Ruffled Feathers

[voidsherpa]

What are the chances that 2 people driving to different county's for a gun sale, meeting at a gun store that isnt their local, wouldnt have gone inside after the sale to look around? I know I would have...

 

[JettaKnight]

What are the chances that 2 people driving to different county's for a gun sale, meeting at a gun store that isnt their local, wouldnt have gone inside after the sale to look around? I know I would have...

Exactly - how could you not at least go in and look? But if someone shooed me out of the parking lot...

 

[JettaKnight]

Err on the side of Liberty. Caution leads to less interesting problems to solve.

You know I'd rep you if I could.

 

[JettaKnight]

I agree about it being bad etiquette to do deals in the parking lot of a Gun shop but why are the big box stores exempt?

I'm guessing it's akin to "buy local" and support your small, hometown businesses. I get it, and if it's going to ruffle the LGS's feathers, I won't do it. As to a big box, you ruffle their feathers like this and no one's going to take it personal.

 

[chezuki]

This is a federal thing by the way.

Please elaborate.

 

[croy]

How did you find out Bradis has the same policy? I don't see anything on their website or Facebook page.
Dan

I was at there counter with a guy selling a gun they didn't want it. I asked what he wanted for it. And the guy said if you make a deal we ask that you don't do it on our property. He was polite, we didn't make a deal anyway.

In fact it was the only decent visit I've had to Bradis

 

[churchmouse]

Please elaborate.

As I was told by 2 lgs owners that own the stores/property they were under the "Assumption" that any transactions on said property was their responsibility to track/record.
Were they mis-informed...???
From some of the info in this thread they may have been.

 

[Trigger Time]

As I was told by 2 lgs owners that own the stores/property they were under the "Assumption" that any transactions on said property was their responsibility to track/record.
Were they mis-informed...???
From some of the info in this thread they may have been.

Yes they are wrong. They are under legal obligation to do a 4473 or log any gun that comes across the doorway of their premises for work or sale or trade or shipping.
they are not responsible for what two adults do outside in their parking lot.
from an ATF examiner that does the audits I personaly heard that the DOORWAY to the shop is the key. Any bs someone is
talkong about a parking lot and legal ramifications between two foreign parties is talking out their butt hole. If the shop owner who is listed on the ffl is doing the sales in the lot or at a gun show ect then yes that's a different story, a 4473 is required.
i think it's probably a sort of slap in the face to the shop to do a transaction in their lot, but I can see how that isn't the intention of the parties. Many times when people have nothing to hide or are just innocent in their doings, they forget or don't think of the possible butthurt their personal happiness could cause others unrelated to them.
soooo, if you walk INTO the business portion of the property (inside the structiure where the money is exchanged) and try to do a gun deal then you have just subjected the shop to a duty to do a 4473 or to stop said personal sale or trade.

for any future questions someone has regarding legalities at a shop ect, call and speak with an ATF examiner. They are the ones that know the rules for shops and they will tell you right. Don't be afraid to approach the ATF booth at the next gun show if they are there. They don't bite.
Remember it's the politicians that make the laws and point the hounds.

 

[Trigger Time]

Oh and color me shocked that Bradis would be dicks to people. Look up bradis in the urban dictionary and I think a picture of male anatomy shows up. Although I heard they recently got rid of a big one. That might have earned them my business again if I'm ever that far over by there. We will see

 

[223 Gunner]

I agree about it being bad etiquette to do deals in the parking lot of a Gun shop but why are the big box stores exempt?

To me they are exempt because most of those stores are either attached to a mall parking area, or other large stores such as Wal-Mart. Just less personal than a small shop with its own parking lot.
I have done one or two deals in the Gander Mtn. parking lot in Greenwood, which is right next door to a Wal-Mart. I really don't do as many firearm deals as I do smaller stuff like ammo, accessories etc.

 

[Expat]

Looking at it from the OP's stand point, he is being told one thing by people that can make his life miserable and cost him thousands in legal costs and something else by random people on the internet.

 

[Trigger Time]

Looking at it from the OP's stand point, he is being told one thing by people that can make his life miserable and cost him thousands in legal costs and something else by random people on the internet.

Well he had no liability until he went out and became a part of it. So I guess the moral of the story is, mind your own business. I don't know how you can tell from afar if it's a sale or just two guys showing off their gun getting ready to carpool to go shoot

 

[bb37]

So I guess the moral of the story is, mind your own business.

When the transaction occurred on his property, then it became his business. The OP says that they own the parking lot, therefore anything that happens in parking lot is his business whether it be a gun deal, an ammo deal, a drug deal, or a baby swap between divorced parents. The property owner has a right, IMHO, to regulate what happens on his property.

Whether or not a 4473 is required is between the LGS and the BATFE. Until someone from the BATFE steps up and posts to this thread, anything we say is just hearsay and speculation.

 

[WebSnyper]

I wasn't aware that any transaction on the property had to 4473, I always figured it only applied to store sales. Of course I've never had a private sale at such a location.

It's not.

I called our ATF branch in South Bend prior to posting this thread, as some laws/rules have changed in the 16 years we have had our FFL, I wanted to make sure this was still the case. Was told ABSOLUTELY any transaction that involved transfer of ownership with regards to firearms on our premises must have a 4473 to go along with it. Said without that black and white line, how would ATF determine which transactions require 4473 and which ones do not? When asked to define "premises" was told ind this case, property lines.

My concern was not monetary, as some have suggested, rather the requirements of maintaining our FFL, which allows me to maintain my business, and therefore put food on my table, clothes on my children, their college tuition, gas in my car, beer in my hand...

