A question about gun control

F

fragtagninja

New member
Hello all. Before I begin I want it to be clear that I want to keep this subject narrow. Not a big long open discussion on gun control. Simply the core of this particular matter.

#1 It is illegal for felons to even attempt to purchase firearms under federal law correct?

#2 Are FFL's required to report felons attempting to purchase guns from them?

#3 If not why don't we? Healthcare workers are required to report crimes.

It seems to me these two things are everything we need to prevent felons from buying guns through FFL's. Not much we can about black market as it opperates outside the law anyway, but not one of these things is overly invasive IMO.


Thoughts?

Again we have enough talk about gun control. I am specifically wanting to discuss the above. How they work. How they should work, and if they don't why. Because these two simple things seem like they should be very effective. Of course straw sales are a judgement call of the individual FFL handling the transaction and we can't really change how someone does business. If they choose to ignore an obvious straw sale and no one is there to witness the deed not much can be done. Thus straw sales are a seperate problem.
 
"#2 Are FFL's required to report felons attempting to purchase guns from them?"

Maybe a forum member/FFL can answer better than I, but...

Once a prohibited person completes a 4473 and a NICS check is submitted and denied, the federal authorities now have the information they need to pursue a prosecution. A FFL needen't report anything, so the answer to your question is "No".

The problem is, according to the Vice President of the U.S. (the executive branch who's responsibility it is to enforce the law), "they don't have time for that".

Yet they want to push for more background checks.:confused::rolleyes:
 
#1, I don't believe so. It is illegal to lie on the 4473, so if a felon answers that they aren't, they did violate federal law, BUT
#2, how would the FFL holder know? They just get back a "procede" or "denied" from the NICS, they don't get a reason.
 
Technically there may be a crime committed when a felon attempts to buy a firearm. I know in the 4 years I worked in a gun store there were hundreds of denials, but not one single followup of any kind, at least as far as we were aware.
 
What ???

Not a big long open discussion on gun control. Simply the core of this particular matter.
Click to expand...
You want to control the replies and target the FFL dealers. Yet your title clearly states it's about Gun Control. You might want to edit your original post. .... ;)

On 1, 2 & 3,

Don't know as I'm not an FFL Dealer but do follow the law. .... :)

Be Safe !!!
 
Once a prohibited person completes a 4473 and a NICS check is submitted and denied, the federal authorities now have the information they need to pursue a prosecution. A FFL needen't report anything, so the answer to your question is "No".

The problem is, according to the Vice President of the U.S. (the executive branch who's responsibility it is to enforce the law), "they don't have time for that".

Yet they want to push for more background checks.
Click to expand...

How does the Fed.gov's power increase by arresting and prosecuting people thay arleady have power over? What's in it for them? Why would they expend resources when there is nothing in it for them?

You can't rule honest people, unless you either make criminals of them, or threaten to ......
 
Who said anything about the gubbmint increasing power? I was just answering the OP's question -- that there is no need for the FFL to report anything since the feds have all the information they need, should they decide to prosecute someone for lying on the 4473, if they did in fact lie on the 4473.
 
And I was just explaining why the Feds don't prosecute the felons that attempt to buy guns .... I'd be easy, yet they don't do it.

You asked why, and I offered my hypothesis why: There's nothing in it for TPTB, yet considerable expenses in resources.

They are not interested in actually doing anything other than increasing their own power, and actually solving the problem would not help that.
 
Last edited:
fragtagninja said:
Hello all. Before I begin I want it to be clear that I want to keep this subject narrow. Not a big long open discussion on gun control. Simply the core of this particular matter.

#1 It is illegal for felons to even attempt to purchase firearms under federal law correct?

#2 Are FFL's required to report felons attempting to purchase guns from them?

#3 If not why don't we? Healthcare workers are required to report crimes.
Click to expand...
#1-- Under federal law, no, oddly enough. A felon can go into a gun store, point to a gun, tell the clerk that he wants to buy it, and plop down some cash. So far, no federal crime. If he tells the truth on the form about being a prohibited person, he'll be denied. If he lies, then he's committed a federal crime, and a big one at that. If he lies on the form and the transfer does happen, then he's a felon in possession of a firearm, which is a crime at both state and federal levels.

At the state level, it may be different. Arkansas just passed a law making it a state crime to provide false information or to encourage a lawful dealer or private seller to provide a firearm under false pretenses or under illegal circumstances (e.g. to a prohibited person).

#2 -- Not that I'm aware of.

#3 -- The simple answer: because the law's not written that way. That may sound silly, but it is what it is. If that's part of the law that you think should be changed, contact your congresscritters and let them know.
 
If [#3 is] part of the law that you think should be changed, contact your congresscritters and let them know.
Click to expand...
I surmise that it would be more effective to enact such a law on the state level, because local law enforcement is more likely to have the resources available to arrest the suspect before he or she has fled.
 
In practice, I'm not sure how this would work. I doubt that too many felons waltz into gun stores and check "yes" on the relevant part of the 4473. If they check "no" and the NICS check comes back "denied," that's all the information the FFL has.

Do we really want FFL's calling the local cops on everyone whose background check is denied, when this may have happened by mistake? Or should FFL's be given more information about the denial? If someone was denied due to a mental health disability, should the FFL have that information? It seems to me that either of these is putting an FFL into a quasi-law enforcement role; if I were an FFL, I'd be very uncomfortable with that.

