4473

[ISCS Yoda]

I remember that 4473 line in Red Dawn - it got me to thinking!!!!

====================

Anyway, I missed an issue that I should have addressed:

21b: "Do you intend to purchase or acquire ...........
21.c.: "Do you intend ...................

The questions are asking for your intent at that moment. If you're buying a firearm to give to your twin brother tomorrow on your mutual birthday then that's your intent and you're barred from purchasing the firearm today. If your plan is to use this firearm and sometime down the road you decide to give it to your twin brother then your intent at that moment was to keep it, not dispose of it. No problem.

See the difference?

 

[YeshuaIsa53]

As per marijuana question, it asks if you are an UNLAWFUL user.

 

[Racer X]

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

at the moment I am purchasing it, no. That's an honest answer. If I change my mind a month from now, thats fine. Name any other tangible or intangible "thing" they ask these questions about when you purchase it.

 

[BC38]

It is now easier to do than going to the dealer and seizing their records. All the Government needs to do is pull the NCIS background checks that were approved off of their computers. (Unless you trust the Government and believe they are totally deleting the background checks in the computer).

...as the LAW requires them to do.

But can we really expect the BATFE to follow the LAW? Laws that were put in place specifically to limit their power?

We've seen so many examples of the government alphabet-soup agencies completely ignoring the rule of law in the last few years. But yet there doesn't seem to be any real grass-roots level action to hold them accountable for their flagrant violations of the rule of law. We are becoming a nation of men - rather than a nation of LAWS.

We've reached a point where it seems naive - and almost illogical - for us ordinary citizens to have any expectation that our government "servants" will follow the rules that have been put into place to limit the power of the Administrative State.

Our once-great nation is descending into tyranny, and most people don't even seem to notice. The average American has been dumbed-down to the point that they don't even realize that their rights are under assault.

We have met the enemy, and he is us...

 

[Racer X]

Yep CA and NY

for now. Judge Benitez is on it as we "speak"

 

[GaryS]

The larger question is if the background checks and 4473 forms are Constitutional?

When were they first instituted?

If it hasn't happened already, someone will sue over this.

 

[BSA1]

Anyway, I missed an issue that I should have addressed:

The questions are asking for your intent at that moment. If you're buying a firearm to give to your twin brother tomorrow on your mutual birthday then that's your intent and you're barred from purchasing the firearm today.

That information is incorrect. It is legal under Federal Law to buy a gun for the express purpose of giving it as a gift to a non-prohibited person It happens a lot at Christmas for example.

 

[BC38]

Back in the 1960's the battle-cry of American youth was "fight the establishment".

But those 1960's revolutionaries have now infiltrated the halls of power - to the point that THEY are now the ones in control.

So now we see them VEHEMENTLY and STRIDENTLY opposing any push-back against their established order. Because now THEY are the ones in charge. THEY have become "the establishment".

My how the worm has turned...

 

[BC38]

As per marijuana question, it asks if you are an UNLAWFUL user.

FWIW, as stupid as it may be, ANY marijuana use is UNLAWFUL per Federal law. And the 4473 specifically points out that fact. Even if you reside in a place where the state/local laws say MJ use is OK, Federal law still says it IS NOT. So if you're tokin' and answer NO to that question, you are now guilty of lying on a federal questionnaire/form and are in violation of Federal law. Which means you are now subject to Federal prosecution.

Drink yourself into a stupor every day - but don't you DARE to take a puff of the evil weed.

Unless you are lucky enough to be a member of the right family and/or are connected to the right people. In which case you would be offered a sweetheart deal and be exempted and shielded from the dire consequences that the rest of us plebes would have to worry about for committing the same offense.

 

[Rustyt1953]

If the Black Hawks were coming for me they'd have been here by now.

 

[jeffrefrig]

I'm curious, as are most of the FFLs I use, why they ask "Latino/not Latino," then follow up with race. I haven't raced since I was in cross-country in 10th grade. That question puzzles me, in this day & age.

 

[pawngal]

I'm curious, as are most of the FFLs I use, why they ask "Latino/not Latino," then follow up with race. I haven't raced since I was in cross-country in 10th grade. That question puzzles me, in this day & age.

