Just a quick note... a family member of mine just lost his job at a pawn shop in the Charleston area due to ATF sting-like operations...

If you own a shop that sells firearms, be sure that your clerks are following the PRECISE LETTER OF THE LAW in order to avoid any confusion.

This means:
1) Checking IDs properly for insignias
2) Being sure a licensed firearms dealer is taking care of the transaction
3) Do not fill out information FOR any customer, even if he/she claims to be unable to read or write because of poor vision or injured/disabled hand.
4) Follow all general rules for the state (not selling handguns to people from out of state etc) as normal... don't even entertain the notion.

I'm just throwing this caution out because I find it intrusive that these checks are being undergone in a manner that is engineered to fool people into making the slightest error, and there are in fact pawn shop employees spending 10 years in the slammer for this kind of stuff in Elkview.

The story (2nd hand, but, still) is that the ATF agent first tried to make the purchase without an ID, was rejected, then tried to use an out of state ID (with plenty of cajoling and asking for it to please be accepted, was rejected, and finally went out to the truck and got a decent Fake ID.  Fake ID was accepted (this was the guy's 2nd day on the job selling guns or having any kind of job where IDs must be checked), etc.  He proceeds to ask for assistance in filling out the form, which the clerk doesn't mind helping a guy with poor vision/etc do, and completes the sale.  

Upon completing the sale, handcuffs are slapped on, people are slammed on hoods, yelling and down-talking occur, humiliation ensues, managers are blamed, managers shift blame back in the form of on the spot firings, and investigations begin.


I just thought i'd post it in local, because I know how difficult it is to earn an honest living selling firearms in WV.  I've seen many a shop open and close just due to lack of profitability in this area... I think everyone should just be extra careful to avoid this kind of thing, and for the love of God, if you run a shop and don't inform your workers on ALL of the policies involved, take the god damned heat when the ATF comes and don't fire someone who didn't know any better when it was your damned responsibility to teach them otherwise.

ATF sucks, btw.

Very true, I can verify this, a pawn shop here in Elkins this summer was caught selling handguns to out of state residence and straw sales, ATF actually got them twice on the same sting.  Need less to say place is shutdown and the two guys that own the place are awaiting trial I believe.

Don't hate the ATF, they just enforce the laws.  If the shop trained staff, and went by the laws they would have no troubles.

Quoted: Very true, I can verify this, a pawn shop here in Elkins this summer was caught selling handguns to out of state residence and straw sales, ATF actually got them twice on the same sting.  Need less to say place is shutdown and the two guys that own the place are awaiting trial I believe. Don't hate the ATF, they just enforce the laws. If the shop trained staff, and went by the laws they would have no troubles.

I hope your joking. Order the film "The Gang" from JPFO wath it then visit ATF Abuse and report back. The ATF has a history of illegally converting semi-automatic weapons in order to convict civilians in a court of law, they have also been known to lie under oath and plant evidence not to mention Waco and Ruby Ridge.



Trailer for The Gang

Quoted: Just a quick note... a family member of mine just lost his job at a pawn shop in the Charleston area due to ATF sting-like operations... <snip> I'm just throwing this caution out because I find it intrusive that these checks are being undergone in a manner that is engineered to fool people into making the slightest error, and there are in fact pawn shop employees spending 10 years in the slammer for this kind of stuff in Elkview. ... the ATF agent first tried to make the purchase without an ID, was rejected ... then tried to use an out of state ID (with plenty of cajoling and asking for it to please be accepted, was rejected, ... (then) went out to the truck and got a decent Fake ID.  Fake ID was accepted ... He proceeds to ask for assistance in filling out the form, which the clerk doesn't mind helping a guy with poor vision/etc do, and completes the sale.   ... if you run a shop and don't inform your workers on ALL of the policies involved, take the god damned heat when the ATF comes and don't fire someone who didn't know any better when it was your damned responsibility to teach them otherwise.

Slight error?  Puhleez ....

How much training is required for an adult to become suspicious -- and involve the boss -- when someone who's been refused service for having an out-of-state ID, comes back with an in-state ID (same name, or different?) to try again?  Was this multiple attempts over several days, or did it all happen during a single visit on one day (the sentiment I got when reading the 2nd hand summary).

How much "help" did the clerk provide?  Sounds more like the clerk instructed rather than helped.  (Telling the customer "write 'yes' here, initial here, and write 'no' here, here, and here" is instructing.)  I believe that a dealer can accommodate a customer's professed disability (e.g., "I can't read" or "I don't have my reading glasses") without coming into conflict with any gun control legislation.  Such a case, however, would involve accurately reading aloud the form's information to the customer, and then explaining to the customer the meaning of the two boxes that apply to what was just read, with the open-ended request for the customer to "initial (place your mark) in the box that applies to you."