The feds have the relevant information (why the person was denied), and it seems to me that they're the ones who ought to take action.
 
So what you are telling me is that we really have everything we need to stop this crap from happening, but we just don't enforce it? Pffft I should have known.:rolleyes:
 
I doubt that too many felons waltz into gun stores and check "yes" on the relevant part of the 4473. If they check "no" and the NICS check comes back "denied," that's all the information the FFL has.
Click to expand...
That's a great summary, Vanya. We don't know why someone got denied on a background check, and we could get in trouble by making assumptions. Furthermore, FFL's aren't law enforcement, so it's not their job.

Furthermore, I've known people to check "yes" to a felony by accident ("I thought I was supposed to check 'yes' all the way down"), and I've known a couple of folks with really old stuff in their past who didn't know better. You'd be amazed by what they call "felonies" these days.
 
Well I have certainly learned a bit from this, and I see Vanya's point in regards to FFL's not being law enforcement. It does seem unfair to put a simple businessman in such a position. Again Vanya made a good point in regards to the feds actually enforcing this stuff.

So if I understand this correctly most of the laws we have would prevent criminals from obtaining guns if they were actually enforced yes?

Now that said basically by not enforcing these provisions we are encouraging convicts to seek out firearms because there is no penalty for doing so. They can try to buy until they slip through somehow, or be stuck perpetually trying to buy. Why not try if there is no penalty for it?

So I have to ask. Why the NICS check at all? What good does it do? From the info provided here it does not sound to me like the feds are very serious at all about keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. Looks to me like a big song and dance about nothing.


So then do you all think that this is as simple as getting these provisions enforced by the feds? Or are there are small legislative changes that need to be made in this area?
 
Why not try if there is no penalty for it?
Click to expand...
There are penalties. It's illegal for felons to possess firearms, and my understanding is that if a prohibited person gets called in to the NICS system, they will get a visit.
 
Tom Servo said:
It's illegal for felons to possess firearms, and my understanding is that if a prohibited person gets called in to the NICS system, they will get a visit.
Click to expand...
Wait... they get a "visit" but are not charged with a crime? Or are you talking about something else? Because known statistics and statements by the government indicate that almost zero people who lie on 4473s about being a disqualified felon ever get charged.

I'm having trouble squaring your "understanding" with those facts, although it's obvious that not even an FFL would know if people who get NICS denied later get visits... only the government really knows (if the government can be said to know anything at all... bureaucracy can be very dense).

fragtagninja said:
So what you are telling me is that we really have everything we need to stop this crap from happening, but we just don't enforce it? Pffft I should have known.
Click to expand...

I'd qualify that and say that part of the problem is what's been mentioned elsewhere in this thread: mistaken NICS denials. In order to go after people who fail NICS checks, it would have to be a lot more accurate on the false positive side. But they're not interested in overall error rate. TPTB are only interested in making sure that as few people get false negatives (NICS approvals to go ahead with the tx) as possible.

The only constraint on false positives is if there are so many that subsequent denial challenges start eating up the NICS budget, high-level bureaucrats will get upset.
 
Yeah, unless something has changed about it, a felon - to break the law and be "in possession" of a firearm - merely has to be in control of it. Just picking it up off the counter is enough for the ATF to arrest and charge him.

But in my 40 some odd years in the gun community I have never heard of the ATF going after a violent felon for simple possession of a firearm. I have known them to go after hobbyists for perceived infractions - people who would not be a danger to anybody - but I have not seen them going after the kind of people who these kinds of laws were written to protect society from.

This is just one of the many good reasons I have for opposing any further anti-gun legislation. When the ATF starts to actually work on the problems it pretends it is concerned with we might have some reason to consider giving it more tools.
 
#1 Yes it is illegal for a prohibited person to attempt to purchase a firearm. This includes individuals that have been convicted of a felony, misdemeanor domestic violence, are chemically dependent, or have been deemed mentally incompetent.

#2 FFL's are not required to report prohibited persons that attempt to purchase a firearm. During the NICS check, the FFL is only given one of three responses regarding whether an individual has passed or not. They are PROCEED, SUSPEND, or STOP. The reason for these responses is never revealed to a FFL holder; SUSPEND or STOP are sometimes due to similar names/birthdays with a prohibited person - there is an appeal process if someone is wrongfully denied. In short, a SUSPEND or STOP doesn't necessarily mean guilt.

Lying on a government form (i.e. 4473) is a crime in itself.

#3 The Fed's along with local law enforcement don't want to take the time or spend the money to prosecute these cases. This link is from a Senate hearing where the witnesses (law enforcement) boldly state that they don't "chase paper" (regarding prosecuting those who attempt to purchase illegally, i.e. lie on the 4473).

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/clip/4396545

######

I would also add that under Title 18 of US Government Code, possession of a stolen firearm is punishable up to 10 years in Federal prison yet this also isn't enforced. Across the nation, stolen firearms are treated as the misdemeanor of "receiving stolen property".

Edit: I should add regarding #2, if the person fails the background check, what is there to report? - the government already knows. If they want for evidence, they can request the 4473 that has the signature and false information to use in prosecution (I've never heard of that happening though).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top