As others have stated, I would ask for the law on this. However, if you want to make that a store policy, then no issues at all with that.

I understand that the ATF person you talked to might have a certain opinion, but if they cannot cite a statute/rule/regulation, then it is just an opinion.

Since this isn't an OTC transaction, they must only be talking about part II. For that, 27 CFR 478.124(f) does not address property lines, premises, or anything like that (as I recall). "Business premises" is defined in the definition section, but apparently not used in the 4473 related part. The regulations all seem to assume the dealer is a party to the transaction.

Store rules can be store rules, but this does not appear to be supported by laws or regulations.

Completion of a 4473 is a federal requirement of transferring inventory from an FFL holder to another person/entity. If the FFL holder is not involved in the transaction, and is not acting as a 3rd. party broker to the deal I see no reason to get your panties in a wad because the 4473 is not required in a private party exchange. Having said that, "your lot your rules", if you do not want that occurring in your lot maybe you should post it.

Agreed, I know there are cases of FFLs selling from their private collection on premises, and no 4473 is needed in those cases.

Thanks for all of the input, I think we will continue to err on the side of caution.

We do own the building, as well as the parking lot.

Please feel free to use us as a transfer agent for those interested in going through the NICS system for private party sales. Mention this post and we will see what we can do to make the transfer fee go away.

I can understand this, but as others have stated, it should be labeled as a store policy, not law. When you label it law, it comes across as another gun store fiction, and then those who know better, wonder how much other stuff you are telling them is not exactly true. It sounds like you guys have the right attitude and are customer service oriented, so that is a plus.

Yeah, just to be clear, I have no quarrel with the LGS having a policy that frowns on this, or offers incentives to bring it inside. That all makes sense from a business perspective.

People sometimes use "its against the law" as an easy way to avoid an argument, regardless whether its true. But, that then gets twisted all sorts of ways. Better to have good information, IMHO.

That said, if the LGS is going to have a policy about this, probably a good idea to post it in the parking lot to make people aware.

Agreed, except then someone would probably try and hold them accountable for something because they "clearly knew it was going on because they posted a sign" as crazy as that sounds.
Reading the recent article about bank personnel being held responsible for changing someone's tire in a parking lot, and being sued because it was later determined the driver was DUI, has made me even lose more faith in other human beings, but then I did not have much to begin with, at least for the general population.

As I was told by 2 lgs owners that own the stores/property they were under the "Assumption" that any transactions on said property was their responsibility to track/record.
Were they mis-informed...???
From some of the info in this thread they may have been.

Yes, I'm thinking so. It may not be a bad practice, but I have never seen anything indicate it was law.

 

[bigbaloo95]

I think Albertsons has the right to err on the side of caution when it comes to the batfe. Better not to ruffle the feathers of someone who may decide to audit your books. Also posting a sign is known as intent in some agents eyes. I can hear it now "you knew private sales were going on or you wouldn't have posted a sign.We need to close this parking lot loophole."

 

[WebSnyper]

Whether or not a 4473 is required is between the LGS and the BATFE. Until someone from the BATFE steps up and posts to this thread, anything we say is just hearsay and speculation.

Here's where some of this may be coming from https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/may-licensee-store-personal-firearms-business-premises

Notice, it says there is a presumption...

"presumption exists that all firearms on a licensee’s business premises are for sale and must be entered in the licensee’s bound book."

I think one could make a pretty good argument that firearms owned by other individuals, that are in the parking lot are not for sale by the FFL, similar to those in holsters walking in and out of the store, etc. The ATF agent was likely just making it black and white for the FFL, and from an FFL standpoint, I can see not wanting any liability at all or even to deal with it, as there is little to no upside for the FFL (agreed, foot traffic is a plus, but probably not to the level of the possible negatives). However, that doesn't make it law, as stated originally.

 

[Steel and wood]

I have only made a couple of buys from private sellers and made the deal in local police parking lots. Just make everyone feel safe and honest in there lot. Even when I buy online and get it transferred to me I always buy something from the lgs to hide my shame from not buying from them. Lol

 

[Bosshoss]

I called our ATF branch in South Bend prior to posting this thread, as some laws/rules have changed in the 16 years we have had our FFL, I wanted to make sure this was still the case. Was told ABSOLUTELY any transaction that involved transfer of ownership with regards to firearms on our premises must have a 4473 to go along with it. Said without that black and white line, how would ATF determine which transactions require 4473 and which ones do not? When asked to define "premises" was told ind this case, property lines.

for any future questions someone has regarding legalities at a shop ect, call and speak with an ATF examiner. They are the ones that know the rules for shops and they will tell you right.

?????
He did call and they gave him a answer and yet the internet experts still disagree with what he was told.

 

[Rookie]

?????
He did call and they gave him a answer and yet the internet experts still disagree with what he was told.

The issue is that he was told but not given any law to back it up. My guess is that he was talking to Donny Baker, "It's state law! I swear to God, it is!"

 

[Rookie]

I understand that the ATF person you talked to might have a certain opinion, but if they cannot cite a statute/rule/regulation, then it is just an opinion.

Since this isn't an OTC transaction, they must only be talking about part II. For that, 27 CFR 478.124(f) does not address property lines, premises, or anything like that (as I recall). "Business premises" is defined in the definition section, but apparently not used in the 4473 related part. The regulations all seem to assume the dealer is a party to the transaction.

Store rules can be store rules, but this does not appear to be supported by laws or regulations.

In case you missed it...