Until the BATFE is assigned other law-enforcement responsibilities, they will continue to 'prey on' the most convenient targets ... FFL holders and their employees.  In the case you described, however, I'm glad that they (coincidentally) removed this particular clerk from the world of gun sales prior to some scrote exploiting him for an illegal purchase.  Sheeesh.  Who in their right mind would sell to someone who retrieved an in-state ID from outside the store after having just refused the sale because on out-of-state ID was presented?

If BATFE had to:

• Find, arrest, charge, and prosecute/deport 100 aliens who violated Federal statutes relating to illegal immigration


• For every individual US citizen they arrest, charge and prosecute for violating Federal statues relating to the administration of gun control laws (i.e., violations not furthering another chargeable felony, like robbery)

... well the world would be a better place.

Just my opinion, of course.

Quoted: If you own a shop that sells firearms, be sure that your clerks are following the PRECISE LETTER OF THE LAW

And I would include a firm, inviolable requirement to surreptitiously notify local law enforcement of any apparent unlawful attempts at purchasing a firearm.  Too often, I fear, attempts by BATFE employees (and criminals, wanna-be and otherwise) are rebuffed by conscientious FFL-holders and their employees ... and no publicly accessible record exists of the activity.  When conducted by BATFE employees, such activities seem to border on subornation (in this sense of the word) in some of the anecdotes I've heard.  A public record of such attempts could be enlightening, all the more so if every gun store and FFL-holder adopted a policy of reporting all suspcious purchase attempts to LEOs for expert assistance.

If LEOs can be dispatched, and respond to, patently lawful conduct, then there shouldn't be any problem with their response to conduct that reasonably appears to be unlawful.  Were I a gun-store employee, I'd be happy to fritter away time in order for a prospective customer's bona-fides to be validated by a responding LEO in a case such as described by JudgeX or the anecdotes I've read about billionaire Bloomberg's investigators.  If it should turn out that instead of a wanna-be criminal, the prospective customer was a BATFE employee ... well it'd be great to have a record of the attempt.

And the youtube video of such an encounter between LEO and BATFE employee at the gun-store counter -- where the latter ID's him/herself to the responding LEO -- would be priceless.

"How much "help" did the clerk provide? Sounds more like the clerk instructed rather than helped. (Telling the customer "write 'yes' here, initial here, and write 'no' here, here, and here" is instructing.) I believe that a dealer can accommodate a customer's professed disability (e.g., "I can't read" or "I don't have my reading glasses") without coming into conflict with any gun control legislation. "

The clerk rejected the out of state ID.
The clerk was fooled by the decent fake in-state driver's license.
The clerk's only arrest-worthy mistake was copying information down on behalf of the customer, who said he could not see very well and needed help copying down his driver's license information.
The clerk's supervisor made the phone calls wherein the man's ID and SSN checked out as valid for a gun sale.

Bottom Line:  If you call the number and that checks out, and the ID looks real enough to avoid suspicion when seen by two people, the ATF is pushing it, and causing unemployment unnecessarily.

A good criminal can make a fake ID that might fool you... as a matter of fact, with the correct equipment, you can completely replicate a WVDL down to the hologram.  Furthermore, you could also steal the driver's license of someone who looked similar to you, then all you need is their SSN, and you can buy all the guns you want on their name.  The ATF is essentially simulating doing this, by using a real name that checks out and a good fake ID, and then arresting people on the tiniest nuances of the law.

This clerk is a good, consciencious fellow.  He's also intelligent, IQ over 130 I guarantee it.  They are ARRESTING and HARASSING people who WOULD NOT REALISTICALLY SELL A FIREARM TO SOMEONE WHO DID NOT DESERVE IT WITHOUT ELABORATE TRICKERY.

If you are egotistical enough to think that you can't be fooled (as most forum trolls are), you'll snap back with some tirade about what kind of a fool you have to be for a fake ID to get you...  but, if you're realistic, you'll realize that ATF agents are scamming and baiting people into possible prison sentences and pink slips.  They are abusing the spirit of the law to their advantage so they can make arrests and start investigations...

Why?  
Because they hate guns?  I don't know.
Because they hate people?  I don't know.
Because they want to make more arrests and seem useful?  Most definitely.
To protect the public from bad gun purchases?  No, not like this, and if this IS how they plan to do it, I want it done differently... this is bad for business, and bad for employment rates.  Figure out a way to do it without fake IDs and without arresting people for helping out disabled folks, and I'm all for it.

