ATF Agents 'taking back' guns after purchase

[BigBlue]

This is interesting. Has anyone heard of this going on before?

Feds issue 4,000 orders to seize guns from people who failed background checks

The FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) vets millions of gun purchase transactions every year. But the thousands of gun seizure requests highlight persistent problems in a system where analysts must complete background checks within three days of the proposed purchase. If the background check is not complete within the 72-hour time limit, federal law allows the sale to go forward. ATF agents are asked to take back the guns if the FBI later finds these sales should have been denied.

So they are going after guns that were allowed to be purchased because they couldn't complete a background check in a timely manner. On the face of it it sounds 'reasonable', but I'm curious about the logistics. Are they somehow processing a refund from the firearm seller and returning the weapon to them? Or are they just confiscating it with no recompense?

This nugget was also in there:

Chipman, now a senior policy adviser for the Giffords Law Center which advocates for more gun restrictions, called the retrieval process "uniquely dangerous."

Stephen Morris, a former assistant FBI director, said FBI examiners who review gun purchasers' backgrounds also recognize the risks.

"They are very aware of the inherent risk to law enforcement officers when they (seek) a firearm retrieval," said Morris, who recently oversaw the bureau's background check operation based in West Virginia.

Though the person may technically have failed a background check, these were essentially legally purchased guns. Why would that lead someone to assume the buyer would be violent?

Anyway, what's next in this scenario? Some type of retroactive review of NICS checks for past purchases and the gov going to confiscate guns if someone's status changes over time? Say they were fine at purchase but years later they did something that would cause them to fail future NICS checks. Is someone going to check that and say "sorry, you're no longer eligible to own it."?

By the way, I thought the feds didn't have a record of the transaction after the check was done? This sounds a lot like de facto registration...

BB

[Rip Van Winkle]

OMG! The sky is falling! Blood in the streets! Bodies stacked like cordwood! ...

Sounds like the next gun control push by the anti's.

By my calculation, 4,000 mistakes out of a total of 27.5 million checks sounds like a effective program. That's what? .01%? I challenge anyone to come up with another government run program that works that well.

ETA: From the article. "ATF agents did not consider most of the prohibited persons who had obtained guns to be dangerous and therefore did not consider it a priority to retrieve the firearm promptly,''

I won't be loosing sleep over this.

[LarryP]

Point is this shouldn't be happening if the system worked properly.

[ex-LT]

Point is this shouldn't be happening if the system worked properly.

As Rip said, there is a 0.01% failure rate, which means it works properly 99.99% of the time.
I challenge you to find anything that works 100% of the time.

[jdege]

Point is this shouldn't be happening if the system worked properly.

Point is this shouldn't be possible if the system were working as mandate by law.
There should be no retrievable record of background checks that passed.

[BigBlue]

Point is this shouldn't be happening if the system worked properly.

Point is this shouldn't be possible if the system were working as mandate by law.
There should be no retrievable record of background checks that passed.

Which is the part I'm curious about. I'm thinking that if these were default 'passes' because NICS couldn't complete them within 3 days then they are still open requests in NICS and that may be why they still have the records.

My other questions about how they are taking them and whether it amounts to a forced return to seller or a confiscation are still open...

BB

[Squib Joe]

They have been doing this for years. Normally they will give prohibited person a chance to sell it back to the store or to another individual, but in cases where they feel there is a subjective risk of the person having the firearm, they will show up and take it.

Keep in mind that this is almost always when the buyer has a felony record and lied on the 4473 to make the purchase.

[BigBlue]

They have been doing this for years. Normally they will give prohibited person a chance to sell it back to the store or to another individual, but in cases where they feel there is a subjective risk of the person having the firearm, they will show up and take it.

Keep in mind that this is almost always when the buyer has a felony record and lied on the 4473 to make the purchase.

That would seem to be a different scenario than the one described in the article (delayed 3+ days so sale goes through by default). Or are you implying one of the reasons a NICS check may take 3+ days is when someone lies on the form?

[crbutler]

Ok, as far as I recall, being a prohibited person from possession is a bit different than failing a background check.

Pretty much you must be a unrestored convicted felon or be court committed mentally ill to be unable to possess a gun.

There is a laundry list of things that makes transfer illegal. Like the misdemeanor domestic assault or chemical dependency.

So if you are an illegal transferee but not a prohibited person, is it the law that they can confiscate the gun? Or is it something that if you transferred it you could be charged for (not in this case, as the law says transfer after the time limit) but this is now something of a loophole?