Concerns with firearm purchase

[fingers]

I went ahead and emailed him. I got a very fast response indicating that I can contact the seller, have the seller issue a "call tag", and then have the seller reship the firearms to a different FFL dealer without an excessive wait period. I emailed the seller and am awaiting a response from them.

I also contacted Arnzen Arms as advised by many here. She confirmed that they move forward with transactions after 3 business days but added: "However, in this particular case, I do not think we would be comfortable performing the transfer, knowing that there is still an open-status NICS check existing for the same person/gun." So it sounds like she'd be willing to provide speedy service for any transfer except this one.

So assuming things move smoothly with the original seller and LE gun sales, I am back to square one with selecting an FFL since it appears Arnzen Arms won't work out. Sigfan recommended Southwest Arms too. I will probably contact them next to see if they might impose a waiting period.

I read that the FBI or ATF or whoever runs the computers that are used to process these background checks are constantly being updated and have been causing a lot of false denials / delays lately for people that have never had a delay or denial ever in their life. For anyone reading this thread, I guess the lesson to take from it is do your research on an FFL before you have firearms shipped to him/her. Once the FFL is in possession of your firearms, it is a hassle to unwind the transaction. Don't automatically go with the cheapest guy. Make sure you are aware of their policy regarding a "delay" result from the background check and are comfortable with it. This goes for anyone with a squeaky-clean background as well as people who raised some hell as a young adult, since delays/denials apparently can arise from a questionable background or from a error in the computers that run the background checks.

[BigBlue]

Sounds like you asked him directly about getting the firearm(s) returned to the seller and/or sent to another FFL. Why didn't you just ask him about the delay and whether he had followed up with it (or would he)? Seems like that would be an easier step than re-shipping them and starting over with another FFL.

Since you're in the middle of this conversation with him about the problem it may be worth pointing out to him the angst that his web site's defined 'policies' have caused and suggesting (gently) that he consider re-phrasing them or mentioning situations where the "don't bug me" rule may not apply. The true test of whether he's worth a damn is if he takes a suggestion like that to heart and fixes things for the future.

BB

[Squib Joe]

To anyone wondering what happens when a FFL releases a firearm after the required three day period and later turns up information that would warrant a denial of the transfer, it goes something like this...

The ATF contacts the FFL, informs them of the denial, and asks if the firearm has been released to the customer. If it has, they ask for the address and other information that would allow them to contact the prohibited person. In most cases, they then pay a visit to the prohibited person and give them the option of either surrendering the firearm or immediately selling it back to an FFL (and, of course, you'll be doing that at a loss).

With that being said, if you're a person who thinks that they might be considered prohibited for any reason, it can be in your best interest to wait for an actual approval from the NICS system before taking possession of the firearm - even if legal to do so.

[Sigfan220]

To anyone wondering what happens when a FFL releases a firearm after the required three day period and later turns up information that would warrant a denial of the transfer, it goes something like this...

The ATF contacts the FFL, informs them of the denial, and asks if the firearm has been released to the customer. If it has, they ask for the address and other information that would allow them to contact the prohibited person. In most cases, they then pay a visit to the prohibited person and give them the option of either surrendering the firearm or immediately selling it back to an FFL (and, of course, you'll be doing that at a loss).

With that being said, if you're a person who thinks that they might be considered prohibited for any reason, it can be in your best interest to wait for an actual approval from the NICS system before taking possession of the firearm - even if legal to do so.

That's pretty much what the ATF told me when I got my FFL. They strongly urged me to consider not transferring due to the hassle.

[crbutler]

I can see the hassle to the ATF.

I can see that it is bad to have an ineligible guy get the gun.

What I don't see in this bit is how it's a hassle to the dealer if he follows the law scrupulously, and gives a guy his property at the time frame listed by law, and states to the ATF, well you had your time frame and didn't do your job, I guess you have more work to do...here's the form and the copy of his DL and permit (if a handgun), hope you catch him and make a case against him.

You couldn't be saying that the ATF will extract retribution on the dealer for following the law?

This whole thing is a part of the problem...if you are an ineligible person, you know it. If you are not really ineligible, then the courts should let you have the gun and bust some chops for whoever put you in wrong. If you tried to get a gun and you are ineligible, you committed some crime, if nothing else, perjury. Do the time.

[igofast]

I can see the hassle to the ATF.

I'm seeing a lot of gun store policies are arising out of ATF not wanting to be hassled. They simply suggest, or strongly encourage, or threaten, or whatever that things are done a certain way thereby moving their job to the vendor.

[Squib Joe]

What I don't see in this bit is how it's a hassle to the dealer if he follows the law scrupulously

That is the point I was trying to make. It isn't a hassle at all for the dealer when this happens. They aren't "in trouble" at all for releasing every gun after three business days, even if one of these later comes back with a denial.

[Randygmn]

I just have to ask... how much was the fine you were unwilling to pay for some peace of mind? I'm assuming it was thousands, right? Sounds like you had a few weeks of hell just worrying. I mean, what's that worth?

[fingers]

I just have to ask... how much was the fine you were unwilling to pay for some peace of mind? I'm assuming it was thousands, right? Sounds like you had a few weeks of hell just worrying. I mean, what's that worth?

I assume you are being sarcastic since you said "thousands"? I am a frugal person and, as mentioned, I picked this guy because he offered $10 transfers. If I had to pay extra for communicating with him, then I would have failed to save any money. Out of my desire to not waste money unnecessarily and out of respect for his policy, I opted to not contact him until the wait really started to bother me. There is nothing wrong with being frugal, ask anyone who has a nice bank account and lives in a nice house. You don't get nice things by blowing money unnecessarily. Capitalism works because people seek the best price for goods and services. The people with the most assets got there because they buy their pants from menards during their crazy days sale and drive cars that look like they are going to break down any moment. Its easy to forget that bad service can come with low prices and that is the mistake I made here.