ATF still... sucks.

The biggest issue and biggest screw up here is with the ID.  It seems that it was a well made fake ID so the screw up wasn't necessarily accepting it.  The screw up was when the guy presented an out-of-state ID was rejected and then went out to his car and got the fake in-state drivers license.  If a person gets rejected with one ID and then goes out to his car and gets another ID from a different state, that should raise immediate red flags.  If the person had a valid in-state ID, wouldn't you wonder why they didn't use it to begin with?  I don't think that the ID thing qualifes as elaborate trickery.

A person can only possess one valid drivers license at a time and if they just moved from out-of-state to in-state, they are required to surrender their out-of-state license when they receive their new in-state license.  It is against the law to possess more than one drivers license at any one time.  The clerk should have known this and the two licenses should have raised a red flag for this reason since the person would be trying to the gun with an invalid license, which is not acceptable.

If someone is fooled by a perfectly replicated fake drivers license that checks out as being valid that is one thing.  When a person presents one ID, gets turned down, immediately goes out to their car, gets a second in-state ID, and then presents that one as being his valid license, it is a completely different situation.  That is almost akin to someone saying that they are going to buy a gun, finding out that they are ineligible, and then coming back in with a friend who then buys the gun for them.  I don't think that this qualifes as a straw purchase, but it is similar in some respects.

ETA:  I am not a big fan of the ATF"s actions here, but I think that it is far from a case where the only arrestable mistake that was made was in helping fill out the application.  The clerk screwed up in multiple ways.

I own a pawn shop in Bluefield and can verify they are active.  He was here four days and was VERY thorough.

He is now at another shop here in town and is going through every single sheet of paper.

My experience is this.  First he was very pleasant and professional.  Unfortunately he arrived at 10 am Monday following our one week vacation and at the very busy first of the month.  Still, we know going it that can happen.

Next we did our inventory and reconciled it to the bound books.  That all worked out fine.

Next he checked our business licenses, our FFL license, our required postings, and our gun locks.  Those failed because they are the cheap China ones.  

Then on tto the 4473s.  

Anyway, again very professional and very thorough.  

We do several forms a year here where the applicant claims to be illiterate.  These were OK with the investigator as we followed the instructions fully:

INSTRUCTIONS TO TRANSFEREE 1. The buyer must personally complete Section A of this form and certify (sign) that the answers are true and correct. However, if the buyer is unable to read and/or write, the answers (other than the signature) may be written by another person, excluding the seller. Two persons (other than the seller) must then sign as witnesses to the buyer’s answers and signature.

Honestly, I am not in the pocket of the ATF, but other than the strict attention to detail I didn't feel excessive pressure was applied.  Hopefully this was an exception to the norm.

"If someone is fooled by a perfectly replicated fake drivers license that checks out as being valid that is one thing. When a person presents one ID, gets turned down, immediately goes out to their car, gets a second in-state ID, and then presents that one as being his valid license, it is a completely different situation. That is almost akin to someone saying that they are going to buy a gun, finding out that they are ineligible, and then coming back in with a friend who then buys the gun for them. I don't think that this qualifes as a straw purchase, but it is similar in some respects."

So a guy from Kentucky comes in with his Kentucky ID, and you reject him... he goes out to his car and gets his valid WVDL, and you don't sell the guy a gun?

Why not?  What logical problem is there with that?  Plenty of people have two or even three valid state driver's licenses.  God forbid someone have a Summer home somewhere and be required by law to have that ID on them, and attempt to use it to buy a gun somewhere not knowing that it's illegal to do so, and then go get the local ID.

I know I could have very easily made that mistake before I knew all of the firearms purchasing laws.

Secondly, regarding the seller not being able to fill out the form for someone if they are handicapped... violating that portion of the law by accident should not a felon make.  The guy was handcuffed, treated like crap, and slammed on the hood of a car in a "let's make a spectacle"-fashion.  That's just embarassing thuggery, brought about after LYING to someone and DECEIVING someone into breaking the law on a MINOR TECHNICALITY, after that person's defenses have already been dropped by your fake ID (another lie).

If you support that kind of fine-grained nit-picking with the law, I hope you get pulled over and ticketted every single time your speedometer reads even 1 mile per hour over the limit, because that's what you're preaching.  I hope you get a bunch of jaywalking tickets, too, and you get harassed by cops all day long for attempting to open carry.

Quoted: Don't hate the ATF, they just enforce the laws.  If the shop trained staff, and went by the laws they would have no troubles.

