1. Welcome to Tacoma World!

    You are currently viewing as a guest! To get full-access, you need to register for a FREE account.

    As a registered member, you’ll be able to:
    • Participate in all Tacoma discussion topics
    • Communicate privately with other Tacoma owners from around the world
    • Post your own photos in our Members Gallery
    • Access all special features of the site

ATF Reverses Interpretation of GCA – Redefines “Transfers” of Firearms

Discussion in 'Guns & Hunting' started by Packman73, Jun 3, 2010.

  1. Jun 3, 2010 at 1:07 PM
    #1
    Packman73

    Packman73 [OP] ^^^^ 3%er ^^^^

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Member:
    #8741
    Messages:
    8,372
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Matt
    The free state of Arizona
    Vehicle:
    2007 TRD Off Road
    Bilstein 5100's (front set @ .85"), OME 885's, chris4x4 anti-Taco-lean spacer on driver's side, Total Chaos UCAs, Rear Leaf Spring TSB, Toytec AALs, Black FJ TT Wheels, BFG 285/75R 16 AT Tires, TRD Exhaust, Viper Alarm, Fog Light Mod, De-badged, Blue LED Dome Light, EZ Clamped Tailgate, Wet Okoles, Satoshi Grill, 5% Tint, Engine Tick Fix, Black Rear Bumper, Black Center Valence, Exhaust Cut At Axle, Thanks for all the help chris4x4!
    http://www.ammoland.com/2010/06/02/atf-redefines-transfers-of-firearms/
    NEWTOWN, Conn --(AmmoLand.com)- Reversing an interpretation of the Gun Control Act that has been on the books for more than four decades, ATF posted a ruling declaring any shipment of a firearm by a manufacturer (FFL) to any agent or business (e.g., an engineering-design firm, patent lawyer, testing lab, gun writer, etc.) for a bona fide business purpose to be a “transfer” under the Gun Control Act of 1968.
    As a consequence, legitimate business-related shipments will now require the recipient to complete a Form 4473 and undergo a Brady criminal background check. In many instances, these requirements will force shipments to a third party, thereby lengthening the process and the time that the firearm is in transit.
    ATF officials have acknowledged this is a radical change from ATF’s long-standing interpretation that this was not a “transfer” under the Gun Control Act that was set forth in a 1969 ruling (”Shipment or Delivery of Firearms By Licensees to Employees, Agents, Representatives, Writers and Evaluators.”) and further clarified in a 1972 ruling.
    In other words, ATF is now saying its long-standing rulings, issued shortly after the Gun Control Act was enacted, were wrong. ATF should be required to explain why it took 42 years to decide that its original understanding and interpretation of the Gun Control Act is now somehow wrong. ATF appears to be under the mistaken impression that the Brady Act of 1993 changed what constitutes a “transfer” under the Gun Control Act. Even if this were true - and it is not – then ATF should be required to explain why it took 17 years to figure this out.
    ATF itself admits that neither the Gun Control Act nor the Brady Act defines “transfer.” There is simply nothing in the Brady Act or is there any other legal reason that compels ATF to now reject 40 years of precedent.
    For more than four decades manufacturers have shipped firearms to agents for bona fide business purposes. ATF is unable to identify a single instance during the past 40 years where a single firearm shipped in reliance upon ATF’s rulings was used in a crime. This unwarranted reinterpretation of the law will cause significant disruption and additional costs for industry members and increase the cost of doing business, while doing nothing to advance public safety.
     
  2. Jun 3, 2010 at 1:12 PM
    #2
    NraFan

    NraFan Join the NRA! Protect your freedom!

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Member:
    #22703
    Messages:
    1,568
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    JT
    SoCal
    Vehicle:
    2011 Sienna LE, rockin the mini van!
    Power sliding doors baby! WooHoo!
    And here we go again. Why can't the government focus on some of the REAL issues with this country and leave the gun owners alone?
     
  3. Jun 3, 2010 at 1:27 PM
    #3
    Packman73

    Packman73 [OP] ^^^^ 3%er ^^^^

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2008
    Member:
    #8741
    Messages:
    8,372
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Matt
    The free state of Arizona
    Vehicle:
    2007 TRD Off Road
    Bilstein 5100's (front set @ .85"), OME 885's, chris4x4 anti-Taco-lean spacer on driver's side, Total Chaos UCAs, Rear Leaf Spring TSB, Toytec AALs, Black FJ TT Wheels, BFG 285/75R 16 AT Tires, TRD Exhaust, Viper Alarm, Fog Light Mod, De-badged, Blue LED Dome Light, EZ Clamped Tailgate, Wet Okoles, Satoshi Grill, 5% Tint, Engine Tick Fix, Black Rear Bumper, Black Center Valence, Exhaust Cut At Axle, Thanks for all the help chris4x4!
    Extra fees and extra time to get work done. This is total nonsense.
     
To Top