Court upholds rifle sales reporting requirement

What's going on in Washington, D.C.?

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

User avatar

Topic author
LSUTiger
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1153
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 2:36 pm

Court upholds rifle sales reporting requirement

#1

Post by LSUTiger »

http://www.myfoxny.com/story/22469110/c ... equirement" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Chance favors the prepared. Making good people helpless doesn't make bad people harmless.
There is no safety in denial. When seconds count the Police are only minutes away.
Sometimes I really wish a lawyer would chime in and clear things up. Do we have any lawyers on this forum?

GeoffB
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2012 11:40 am

Re: Court upholds rifle sales reporting requirement

#2

Post by GeoffB »

Does this include the whole state of Texas, or just FFL dealers close to the border?
User avatar

The_Busy_Mom
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 352
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:07 pm
Location: DFW Metro Area

Re: Court upholds rifle sales reporting requirement

#3

Post by The_Busy_Mom »

Every state that borders Mexico - the whole state. We are in DFW area, and have to report. Total bull, if you ask me.

:txflag: TBM
Texas CHL Instructor / NRA Certified Instructor
Final Shot Armory - Specializing in Firearms Sales & Transfers, NFA Sales
$20 Transfers for Current TX CHL Holders, Military, Teachers, LEO / $25 Everyone else
http://www.FinalShotUS.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

lrpettit
Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 140
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:33 pm
Location: Plano/Dallas

Re: Court upholds rifle sales reporting requirement

#4

Post by lrpettit »

I guess I'll have to start limiting my purchases to one per week! :thumbs2:
Opinions are my own, commonly worthless, and should not be relied upon. I am not a lawyer.
LTC Holder

JSThane
Banned
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 610
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 12:07 pm

Re: Court upholds rifle sales reporting requirement

#5

Post by JSThane »

Or don't buy two rifles from the same shop within a week. Space them out, and support ALL your local Fun Shops, not just one!

:biggrinjester:
User avatar

OldCannon
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 3058
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 11:19 am
Location: Converse, TX

Re: Court upholds rifle sales reporting requirement

#6

Post by OldCannon »

lrpettit wrote:I guess I'll have to start limiting my purchases to one per week! :thumbs2:
I make sure all my customers are informed and aware of the current anti-gun rain dance going on by King Obama. I've had customers that have had more than one "qualifying" rifle get here at the same time, and they just transfer one a week. You don't have to transfer them all at once. There's no law that says you have to :)
I don't fear guns; I fear voters and politicians that fear guns.

lrpettit
Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 140
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2012 9:33 pm
Location: Plano/Dallas

Re: Court upholds rifle sales reporting requirement

#7

Post by lrpettit »

OldCannon wrote:
lrpettit wrote:I guess I'll have to start limiting my purchases to one per week! :thumbs2:
I make sure all my customers are informed and aware of the current anti-gun rain dance going on by King Obama. I've had customers that have had more than one "qualifying" rifle get here at the same time, and they just transfer one a week. You don't have to transfer them all at once. There's no law that says you have to :)
With my budget (or lack thereof) I don't think I'll find this to be a big problem anytime soon. ;-)
Opinions are my own, commonly worthless, and should not be relied upon. I am not a lawyer.
LTC Holder
User avatar

jmra
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 10371
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:51 am
Location: Ellis County

Re: Court upholds rifle sales reporting requirement

#8

Post by jmra »

lrpettit wrote:
OldCannon wrote:
lrpettit wrote:I guess I'll have to start limiting my purchases to one per week! :thumbs2:
I make sure all my customers are informed and aware of the current anti-gun rain dance going on by King Obama. I've had customers that have had more than one "qualifying" rifle get here at the same time, and they just transfer one a week. You don't have to transfer them all at once. There's no law that says you have to :)
With my budget (or lack thereof) I don't think I'll find this to be a big problem anytime soon. ;-)
:iagree:
Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid.
John Wayne
NRA Lifetime member
User avatar

tomneal
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1183
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 2:26 pm
Location: Houston
Contact:

Re: Court upholds rifle sales reporting requirement

#9

Post by tomneal »

http://www.class3weapons.com/

Reporting applys to multi-packs of AR15 lower receivers

2 Pack Rock River Arms AR0114RRA Stripped Lower Receivers Price $289.00

Finishing the guns might be expensive but the Multi-packs are within my budget.