Contrary to what your obviously-authoritarian upbringing has led you to believe, ignorance of the law IS an excuse.

And contrary to what you have been told by the gubmint, just because something is "the law" doesn't make it just, legal, or moral, doesn't mean it should be enforced, and doesn't mean you should follow it.

I would consider the ATF evil even if they just enforced the laws.  Do you really think a person should lose his FFL because shop employees occasionally did things like abbreviating "Avenue" as "Ave."?

Is that what you think the "shall not be infringed" guys had in mind?

One day you or someone you care about is going to be on the receiving end of the hammer of government.  And you're not going to like it.

Well said, v8unleashed... a couple people I know IRL that I have talked to about this issue have said crap like "you can't break the LAW" and other basic law-worshipping snippets of sheep-logic.

Wait until a friend of yours gets bitten by it.  Or even a family member.  The ATF deserves all the respect of a common meter maid... most of their agents are out to collect money, jobs, and jailtime that do not benefit the people in any way...

Our tax money goes towards activities that stop good businesses on technicalities so that a particular agent's file can have more arrests listed in it, so that he can get a promotion to earn more of our tax money, while the businesses he destroys generate less taxable revenue, and the people he puts in jail require more tax revenue for support.  The people he puts out of work are likely to commit crimes or sell drugs, which brings a need for more officers and more tax money, and the ones that don't will probably go on unemployment or welfare, and thus need more tax money.

The ATF is completely cancerous.  Bad for humanity (not considering the detriment to another person that is caused by making them lose a job on a stupid technicality, destroying a business that has served a community for 20+ years, etc)... bad for the economy (see previous paragraph), and bad for freedom (enacting/enforcing stupid laws that violate/limit/infringe upon our constitutional rights), and writing policies that are treated as law without any sort of supervision (such as the policies that choose to make importing weapon part X or Y illegal as viewed/interpreted by some dipshit somewhere).  

If the ATF really wants to serve the public and make tomorrow a better place, it can start by looking at real problem-potential people, such as militias and convicts, and pushing local enforcement to more harshly prosecute people for DUI's (including celebrities, who would make perfect examples and save lives if thrown behind real bars for those kinds of crimes)...

Their enforcement strategy should come more from statistics and less from what it takes to get an easy arrest on some retarded technicality.  When 90% of people who are shot are shot with an unstolen handgun that was sold illegally by a gun/pawn shop, they should start doing htis kind of canvassing.  Unfortunately, 90% is many, many magnitudes higher than the actual case... many more people are killed by alcohol and tobacco each year... but those regulations don't usually come with nazi-stern punishments like firearms do.

Quoted: "If someone is fooled by a perfectly replicated fake drivers license that checks out as being valid that is one thing. When a person presents one ID, gets turned down, immediately goes out to their car, gets a second in-state ID, and then presents that one as being his valid license, it is a completely different situation. That is almost akin to someone saying that they are going to buy a gun, finding out that they are ineligible, and then coming back in with a friend who then buys the gun for them. I don't think that this qualifes as a straw purchase, but it is similar in some respects." So a guy from Kentucky comes in with his Kentucky ID, and you reject him... he goes out to his car and gets his valid WVDL, and you don't sell the guy a gun? Why not?  What logical problem is there with that?  Plenty of people have two or even three valid state driver's licenses.  God forbid someone have a Summer home somewhere and be required by law to have that ID on them, and attempt to use it to buy a gun somewhere not knowing that it's illegal to do so, and then go get the local ID. I know I could have very easily made that mistake before I knew all of the firearms purchasing laws.

BEEEEP!  Wrong....stop right there.....

It is illegal for people to have more than one driver's license issued by multiple states, and lest you not believe me, here is the code from your very own Wild and Wonderful West Virginia...

http://www.legis.state.wv.us/WVCODE/17B/WVC%2017%20B-%20%202%20%20-%20%20%201%20A.htm

Many people do not do it, but you are required to turn in your license from your other state when you are issued a new DL from your new state.....so in your example....assuming the Kentucky license was first, and the WV license was second, the Kentucky license is no longer valid....

And lest you think CDL licenses may create this circumstance, the Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 made it illegal to possess a CDL from more than one state....

No, the fact remains, is you may have more than one driver's license, but you only have one VALID driver's license....

