4473 changes

[platoonDaddy]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Firearms Transaction Record (ATF Form 4473 (5300.9)

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/04/07/2016-07970/agency-information-collection-activities-proposed-ecollection-ecomments-requested-firearms

 

[fightinbluhen51]

OH HELL NO!

Yeah, let's just give them a centralized storage repository for them to database & then leak like the OPM Hack. ********!

Isn't this against current federal law?

 

[BeoBill]

Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 60 days until June 6, 2016.

Do it! Please. Email addy: FederalRegisterNoticeATFF4473@atf.gov

 

[2nd=Good+Substantial]

... Isn't this against current federal law?

That's what I thought. Next step towards confiscation.

 

[iH8DemLibz]

OH HELL NO!

Yeah, let's just give them a centralized storage repository for them to database & then leak like the OPM Hack. ********!

Isn't this against current federal law?

And if its legality is challenged at the SCOTUS level, we will lose in a 4-4 tie.

1-20-17 can't come soon enough.

As long as a Conservative wins that is.

 

[embermage]

Federal Law 18 U.S.C. 926 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/926) being:

No such rule or regulation prescribed [by the Attorney General] after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established.

 

[danb]

say what? They want to do what?

"Your comments should address one or more of the following four points"...

Notice that "blatantly illegal to collect permanent records" is not one of the four points.

 

[Mark K]

Wait a minute. Am I missing something? What is ATF proposing to change on the 4473?

Or is it just a periodic renewal of the form?

 

[danb]

I have read the document and the pdf file 4 times. I cannot figure out for the life of me what they are asking for comments to do, or not do. At first I thought they were asking to store 4473s. Then I thought they were revising it. Now I think they are asking for permission to collect 4473s electronically. It is clear as mud.

 

[pcfixer]

email sent. data collect not necessary for funcitional use of agency under current law.

(3) regulations providing for effective receipt and secure storage of firearms relinquished by or seized from persons described in subsection (d)(8) or (g)(8) of section 922.
No such rule or regulation prescribed after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary’s [1] authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.

 

[Threeband]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed eCollection eComments Requested; Firearms Transaction Record (ATF Form 4473 (5300.9)

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2016/04/07/2016-07970/agency-information-collection-activities-proposed-ecollection-ecomments-requested-firearms

This is a textbook "drive by post".

What are you posting about? Please summarize.

Otherwise, is there a reason why I should care?

Then tell me why.

Don't just post some incomprehensible gobbledygook with a link.

 

[platoonDaddy]

This is a textbook "drive by post".

What are you posting about? Please summarize.

Otherwise, is there a reason why I should care?

Then tell me why.

Don't just post some incomprehensible gobbledygook with a link.

what is a textbook "drive by post"?

The incomprehensible gobbledygook, will impact us all.

 

[Mr H]

what is a textbook "drive by post"?

The incomprehensible gobbledygook, will impact us all.

A brief description of what you're posting is always helpful. Many folks are checking threads from devices on the go, so opening links isn't always a handy thing to do.

 

[Mark K]

The problem is that nobody can tell exactly what this is proposing.

As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act, ATF is asking OMB for "Revision of a currently approved collection." The collection is ATF Form 4473 (5300.9).

That's the current version of the 4473, as of April 2012.

The abstract of the request says, "The form allows for Federal firearms licensees to determine the eligibility of persons purchasing firearms. It also alerts buyers to certain restrictions on the receipt and possession of firearms."

Currently on the ATF 4473 (5300.9), all it says is that "The purpose of the information is to determine the eligibility of the transferee to receive firearms under Federal law."

So it kind of looks like the proposed revision is to add the second sentence to the purpose.

I suspect the reason is that ATF wants to make clear that one of the purposes of the form is to inform potential firearms buyers of the various things that would disqualify them. Like being a drug user or a Communist.

 

[BeoBill]

And that's why your email can be as simple as "I oppose the proposed rule. Thank you."

 

[spclopr8tr]

This is a textbook "drive by post".

What are you posting about? Please summarize.

Otherwise, is there a reason why I should care?

Then tell me why.

Don't just post some incomprehensible gobbledygook with a link.

Yeah, what Threeband said. What was the point of posting this without comment? Why should we care? Or does OP want us to do the research for him?

 

[Threeband]

what is a textbook "drive by post"?

The incomprehensible gobbledygook, will impact us all.

Sorry to be so grumpy. I apologise, I really do.


A drive by post is a link with virtually no explanation. That's what you posted. There is some kind of legalese apparently pasted directly from the link, and that's all.

What is it?
Why should I care?
You say it will affect us all, in what way?

Can you give a quick one sentence summary in your own words?

 

[Brooklyn]

I have read the document and the pdf file 4 times. I cannot figure out for the life of me what they are asking for comments to do, or not do. At first I thought they were asking to store 4473s. Then I thought they were revising it. Now I think they are asking for permission to collect 4473s electronically. It is clear as mud.

No clue either..

Maybe nra or saf will tell us.

 

[Doctor_M]

Color me confused...

 

[Schipperke]