Sneak peek at the new 4473 coming soon to a dealer near you......
0
-
OMG, only 7 pages. What a bunch of BS. 0 -
The silliest things are always done when they make changes to these things......like that whole ordeal where they want the guns on the form BEFORE the person fills it out....only 4 spaces for firearms and the yes/no questions are revamped. Its just a shell game with these things. They probably have a building full of people devoted to this form and all the nit picky things about it, costing truck loads of money just so it makes like this building full of people are necessary. 0 -
Reworked in some places , glad to see the military pcs section added as we get a lot of Air Force , marines and infantry thru our shop . Might be a tad easier when we have to respond to an atf trace request .
0 -
Not much changed, mostly the order its in.
"Non-binary" added for gender.
Few other additions.
0 -
One of the hallmarks of a bureaucracy is that it must justify itself to sustain funding levels . The minions need work too
0 -
I feel safer already! (green font) 0 -
My family's future is secure. Part of the family are tree farmers. They grow trees. To be made into paper. 0 -
Does # 29 mean a valid CWP bypasses the need to call it in? 0 -
OK, what color will it be this time? 0 -
My understanding of # 29 is that it is dependent on the state issuing the permit . Atf has determined that the concealed handgun permit issued by N C. Meets the qualifications for background checks . Therefore no call in is needed . It makes purchases a very streamlined process . Other states permits I am unsure of . In NC one is fingerprinted and a rather lengthy check is done by the local Sherrifs office along with a required class .
0 -
My main concern is that they are recording firearm specifics on the 4473, where this has not been required before.
So the feds are going to database the specifics of everything that you purchase now. Quasi registration ?
Does this bother anyone or am I just being overly sensitive ? (sarcasm for sure)
0 -
redneckandy said:Does # 29 mean a valid CWP bypasses the need to call it in?
Yes0 -
This needs to be addressed in a loud and forceful manner. I will contact all gun rights organizations regarding this.Ridefar said:My main concern is that they are recording firearm specifics on the 4473, where this has not been required before.
So the feds are going to database the specifics of everything that you purchase now. Quasi registration ?
Does this bother anyone or am I just being overly sensitive ? (sarcasm for sure)
0 -
I recall posting about this and it got snuck away in the gun rights forum. Oh well. 0 -
jimdeere: 31540328480155/comments/31540371706779
This needs to be addressed in a loud and forceful manner. I will contact all gun rights organizations regarding this.Ridefar said:My main concern is that they are recording firearm specifics on the 4473, where this has not been required before.
So the feds are going to database the specifics of everything that you purchase now. Quasi registration ?
Does this bother anyone or am I just being overly sensitive ? (sarcasm for sure)
Nothing has changed in this regard, calm down. Instead of on page 3 it is now on page 1. Otherwise same format as before.
3 -
redneckandy: 31540328480155/comments/31540327104027
Does # 29 mean a valid CWP bypasses the need to call it in?
See my sticky up top about which states are states that accept a cwp instead of a NICS check.
0 -
How much do you want to bet the company that prints the forms lobbies BATF for the new format? 0 -
shootuadeal said: \nRidefar<\/a> said:<\/div> \nRidefar<\/a> said:<\/div>My main concern is that they are recording firearm specifics on the 4473, where this has not been required before.
<\/div>So the feds are going to database the specifics of everything that you purchase now. Quasi registration ?
<\/div>Does this bother anyone or am I just being overly sensitive ? (sarcasm for sure)
<\/div><\/div> \n<\/blockquote> \nThis needs to be addressed in a loud and forceful manner. I will contact all gun rights organizations regarding this.","bodyRaw":"https://forums.gunbroker.com/discussion/comment/11188745#Comment_11188745My main concern is that they are recording firearm specifics on the 4473, where this has not been required before.
<\/div>So the feds are going to database the specifics of everything that you purchase now. Quasi registration ?
<\/div>Does this bother anyone or am I just being overly sensitive ? (sarcasm for sure)
<\/div><\/div><\/blockquote>This needs to be addressed in a loud and forceful manner. I will contact all gun rights organizations regarding this.","format":"wysiwyg","dateInserted":"2020-05-26T14:45:35+00:00","insertUser":{"userID":344145,"name":"jimdeere","photoUrl":"https:\/\/us.v-cdn.net\/6031683\/uploads\/userpics\/011\/nM4MFKAVPJR0S.jpeg","dateLastActive":"2020-05-26T22:22:12+00:00","label":"✭✭✭"},"displayOptions":{"showUserLabel":false,"showCompactUserInfo":true,"showDiscussionLink":false,"showPostLink":false,"showCategoryLink":false,"renderFullContent":false,"expandByDefault":false},"url":"https:\/\/forums.gunbroker.com\/discussion\/comment\/11188745#Comment_11188745","embedType":"quote"}">Nothing has changed in this regard, calm down. Instead of on page 3 it is now on page 1. Otherwise same format as before.
Up to this point the NICS inquiring dealer was simply asked "long gun or hand gun" by the phone center when calling in a 4473 check. Thats all the information pertaining to the firearm itself that was exchanged. The printed form stayed in the hands of the dealer.
New proceedure includes NICS asking for make, model, caliber and serial number before completing the "check".Does anyone expect them to not harvest this information into a database at the time of the check ?I am not a FFL dealer, but a friend is and he told me this came right from ATF.
0 -
Where is your friend getting this info? I stay pretty well on top of things and also am a member of an industry legal service that is more on top of things than anyone else. The "new procedure" is simply a change to the form, which happens every 4-5 years normally. If that were the case than yes, I would be screaming to everyone that they will start keeping a registry, but as of now, there is no such change in the works.Ridefar said:shootuadeal said:Nothing has changed in this regard, calm down. Instead of on page 3 it is now on page 1. Otherwise same format as before.
Up to this point the NICS inquiring dealer was simply asked "long gun or hand gun" by the phone center when calling in a 4473 check. Thats all the information pertaining to the firearm itself that was exchanged. The printed form stayed in the hands of the dealer.
New proceedure includes NICS asking for make, model, caliber and serial number before completing the "check".Does anyone expect them to not harvest this information into a database at the time of the check ?I am not a FFL dealer, but a friend is and he told me this came right from ATF.
So lets have your friend cite his source, here is an ATF official response regarding the comments they recieved on the new form:
https://www.atf.gov/file/143521/download3
<br><\/div><\/div><\/blockquote>This%20needs%20to%20be%20addressed%20in%20a%20loud%20and%20forceful%20manner.%20I%20will%20contact%20all%20gun%20rights%20organizations%20regarding%20this.%22,%22format%22:%22wysiwyg%22,%22dateInserted%22:%222020-05-26T14:45:35+00:00%22,%22insertUser%22:{%22userID%22:344145,%22name%22:%22jimdeere%22,%22photoUrl%22:%22https:\/\/us.v-cdn.net\/6031683\/uploads\/userpics\/011\/nM4MFKAVPJR0S.jpeg%22,%22dateLastActive%22:%222020-05-26T22:22:12+00:00%22,%22label%22:%22%E2%9C%AD%E2%9C%AD%E2%9C%AD%22},%22displayOptions%22:{%22showUserLabel%22:false,%22showCompactUserInfo%22:true,%22showDiscussionLink%22:false,%22showPostLink%22:false,%22showCategoryLink%22:false,%22renderFullContent%22:false,%22expandByDefault%22:false},%22url%22:%22https:\/\/forums.gunbroker.com\/discussion\/comment\/11188745#Comment_11188745%22,%22embedType%22:%22quote%22}%22>%0D%0A%20%20%20%20</div></div></div></div>){kind=link}
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
19 comments