Quoted: "If someone is fooled by a perfectly replicated fake drivers license that checks out as being valid that is one thing. When a person presents one ID, gets turned down, immediately goes out to their car, gets a second in-state ID, and then presents that one as being his valid license, it is a completely different situation. That is almost akin to someone saying that they are going to buy a gun, finding out that they are ineligible, and then coming back in with a friend who then buys the gun for them. I don't think that this qualifes as a straw purchase, but it is similar in some respects." So a guy from Kentucky comes in with his Kentucky ID, and you reject him... he goes out to his car and gets his valid WVDL, and you don't sell the guy a gun? Why not?  What logical problem is there with that?  Plenty of people have two or even three valid state driver's licenses.  God forbid someone have a Summer home somewhere and be required by law to have that ID on them, and attempt to use it to buy a gun somewhere not knowing that it's illegal to do so, and then go get the local ID. I know I could have very easily made that mistake before I knew all of the firearms purchasing laws.

The problem with this is that it is against the law for a person to have more than one valid drivers license, at least in Virginia and West Virginia.  So anyone who has two or three valid state drivers licenses is breaking the law by having one.  If he presents you with more than one license, then one of them is invalid and can't be accepted as an identification for a firearms purchase.  A person is not even supposed to have a West Virginia license if they have a valid license from another state.

I am not going to look up the drivers license laws in the rest of the country, but merely having a summer home probably is not enough to require that a person have a drivers license in that state.  Most state statutes dealing with how long you can live in the state without obtaining a state license say that a person must have an intent to reside in that state.  Legally speaking, a residence is not necessarily where you are at that present time.  Residing in a state, most simply, means that you intend to return to that state any time you leave.  In the summer home example, since you intend to return to whereever your non-summer home is, your state of residence would be in whatever state that is.  Also for state of residence, you can look at things like where you are registered to vote to decide.

Secondly, regarding the seller not being able to fill out the form for someone if they are handicapped... violating that portion of the law by accident should not a felon make.  The guy was handcuffed, treated like crap, and slammed on the hood of a car in a "let's make a spectacle"-fashion.  That's just embarassing thuggery, brought about after LYING to someone and DECEIVING someone into breaking the law on a MINOR TECHNICALITY, after that person's defenses have already been dropped by your fake ID (another lie). If you support that kind of fine-grained nit-picking with the law, I hope you get pulled over and ticketted every single time your speedometer reads even 1 mile per hour over the limit, because that's what you're preaching.  I hope you get a bunch of jaywalking tickets, too, and you get harassed by cops all day long for attempting to open carry.

Actually violating that portion of the law is illegal (I don't know whether the violation is a felony or not).  Violations of regulations like that are based upon a strict liability standard.  Basically if you violate the law, then you are guilty.  It does not matter what your intent is with a strict liablity crime, the only thing that needs to be proven is that the person violated the regulation.  And in this case, it is clear that the person was in violation because he did not get the requisite signatures.

This type of sting is allowable.  Police do it all the time.  Calling their actions thuggery is just an attempt to shift the blame to the wrong person.  The clerk is the person who screwed up.  The fact of the matter is that he didn't know what he was doing in an industry that is highly regulated.  Now he may not have been trained properly, but that does not mean that he is not responsible for his own actions.

You may feel that this is fine grained nitpicking of the law, but the fact of the matter is that all the conduct was still illegal.  To use your speeding example, a person going one mile over the speed limit is still as guilty as speeding as a person 20 miles an hour over.  If I got pulled over for doing one mile an hour over, I would not be happy about it, but I would accept the ticket because I broke the law.  

Quoted: Quoted: Don't hate the ATF, they just enforce the laws.  If the shop trained staff, and went by the laws they would have no troubles. Contrary to what your obviously-authoritarian upbringing has led you to believe, ignorance of the law IS an excuse. And contrary to what you have been told by the gubmint, just because something is "the law" doesn't make it just, legal, or moral, doesn't mean it should be enforced, and doesn't mean you should follow it. I would consider the ATF evil even if they just enforced the laws.  Do you really think a person should lose his FFL because shop employees occasionally did things like abbreviating "Avenue" as "Ave."? Is that what you think the "shall not be infringed" guys had in mind? One day you or someone you care about is going to be on the receiving end of the hammer of government.  And you're not going to like it.

Ignorance of the law actually is not an excuse.  If you violate a law that you don't know about, you have still violated the law.  Show me any case where the court held that a person was not guilty because he did not know the law.  

Also, if something has been passed by the government in the approved manner, then that is most certainly the law and you have to follow it.  If you don't follow it and get caught then you will get punished for not following the law.  You may disagree with the law morally but that does not mean that it is any less valid.  

