Background checks and trading

[SA Friday]

FFL 07/02 here. I want to revise what I said earlier. Looks like ATF has released updated instructions to us, which means as long as a seller does not "relinquish" the firearm, they can leave with the gun at any point. Don't release your gun to the dealer when you're doing the transfer!

A 4473 is required for all transfers, and logging in/out of FFL books is still required before any FTF transfer can proceed. However, the BGC can happen prior to the transfer, and if the buyer fails, the seller can walk out. The $10 still gets charged to the FFL regardless, and you can bet they are going to want their service fee up front too, regardless of pass/fail.

Also, keep in mind the $10 you pay to CBI is not to the ATF. Colorado requires the $10 fee to pay for its own internal check, because "it's better" than the free federal NICS check, I guess.

For your viewing "pleasure":
https://www.atf.gov/sites/default/fi...rough_ffls.pdf

Short version:
1) Buyer fills out 4473
2) FFL checks and records buyer ID, marks handgun/longgun/other (no SN# yet), and runs the BGC. CBI charges $10 at this point
3) If pass, FFL takes gun & confirms SN, enters gun into books, writes the SN# on the 4473, and logs the book out to buyer. Buyer/seller leave happy.
4) If fail, seller takes the gun and leaves. FFL did not take possession. FFL does not enter the gun into the books. 4473 gets filed (without SN/gun info).
5) If the seller ever gives "exclusive possession" to the FFL (not a lawyer but you'd probably have to actually leave to do this), then seller has to pass a BCG to get their gun back. Seller still owns it, just can't take possession. If seller fails BGC, you'll have to work something out with the FFL (likely consignment as mentioned above, or find another buyer).

So it could be worse. Could be a LOT better though.
Be nice to your FFL if you found a good one. This stuff is as much BS for us as it is for you. Also, keep in mind not every FFL does it exactly this way. You can certainly direct them to the linked doc, but don't be a jerk about it.

Sorry Brian. I missed this post earlier. This is very interesting. Two phone calls to ATF and was NEVER told about this. This clarifies the process very well.

[Brian]

Sorry Brian. I missed this post earlier. This is very interesting. Two phone calls to ATF and was NEVER told about this. This clarifies the process very well.

You're not the only one. This information wasn't published to everyone like the last one from January was. No clue why...

[Brian]

This post should be stickied!..... Please

Maybe if I get bored tonight, I'll write up and summarize everything in one post and we can keep it updated, just with the facts.

[Marine24]

Process is no doubt confusing, even for the local FFL. The ones I typically use believes they need to take possession of the firearm, log it in to their books with both seller and buyer present. They will charge the $10 CBI fee plus an additional fee, like they would for an out of state transfer. The latter would run as much as $50. If the buyer fails, they would have to run an additional BGC on the seller to release the firearm to them. If the seller fails the BGC, they would hold the weapon until either the buyer or the seller cleared up what ever caused them to fail the BGC. They didn't say what they would do if neither could pass.

Not sure if they are aware of the net ATF guidelines posted above, but right or wrong, this is the process they believe is appropriate given the new laws. Good time to feed my knife fetish until the dust settles on this one, while supporting the Sheriff's suit to get it thrown out.

[brutal]

Technically, you can only do this when you are indicating you are buying a gun. FFL has to mark whether the BGC is for a long gun, hand gun or other.
That being said, you really were interested in that handgun the FFL had in stock, but changed your mind, right?

Yes, I wasn't going to specifically call that premise out, but it was there for those that could interpret my "intent."

[edit] I also did not see Brian's excellent post follow up.

[brutal]

OK,

I think that clears up FFL transfer.

Now what about repairs not sent to the MFR?

If I have to hand off a lower/frame for repair or finishing, is that a transfer?

Not an issue for the current slide finishing work I'm having done - the guy is SOT or I could have just handed over the slide part, but what about all these other part time handlers that do not have an FFL?

[SA Friday]

OK,

I think that clears up FFL transfer.

Now what about repairs not sent to the MFR?

If I have to hand off a lower/frame for repair or finishing, is that a transfer?

Not an issue for the current slide finishing work I'm having done - he guy is SOT or I could have just handed over the frame part, but what about all these other part time handlers that do not have an FFL?

Ah, a BP inquiry if I've ever seen one.

[brutal]

Ah, a BP inquiry if I've ever seen one.

"slide part" I caught my error...

[james_bond_007]

...I was approaching it more from the perspective of "accidental possession" - I wouldn't want a seller to be afraid to hand a gun to the FFL to look it over (heck one of the best parts about transfers is seeing what someone else had the money to buy!)...

Brian: Your scenario of handling a firearm while looking it over should be covered...handling it with a seller supplied >15rd mag however, DOES violate HB13-1224

HB13-1229 aka 18-12-112 (6)(g) should cover this scenario
(6) THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION DO NOT APPLY TO:
...

(g) ANY TEMPORARY TRANSFER THAT OCCURS WHILE IN THE CONTINUOUS PRESENCE OF THE OWNER OF THE FIREARM

Note: In case anyone is wondering, I'm not "freaking out" or "all uptight" over the new laws. I just enjoy threads where they can be "tested" a bit, with some other friendly forum members. In lieu of better written laws, common sense is always a good choice (...might not coincide with the law, 100%, but if you are not sure of the law, it is the next best thing...)

Note: This post is my opinion and is not to be construed as legal advice.

[Brian]

Brian: Your scenario of handling a firearm while looking it over should be covered...handling it with a seller supplied >15rd mag however, DOES violate HB13-1224

Yeah, I have yet to come up with a scenario where a legal transfer could occur with >15rd mags, other than maybe adding someone to a trust you created prior to today that held your mags. And I'd never recommend that anyway, even if it was legal. The "person" clause in 1224 makes that sketchy at best anyway. Any thoughts on how well the "trust" method of mag ownership is going to hold up?