then you still told the truth......Ben

 

[Dreadi]

How can you truthfully answer this question unless you have specified in your will that you are to be buried with it?

That’s not a question on the current form.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Dreadi]

I have not seen this, but it was covered in detail on Armed America Radio. The AFT has added questions to the 4473 form.
1. Asks if you live in a city/ county/ unknown.
2. A question regarding ammo.
Has anyone seen this new form? Looks like they are up to something.

The current 4473 has been published and available for months. It has been required for use since May 1st. Yes, I see them everyday.

 

[Spurdann]

How can you truthfully answer this question unless you have specified in your will that you are to be buried with it?

Read the entire sentence. Just sayen

 

[deadin]

Is there a difference between "resale" and "resell"? (Other than poor English)

I can't wait for the first defence of "I bought to enhance my collection" even though it doesn't really fit what I collect. But I can trade/sell for something that does.
This may be the first salvo against the DWOL's (Dealers without licenses) that inhabit most gunshows.

 

[Doug M.]

no combination of questions will have any real effect if they don't prosecute people who lie on a 4473. It is literally a signed confession.

*
It is very rare that they do so. I've had cases that we sent to ATF, and even if the case agent was interested, the US Attorney's Office was rarely interested, which is partially a resource issue.

I have met some good AUSAs, but most of them could not perform in an office like mine. I am not a fan of doing jury trials, but have done more in a few years than most AUSAs will do in a career.

 

[pharmer]

Maybe they are preparing for ammunition background checks.......

We already did that for almost 20 years (1968-1986). I had a bound book that pretty much had one entry over and over. A group of "country folk" south of Kissimmee bought enough components monthly to assemble 2K .223 and 2K .44 mag ammo. I forget but I think primers and brass were "controlled." I burned it after Reagan closed the NFA registry and de-regulated ammo (".gov giveth, .gov taketh" with one signature). UPS guy hated humpin' cases of 1K .44 240 grainers, 2 at a time. Better times. Joe

 

[Bozz10mm]

We already did that for almost 20 years (1968-1986). I had a bound book that pretty much had one entry over and over. A group of "country folk" south of Kissimmee bought enough components monthly to assemble 2K .223 and 2K .44 mag ammo. I forget but I think primers and brass were "controlled." I burned it after Reagan closed the NFA registry and de-regulated ammo (".gov giveth, .gov taketh" with one signature). UPS guy hated humpin' cases of 1K .44 240 grainers, 2 at a time. Better times. Joe

I remember that. My grandpa was beside himself, extremely upset that he had to show ID to purchase a box of .22 LR. It wasn't actually a background check to buy ammo, it was a registry.

 

[BSA1]

Maybe they are preparing for ammunition background checks.

Preventing Straw Purchases

Two more questions have been added to Section B (21b and 21c) to confirm the purchaser is not buying the firearm for a prohibited party.

21b: “Do you intend to purchase or acquire any firearm listed on this form and any continuation sheet(s) or ammunition, for sale of other disposition to any person described in questions 21(c)-(m) or to a person described in question 21.n.1 who does not fall within a nonimmigrant exception?”
21.c.: “Do you intend to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm listed on this form and any continuation sheet(s) or ammunition in furtherance of any felony or other offense punishable by imprisonment for a term of more than one year, a Federal crime of terrorism, or a drug trafficking offense?”

Are there any States that require that ammunition can only be brought through a FFL?

If so can a STATE require the person buying the ammunition complete the FEDERAL 4473 Form?

Or can a anti-gun LOCAL government say Chicago or NYC for example?

If so for what purpose?

Maybe California come to mind.

 

[pantannojack]

I sometimes add at the bottom of the form in hand written: "I buy these things so that I can take them home, lock them up, and they won't by laying around on the streets."

 

[Sistema1927]

I just filled one out last week to pick up a suppressor*, and was surprised to see the additional questions.

*After ATF having my paperwork for 8 months, and doing a full background check including finger prints, I still had to fill out a 4473 prior to receiving my suppressor. Don't you all feel safer?

 

[Dreadi]

I just filled one out last week to pick up a suppressor*, and was surprised to see the additional questions.

*After ATF having my paperwork for 8 months, and doing a full background check including finger prints, I still had to fill out a 4473 prior to receiving my suppressor. Don't you all feel safer?

The transferring FFL holder is required to have that completed as a record of the transfer. Did you also have to submit to a background check that may have been required by your state?

 

[ISCS Yoda]

Form 4473 has never been particularly well written.

If you are interested in why the 4473 was revised just go here:

ATF Form 4473 - Firearms Transaction Record Revisions | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

Questions 21b and 21c are ridiculous. "Do you intend...." Seriously? If the buyer truly intends to transfer a firearm to a prohibited person why would he or she tell of that intention?

My favorite question has always been this one:

Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance

On the assumption that the buyer or transferee is not addicted to anything, but the buyer routinely abuses drugs on weekends, what is the correct answer? I think it is "not at the moment".

Naturally, the required answer is "NO" but even if you're a heroin addict you can say "no" because to answer "yes" would be self-incriminating and the Fifth Amendment says you cannot be compelled to do that. And there is a Supreme Court case on that very subject.

Okay, I admit there is an issue with respect to making false statements on Federal forms under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 or when speaking to law enforcement which is why lawyers always advise folks to not speak to law enforcement, especially Federal law enforcement. There is a fine line difference between these issues and I'll leave it for a discussion another day......

 

[Racer X]

I fully understand it is a FEDERAL form, but when you are in a state where pot is legal, or legal for medical reasons, and you have a medical card, the answer is maybe, I don't know, etc.

I know the answer is no, but they are unclear for the average Joe.