In an industry like firearms that is so heavily regulated, there really is no excuse for not knowing the laws.  I think that it is personally a bit extreme to revoke a FFL for something like you mentioned (although I don't even know if this is possible), but if that happens to a FFL, it happened because the FFL did not follow the law and got caught by the ATF.  If the ATF has the authority to revoke a person's FFL for that then they are fully within their rights to do so.

In regard to "shall not be infringed," you can argue all you want about how the current laws are unconstitutional.  However, that does not mean that at this moment in time the current laws are any less valid.  You may disagree with the laws and want them to be changed, but until they are changed they are still the law and you still have to abide by them.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Don't hate the ATF, they just enforce the laws.  If the shop trained staff, and went by the laws they would have no troubles. Contrary to what your obviously-authoritarian upbringing has led you to believe, ignorance of the law IS an excuse. And contrary to what you have been told by the gubmint, just because something is "the law" doesn't make it just, legal, or moral, doesn't mean it should be enforced, and doesn't mean you should follow it. I would consider the ATF evil even if they just enforced the laws.  Do you really think a person should lose his FFL because shop employees occasionally did things like abbreviating "Avenue" as "Ave."? Is that what you think the "shall not be infringed" guys had in mind? One day you or someone you care about is going to be on the receiving end of the hammer of government.  And you're not going to like it. Ignorance of the law actually is not an excuse.  If you violate a law that you don't know about, you have still violated the law.  Show me any case where the court held that a person was not guilty because he did not know the law.   Also, if something has been passed by the government in the approved manner, then that is most certainly the law and you have to follow it.  If you don't follow it and get caught then you will get punished for not following the law.  You may disagree with the law morally but that does not mean that it is any less valid.   In an industry like firearms that is so heavily regulated, there really is no excuse for not knowing the laws.  I think that it is personally a bit extreme to revoke a FFL for something like you mentioned (although I don't even know if this is possible), but if that happens to a FFL, it happened because the FFL did not follow the law and got caught by the ATF.  If the ATF has the authority to revoke a person's FFL for that then they are fully within their rights to do so. In regard to "shall not be infringed," you can argue all you want about how the current laws are unconstitutional.  However, that does not mean that at this moment in time the current laws are any less valid.  You may disagree with the laws and want them to be changed, but until they are changed they are still the law and you still have to abide by them.

Thank you for the very law and order response.  What you're saying basically boils down to "the law is the law."  I agree.

As a side note, with tax law, it is a maxim that ignorance excuses violations.

But my opinion was not about what the law is, what the courts are going to interpret it to be, nor did I state that I don't believe you won't be prosecuted for breaking it.  My point was that we live in a country where you can't possibly know the laws.  Most of them are so convoluted you can't even understand them without the help of a lawyer.

I looked, and I can't find the quote by one of the founding fathers that basically says a nation is doomed when it has so many laws that a citizen cannot possibly hope to know and follow them all.

And I don't believe in social contract theory bullshit, so please don't parrot to me that just because a legislature did it in accordance with the "rules" they set up means I am bound by it because I live here.

It is plenty possible for the ATF to revoke an FFL for what I mentioned.  I don't know how publicized the case I'm talking about is so I won't name it, other than to say the only "infractions" ATF found were in filling out paperwork.  Rd. instead of Road.  N instead of No.

NO willfully-illegal sales, NO firearms unaccounted for.  They just didn't get everything right in the 40+ blanks on several thousand + forms a year for decades of selling guns.

But, according to you, that is no excuse.  We must be perfect.  We must be omniscient.

If only we were able to hold government to the same standard.

I dont want to speak for Civprod, but since I know he is driving home from his office, I will give a crack at this, and since I know we went to the same law school, I will give it a crack...

I think what he had issue with was the statement that "ignorance is not an excuse"...

In the instance of regulatory crimes especially which, for the most part, are strict liability crimes, it is the time when ignorance is the LEAST excuse....

In this example, for instance, the business owner has purposefully availed himself of the firearms business, and the regulations the ATF is charged with enforcing, and therefore has a positive duty to know the laws....

Regardless, though, in strict liability, there is generally NO excuse, beyond the absolute defenses like being cuckoo, etc...


The clearest example of a strict liability crime is sex with an underage girl....it is strict liability....the law does not care that you didn't know she was 16, it doesn't matter that you were both high, it just doesn't matter....strict liability is strict liability, you did it, so you are guilty, and the majority of normal defenses just are not available....


Now, having said that, and discussing your case, at some point (I would think) there exists a level of prosecutorial discretion as to what cases to prosecute and what not to....I don't know that though...I haven't read the statutes, they may be a strict enforcement kind of thing too....which could mean 1 violation requires the enforcing agency to take action....again...it is all in the wording of the statute...