IMO, that is there to make sure people read the form. About 1/2 of the people miss that it is a 2-part question.

Another new revised 4473 is in the works, probably out around Jan 2024.

 

[BC38]

If the Black Hawks were coming for me they'd have been here by now.

Yeah, most of us little people aren't important enough to warrant that kind of attention. Its only the ones who speak out too much and start gaining a following that get the full treatment. People like that they see as a threat.

Though I have recently been seeing articles about BATFE agents showing up unannounced at people's homes wanting to see their guns to "compare serial numbers to 4473 forms". These visits were supposedly triggered by a citizen making two or more gun purchases at the same time. The visit is purportedly to verify that they still have the guns in their possession and that they weren't straw purchases.

 

[THE PILGRIM]

Executed one just the other day at Cabela's on a Tablet.
Don't recall that ammo question.
Did see the where do you live question.
But it was only a 9mm!
Finally bought that Sig.

 

[LVSteve]

As per marijuana question, it asks if you are an UNLAWFUL user.

Under Federal law all marijuana use is illegal. It's not just about guns, either. If you are in any form of employment that takes federal money, Mary Jane is out. That goes for teachers and government contractors.

 

[Racer X]

Under Federal law all marijuana use is illegal. It's not just about guns, either. If you are in any form of employment that takes federal money, Mary Jane is out. That goes for teachers and government contractors.

ages ago as a contractor for an aerospace/defense company working on government projects I had a low level security clearance to be around "stuff" Drug use was on those forms too. Different purpose, but still related.

 

[Rubone]

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.

If it is all new to you, you aren't buying enough guns....

 

[steelslaver]

The red dawn and the Check for NCIS background checks wouldn't get you very much usable information in Montana. For example, there are 12,000 people in this county and 25 FFLs, plus the fact that lots of people have carry permits and with those there is no NCIS background check needed. But then they figure 2/3 of all households have guns here. I believe they are considerably low. The best plan would be just stay out of Montana. Just over a million people and over 1,500 FFLs. That is one for every 667 if you count the kids and those in retirement homes.

 

[stansdds]

Montana is sounding better and better every day!

 

[BE Mike]

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.

When I got back from Viet Nam, I went to the Ace Hardware store to buy a box of .22 LR ammo. They directed me upstairs. There was a lady at a caged counter with a hole like you'd see at an old time bank. She had me show my ID. She recorded the info and if I remember correctly, had me sign for the box of .22 LR ammo. I couldn't believe what had happened in this country for the year that I had been gone (the 1968 GCA)! It was bad enough to be treated badly as a Nam vet when I got home, but this was a real stab in the heart. Not long after that Uncle Sam sent me to West Berlin. Yeah, when I got back, I wrote letters to my representatives and the president. I was very happy when Reagan finally put an end to that ammo nonsense.

 

[deadin]

Back in the '60's I was stationed with a Navy Unit Band out of Seattle. We were on a road trip (People to People) putting shows through the 13th Naval District. We had a bus for personnel and two vans for our gear. I was driving one of the vans when the bus broke down in the middle of nowhere Montana. (One of those places if you were carrying a pair of oars or an anchor, someone would want to know what they were...)
Anyway, the Chief told me to take my van and find a phone (Pre cell phone days) and call for help.
Finally found a ranch house, pulled in, turned off the engine and I sat there. My "co-pilot" asked if I was going to go ask to use their phone. I told him "No", we will just sit here and if they decide to talk to us, they will come out. I also warned him to not be too surprised if they came out with a 30-30 or a 12 Ga.
All turned out well......

 

[Skeet 028]

Hell I grew up on the Eastern Shore of Maryland in the 60s If you pulled up to a farm house there...people woulda come out with a shotgun. . How things have changed there

 

[mojave30cal]

I think I might start buying antique Smith & Wessons. Problem
solved.

 

[Old Corp]

Some years back I worked p/t at a large, busy LGS that had been a hardware store owned by the same family for very many years. I had a chance to look at some very old completed 4473's from the 1960's.
It was interesting - there was less information on them than you'd find on most people's library cards.