And it has been a minor hell in my mind. I'm not pleased that this very un-consumer friendly policy was revealed at a time it was too late to go with a different FFL without paying greater fees. There has been crime in my neighborhood lately. Although the criminals haven't had the ambition to enter anyone's house yet, cars and garages have been burglarized. I've got two little girls and a wife here and I am responsible for their safety, especially when I know there is criminal activity occurring in my neighborhood. Its been my goal to introduce my wife to a small benign-looking firearm and get a concealable for myself when I am outside in the shop/garage or out and about. The guns I currently own are not CCW-friendly and would probably be a little intimidating to my wife when I try to introduce her to firearms. So, yes, I've had a hard time with this delay, ever since my car was broken into. I've had a hard time sleeping and it has been a minor hell having to deal with this ridiculous government delay when I know full well that my record is clean enough to have passed the background checks necessary to become a notary, an attorney, obtain my conceal carry permit and purchase firearms in the past. If an armed intruder bursts through one of my garden-level windows tonight or tomorrow, there isn't much I can do about it unless I want to walk around with my glock 22 in my pocket or ar15 around my arm and if I happen to be out doing chores, there isn't anything my wife or two little girls are going to do about it. So make fun of me or whatever, but this is something that weighs on my mind and it makes me angry that this FFL waited until after my firearms were in his possession that he decided to reveal this ridiculous policy to me. Its going to cost me $50 for the original seller to reclaim the firearms, but I won't make this mistake twice. I am going to research the FFL I select next time and will pay whatever it takes to get good service.

Its my understanding that the exact same background check is performed when a person applies for their conceal carry permit. I presented my conceal carry permit to the seller when I appeared to pick up my firearms. As all of you know, you need a permit to purchase or conceal carry permit to purchase a pistol. How can there be any question in this FFL's mind that the NICS check would come back "deny" if I have a valid conceal carry permit? Or am I mistaken about that and its easier to get a conceal carry permit than it is to pass the federal background check? I do recall lots of questions on my conceal carry application about domestic violence, drug use, felonies...

[fingers]

I can see the hassle to the ATF.

I can see that it is bad to have an ineligible guy get the gun.

What I don't see in this bit is how it's a hassle to the dealer if he follows the law scrupulously, and gives a guy his property at the time frame listed by law, and states to the ATF, well you had your time frame and didn't do your job, I guess you have more work to do...here's the form and the copy of his DL and permit (if a handgun), hope you catch him and make a case against him.

You couldn't be saying that the ATF will extract retribution on the dealer for following the law?

This whole thing is a part of the problem...if you are an ineligible person, you know it. If you are not really ineligible, then the courts should let you have the gun and bust some chops for whoever put you in wrong. If you tried to get a gun and you are ineligible, you committed some crime, if nothing else, perjury. Do the time.

An ineligible person possessing a firearm is a very serious crime, punishable with lots of prison time. No doubt about that. I also can't see why a dealer would not do everything within the bounds of the law to complete a transfer as soon as possible. I hate to generalize or paint a group of people with a broad stroke, but if I had to make general statements about gun dealers, I'd assume they are generally against gun control, government interference with gun ownership, etc etc. If I am right about that, I can't see how a policy of making a buyer wait a month or more to complete a transfer is consistent with views against government interference with gun ownership if the transfer can be completed in three days. I assume the 3 day rule was included in the legislation to thwart government red tape and delays like this. I guess when this FFL decided whether he supported gun ownership within the bounds of the law or government bureaucracy, he unfortunately chose the latter.

I agree bad guys should not get guns. Those are the guys who should get an unequivocal and fast "deny". However, I've read about enough eligible people getting "delay" or "deny" especially after some new update in September to the NCIS system that you'd think FFLs would error on the side of "eligible buyer / false red flag" and honor the 3-day provision in the brady bill.

[fingers]

To anyone wondering what happens when a FFL releases a firearm after the required three day period and later turns up information that would warrant a denial of the transfer, it goes something like this...

The ATF contacts the FFL, informs them of the denial, and asks if the firearm has been released to the customer. If it has, they ask for the address and other information that would allow them to contact the prohibited person. In most cases, they then pay a visit to the prohibited person and give them the option of either surrendering the firearm or immediately selling it back to an FFL (and, of course, you'll be doing that at a loss).

With that being said, if you're a person who thinks that they might be considered prohibited for any reason, it can be in your best interest to wait for an actual approval from the NICS system before taking possession of the firearm - even if legal to do so.

Thanks for this information. I was kinda wondering about that... However, I am surprised that the ineligible person isn't arrested as well. I've read about a few ineligible guys getting caught with a firearm, usually when committing a separate crime, and the penalties are pretty stiff.

[Squib Joe]

Its my understanding that the exact same background check is performed when a person applies for their conceal carry permit.

The databases checked by the State of Minnesota for your Carry Permit are also used by NICS, but they are not exactly the same. NICS may also access information above and beyond the NCIC and Interstate Identification Index (used by Minnesota) including information from the Federal Bureau of Prisons, Interpol, Homeland Security Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Tribal agencies and probably a few others that they don't make public.

And also keep in mind that just because somebody has a physical Carry Permit doesn't mean that they haven't done something since it was issued to prevent them from owning a firearm.

[Squib Joe]

I am surprised that the ineligible person isn't arrested as well.

That can happen too

[Ghost]

I am surprised that the ineligible person isn't arrested as well.

That can happen too

Probably depends on why they are ineligible and if they cooperate