Again, though....I was going to respond to your characterization as "ignorance is not an excuse" until Civprod did....and for the very reasons I described....in statutory violation crime, many times there are no excuse...period...ignorance being the least of them...

But, having said that, in all crime ignorance of the law is still not considered a defense...

And before you say it, I agree with you...I am a lawyer....way too many damn laws....

They're active in Inwood.  VG2 had a 3 day visit last week from them.
Dotted "i"s and crossed "t"s were the subject of the investigation.  They checked out every sale since the place opened, and this is the second time since they've been audited.

One of the things I DO know about this area, and quite possibly the state as well, there are a lot of straw purchases being made here in WV.  This coming from a local Federal Probation officer that I know.  VG2 has had quite a few, but I'm not sure even if they know yet.  Not the shops fault, but the buyer.  There is rarely any way to know who the buyer is giving them to or keeping them for themselves.

Folks, they're out there to "enforce", whether you like them or not, their laws or not, their methods or not.  It's going to happen, and unless you do something to remove their authority, it's going to keep happening.  Eventually, it'll happen to you, your friends, your parents.....unless YOU do something about it.

NO, I'm not advocating a "Unintended Consequences" revolt.....I'd never do that.

Ok, before I get my ass flamed more for saying "don't blame the ATF".  Yes the ATF does things to totally screw people over, and I think that is wrong, but if a shop allows something they know is wrong, like selling a handgun to an out of state person, allowing another person to buy in anothers name, and allowing a person who was just there with a out of state Id to magically produce a WV one.  That is wrong, and they should be shut down.  In the end yes the ATF will try to screw you over, along with any other gov agency.  Most people know that, and if they don't they are in denial.  but they make laws for a reason, and if your not following them your get your ass canned eventually.

You can get state IDs though, some of which do not differentiate between residents and nonresidents in any way.

Bought several guns in college this way no problem. ( Maintained legal residence in Home state for partial tuition break, while having apartment with state ID in college state)

And yes this is legal following the for 4473 definitions of multiple states residency.

And state IDs are valid for long periods, and are not revoked when getting a driver license, so they could cause some thorny residency proof problems methinks.

Yes, it appears that many people in this thread don't understand that having valid state IDs for multiple states is in fact a reality and is completely legal.

If you have a home in california, for instance, you have I think 10 days to get a california driver's license.  If it's a home you stay in for half of the year, you'd better have one there and one in WV, too...  if you want to buy guns at all... ever.

By the way, for the law-worshippers.... Law is not holy.  It is flawed.  made by man.  
You will only be able to see the truth in this when you are at the business end of a cop's gun while he's disarming you for "officer safety".  

The law is flawed to begin with, then, you enforce it with low-paid numbskulls or high paid feds who don't care about the common guy?  The enforcers themselves are human and flawed as well.  Flawed law + flawed enforcement = you're probably going to get the raw deal at some point when you accidentally mess up... even when it didn't actually endanger anyone.

Quoted: If you have a home in california, for instance, you have I think 10 days to get a california driver's license.  If it's a home you stay in for half of the year, you'd better have one there and one in WV, too...  if you want to buy guns at all... ever.

It appears that some people contributing to this thread seem happy to make up information as part of contributing.

Here's a link to the Driver's License Compact, which describes, on page three (in the text quoted below) that you are wrong, JudgeX.  Signatories of the Compact (including California, West Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, Pennsylvania ... among at least forty-five of the states comprising the Union) shall require applicants "to surrender any and all valid driver licenses issued to the applicant by any other state" (Section 2.1.2, page 5).  This concept is conveyed quite nicely in the following:

ARTICLE V APPLICATIONS FOR NEW LICENSES—Upon application for a license to drive, the licensing authority in a party state shall ascertain whether the applicant has ever held, or is the holder of, a license to drive issued by any other party state. The licensing authority in the state where application is made shall not issue a license to drive to the applicant if: (1) The applicant has held such a license, but the same has been suspended by reason, in whole or in part, of a violation and if such suspension period has not terminated. (2) The applicant has held such a license, but the same has been revoked by reason, in whole or in part, of a violation and if such revocation has not terminated, except that after the expiration of one year from the date the license was revoked, such person may make application for a new license if permitted by law. The licensing authority may refuse to issue a license to any such applicant if, after investigation, the licensing authority determines that it will not be safe to grant to such person the privilege of driving a motor vehicle on the public highways. (3) The applicant is the holder of a license to drive issued by another party state and currently in force unless the applicant surrenders such license.