 

[steelslaver]

Back in the '60's I was stationed with a Navy Unit Band out of Seattle. We were on a road trip (People to People) putting shows through the 13th Naval District. We had a bus for personnel and two vans for our gear. I was driving one of the vans when the bus broke down in the middle of nowhere Montana. (One of those places if you were carrying a pair of oars or an anchor, someone would want to know what they were...)
Anyway, the Chief told me to take my van and find a phone (Pre cell phone days) and call for help.
Finally found a ranch house, pulled in, turned off the engine and I sat there. My "co-pilot" asked if I was going to go ask to use their phone. I told him "No", we will just sit here and if they decide to talk to us, they will come out. I also warned him to not be too surprised if they came out with a 30-30 or a 12 Ga.
All turned out well......

No doubt when the did come out and found you were military with problems they did everything possible to help you.

 

[ISCS Yoda]

As per marijuana question, it asks if you are an UNLAWFUL user.

Under Federal law any use of marijuana is unlawful. Period. State laws do not apply.

That information is incorrect. It is legal under Federal Law to buy a gun for the express purpose of giving it as a gift to a non-prohibited person It happens a lot at Christmas for example.

I don't know when the ATF started permitting that but it sure wasn't the law for a very long time.

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/n...ms-licensee-ffl-newsletter-june-2021/download

Scenarios (Straw Purchase? Yes or No)

• Buying a firearm on behalf of an individual
(prohibited or not)? YES. The buyer must
answer "No" to question 21.a.

• Buying a firearm on behalf of an individual to
save them money (to get a discount)? YES.
The buyer must answer "No" to question 21.a.

• Buying a firearm as a gift? NO. As long as
the purchaser is the actual buyer, and the gift
is bona fide.

• Using spouses' credit card account to purchase
a firearm? NO. As long as the purchaser is an
authorized user on the credit card.

Actually, I am shocked that this is true - I have seen LGS FFLs turn down sales in the past when a buyer said it was a gift for someone else.

Call me crazy but I would never do it...........

 

[Old Corp]

Having worked at a few different LGS's over the span of 3+ decades, I could probably fill the entire bed of a full size pickup with all the 4473's I've handed over to be completed.

The ones closest to a closing time on a very busy Saturday will go to a customer who struggles over the form like it's Chineez calculus. The clerk/employee can only 'assist' so much.

A favorite one that comes to mind was an much older gentleman attempting to complete the form one afternoon. He was entirely stumped by the block "Place of Birth". He stated that was impossible to fill out because - "Hell - I was born at home!'
I suggested he not put 'Home' in that block. This prompted a very long exchange about where he grew up, family deaths, cousins, workplaces, short duration residencies, etc., etc, etc.
Somehow we finally narrowed it down to an actual location.

And, some of the LGS's I worked p/t at were 'retirement jobs' and I enjoyed it for a bit. THEN the 'panic-buying sessions' came about. Without boring all with details - let's just say that I discovered retail, it's pay and lack of benefits had me swear off of that as a retirement job.
Those several sessions of 'panic buying' made for a pretty miserable work environment. They helped the owners ($$$) - but for employees it was pure aggravation.

 

[TIMETRIPPER]

I have only seen the new questions when filling out a 4473 via computer. There is that question about gender which now includes a third option as being "non binary". If selected, this seems at odds with how to answer line 21h, re about being mentally defective or committed to an institution.

John

 

[sceva]

As I recall the old ammo requirement from the 68 GCA only applied to Handgun ammo, Shotgun or rifle ammo did not need to go into the "book". The stickler was ammo that could be used for both; .22 rimfire, 32-20, 38-40, and due to Contenders etc .223, .308 etc.. Some (Urban areas mostly) would just ask if it's for a rifle or handgun, if rifle good to go no matter what the caliber. Others would require the book if it could be used in either.
The requirement was ended by cooler heads in the Government once it was shown that there was absolutely no instance where the records were used to solve or prosecute a crime

 

[raljr1]

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 a local store near our camp that stopped]ed selling ammo when the registratiom came in. Owner said ot was too much trouble and did not want to ask women for their birth date.