On the other hand...
I thought there were multiple court cases, that would go to at least 2 different Courts of Appeal.
All the cases aren't complete, are they?
See you at the range
NRA Life, TSRA Life, USPSA Life, Mensa (not worth $50 per year so it's expired)
Tom (Retired May 2019) Neal
User avatar

OldCannon
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 3058
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 11:19 am
Location: Converse, TX

Re: Court upholds rifle sales reporting requirement

#10

Post by OldCannon »

tomneal wrote:http://www.class3weapons.com/

Reporting applys to multi-packs of AR15 lower receivers
No, it absolutely doesn't. Why do you think that?
I don't fear guns; I fear voters and politicians that fear guns.
User avatar

tomneal
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1183
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2004 2:26 pm
Location: Houston
Contact:

Re: Court upholds rifle sales reporting requirement

#11

Post by tomneal »

Good thing I am not an FFL
See you at the range
NRA Life, TSRA Life, USPSA Life, Mensa (not worth $50 per year so it's expired)
Tom (Retired May 2019) Neal
User avatar

sjfcontrol
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 6267
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 7:14 am
Location: Flint, TX

Re: Court upholds rifle sales reporting requirement

#12

Post by sjfcontrol »

OldCannon wrote:
tomneal wrote:http://www.class3weapons.com/

Reporting applys to multi-packs of AR15 lower receivers
No, it absolutely doesn't. Why do you think that?
Could you explain why it would't? The lower is the formal "gun" part.
Range Rule: "The front gate lock is not an acceptable target."
Never Forget. Image
User avatar

OldCannon
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 3058
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 11:19 am
Location: Converse, TX

Re: Court upholds rifle sales reporting requirement

#13

Post by OldCannon »

sjfcontrol wrote:
OldCannon wrote:
tomneal wrote:http://www.class3weapons.com/

Reporting applys to multi-packs of AR15 lower receivers
No, it absolutely doesn't. Why do you think that?
Could you explain why it would't? The lower is the formal "gun" part.
A lower is not a gun. It's a receiver. To the ATF, it is not a rifle or a shotgun, therefore it's marked as an "other" in the transfer. It is logged as a "Receiver" in the A&D log. Yes, it's a serialized component, but it is NOT a gun.

An AR-15 "stripped lower" is not, and never has been, considered a "gun" in any legal consideration (ok, I can't speak for the insane states like CA or NY)

Edit: In a twisted sense of irony, if you are under 21, you _cannot_ transfer a AR-15 stripped lower, but you can buy a complete rifle. Go figure "rlol"
I don't fear guns; I fear voters and politicians that fear guns.
User avatar

RX8er
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1269
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2012 10:36 pm
Location: Northeast Fort Worth

Re: Court upholds rifle sales reporting requirement

#14

Post by RX8er »

tomneal wrote:
Reporting applys to multi-packs of AR15 lower receivers

On the other hand...
I thought there were multiple court cases, that would go to at least 2 different Courts of Appeal.
All the cases aren't complete, are they?

I have heard of one case where an IOI was telling FFL dealers this. Our inspector was very specific in the fact hat it had to be a full rifle. This form specifically calls out reporting semi-automatic rifles larger than .22. The form in question is the ATF E-Form 3310.12
This form is to be used by licensees to report all transactions in which an unlicensed person acquired, at one time or during five consecutive business days, two or more
semi-automatic rifles larger than .22 caliber (including .223/5.56 caliber) with the ability to accept a detachable magazine. This form is not required when the rifles are
returned to the same person from whom they are received.
Final Shot offers Firearms / FFL Transfers / CHL Instruction. Please like our Facebook Page.
If guns kill people, do pens misspell words?
I like options: Sig Sauer | DPMS | Springfield Armory | Glock | Beretta
User avatar

Wes
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 885
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 6:02 pm
Location: Ft Worth
Contact:

Re: Court upholds rifle sales reporting requirement

#15

Post by Wes »

OldCannon wrote:
sjfcontrol wrote:
OldCannon wrote:
tomneal wrote:http://www.class3weapons.com/

Reporting applys to multi-packs of AR15 lower receivers
No, it absolutely doesn't. Why do you think that?
Could you explain why it would't? The lower is the formal "gun" part.
A lower is not a gun. It's a receiver. To the ATF, it is not a rifle or a shotgun, therefore it's marked as an "other" in the transfer. It is logged as a "Receiver" in the A&D log. Yes, it's a serialized component, but it is NOT a gun.

An AR-15 "stripped lower" is not, and never has been, considered a "gun" in any legal consideration (ok, I can't speak for the insane states like CA or NY)

Edit: In a twisted sense of irony, if you are under 21, you _cannot_ transfer a AR-15 stripped lower, but you can buy a complete rifle. Go figure "rlol"
So they just require the ffl transfer because its serialized, not because its classified as a gun? Interesting. I knew it needed ffl and everything, can't say I knew exactly why though since its not a gun as you said.

I actually bought two rifles from cabelas a couple months ago and asked about this but they said they had no requirement like that. Has this been pending the court outcome?
Alliance Arsenal - Firearms and transfers in north Ft. Worth
Post Reply

Return to “Federal”