Without regard to the Nation's gun control laws, and the BATFE's enforcement efforts (for a heartwarming story, click <-- this link-->) numbskulls have no business working behind the counter at a gun store.  And while I appreciate the fact that blood is thicker than water, no amount of fabrication will change the fact that your kin appears to have been legitimately arrested for violating one or more provisions of Federal gun control laws.  

I hope that your kin's counsel does not rely on your expertise, JudgeX when preparing for the court case.  I fear otherwise a long vacation at Club Fed might be in the offing.

(ETA)  Here's another link, <-- Click Me --> that provides an overview of the Compact, and lists the signatory states.

thank you, larry...you just saved me some time this evening....

Yeah, larry, thank you.

Your lengthy document and self aggrandizing-exposition sure put the nail in this coffin...

Except you didn't take a couple things into consideration...

1) The purpose of my post was to warn other gunshop owners, I wasn't giving 100% accurate down to the second information, generalities, instead, so as to obfuscate information in case someone on the local boards was somehow connected to this bust.

Therefore...
2) My use of the term "driver's license" could quite easily have been "State ID"... and as a matter of fact, I warned that it was a second hand story in my first post.  I honestly don't remember if my "kin" said "driver's license" or "state ID".  A license is just the first thing that comes to mind when I think about it.  Furthermore, in my first post, if you read carefully, I only really mention state IDs.  The document you posted has nothing to do with those.

3) You don't need a driver's license to own a firearm.

4) That gigantic document you posted and I read, letter by letter, deals only with driver's licenses.  Do you know why that document exists?  It's certainly not to prevent firearms sales... as a matter of fact it's not even under the scope of laws that someone should even really be expected to know, except for those of us who work at the DMV.  That document exists to prevent people from getting their license revoked in Montana for DUIs and moving 2 miles across the border and getting another license.  That's the spirit of that law, read it.  

5) People can trick the DMV.  I know a guy with a WV and Ohio driver's license.  Technically he shouldn't have it, but, there are benefits to it.

6) When your residence changes to a state and you get pulled over, the police tend to tell you that you have to have a license with your current residence on it.  Therefore, you HAVE to go change your driver's license... but, the document does not make mention of other forms of state ID.  It would be very easy to have any given state driver's license and another state's ID, without even having to lie.

7) Someone who just wants to lie and sign an affidavit saying that he or she never had another driver's license can also have 2.

8) People from the 4 states not listed (such as Georgia), are not forced to surrender their licenses, and can thus, fully and legally have two, as could have easily been the case.

9) Wow.  You went through a lot of trouble to bust up a shakily detailed posting that was just meant to help others who might fall into the same stink.  You trying to prove somethin, kiddo?  What's your deal?  Chill down.  I know you want to deep throat the law every day... it helps some people feel better about themselves to be "law-abiding citizens"... but ultimately, if we cannot criticize the law, then it is no longer law, but instead some sort of Mandate Of Heaven passed down by the Gods that cannot be questioned.

Yes, We all wish taht the written word of the law was alright, but, when you take license laws and use them to bust people for firearms regulations based on their ignorance of vehicle-related laws, if we extrapolate that as far as we want in other directions, we could very easily, most likely, make it legally impossible to sell tylenol or cat food at a grocery store, completely outlaw the buying and selling of anything that remotely looked like it might be used for smoking tobacco, and send tons of people to jail each year for accidentally leaving the back of their beer truck open for 18 seconds while they cart a crate of booze up to the convenience store (since they made it accessible to minors).  However, with moderate interpretation of the law, and wise enforcement and punishment policies, as it's written it's fine.

Unfortunately, people like you ruin it for everyone.  Good job.  :)

I would also like to point out that someone's character judgement of my "kin" was rude and uncalled for.  Said person or persons were not there, said person or persons do not have the details.  Neither do I.  It's QUITE POSSIBLE that my kin is an idiot.  I will admit that... however, for someone to leap in and presume someone's relative intelligence based on a very second hand story is first-hand retarded, unless someone knows exactly what happened, and can enlighten us all.

However, I do sense that someone's e-peen might have swelled up when he/she saw the chance to call me on my simple mistake of using an imaginary anecdote involving california when I should have used Georgia.  WHOOPS.  I'm not a lawyer.  At least I'm not a rude forum troll who thinks he knows it all.

Have a nice day ;).

And, while we're talking legalese...

Disclaimer:
Any suppositions or ad hominem attacks presumed targetted at a forum member in the previous post or posts are coincidental, and do not directly correlate to any person, living or dead.  JudgeX does not take responsibility for the assumptions of character taken on by readers based on the text he has posted.