Posted: 8/20/2025 1:55:19 PM EDT
|
I made a mistake at my FLL yesterday, you tell me if you would have done things differently. I bought a 10/22 Ruger that had a folding stock. I understand if it's under 26" folded I need a pistol purchase permit, and I had one. The ffl was going to transfer it as a rifle and I explained it had to be transfered as a "Michigan Pistol" as it had a folding stock. She made comments that it might be an sbr as pistols can't have stocks, and it had to have a brace. I guess I didn't read the room well as she said I could take it elsewhere and not to transfer stuff there anymore. I really liked the girls there as they have treated me with respect, and they just are decent people. I thought I was just being helpful by trying to explain Michigan law, plus being excited by my new purchase. She called the ATF to get guidance and in the end it was registered as a pistol. Seems some FFL's don't like being corrected, but truthfully they should have known. I ended up smoothing it over, I hope I did as I was sincere. But if it ever happens again I won't be trying to explain Michigan law again, and if it needed to be registered I would do that after I leave. Has anyone else encountered a ffl that really didn't understand the law? What would you do? Did I handle it right? I still feel bad as it didn't have to escalate like that. |
|
Originally Posted By STJ: Federally it's a rifle on 4473 Michigan it's a pistol on RI-60 I tried explaining it, and how Michigan measures oal at its shortest configuration and federal measures at the extended. I was just excited about my new range toy and didn't realize they were offended when I tried to teach them Michigan law regarding this. She even went as far as saying she had more NFA items than me, which when I think on it she should have known. |
|
Every once in a while I run into someone who is dense. I had a stripped lower receiver shipped to a store in Westland. Stripped receivers are exempt from having a RI-60 filled out, under Michigan's unconstitutional law. The store worker insisted on having it filled out and at the end handed me a copy. I told him since even a rifle didn't have to be registered with the State that I didn't need the form. He was almost enraged that I would not take the form. He went on about everyone has to keep their RI-60s to prove they own their guns. Ug. I don't think I've stepped foot in the store since. |
|
I know it's frustrating but remember they are more than likely doing their best to navigate a minefield of intentionally subjective and unclear laws so they can keep their license. The confusion and differing interpretations is by design. Blame the arsonist, not the fire. |
|
Originally Posted By Bebop_941: I know it's frustrating but remember they are more than likely doing their best to navigate a minefield of intentionally subjective and unclear laws so they can keep their license. The confusion and differing interpretations is by design. Blame the arsonist, not the fire. Tis true. I'm currently looking into redoing the makers information on a few of my Formed 1 NFA items. The person I used did the minimum legal depth. I want them redone to a deeper "NFA" depth. Once place won't touch them because they are concerned that they'll get in trouble for destroying "manufacturer's" information......even though they would be reapplying the same information right back. |
|
Originally Posted By 243savage: Tis true. I'm currently looking into redoing the makers information on a few of my Formed 1 NFA items. The person I used did the minimum legal depth. I want them redone to a deeper "NFA" depth. Once place won't touch them because they are concerned that they'll get in trouble for destroying "manufacturer's" information......even though they would be reapplying the same information right back. I get my nfa items engraved by Gerbrand Defense He does a great job and its plenty deep. I think he charges $50 and you can wait for it. |
|
Originally Posted By Bebop_941: I know it's frustrating but remember they are more than likely doing their best to navigate a minefield of intentionally subjective and unclear laws so they can keep their license. The confusion and differing interpretations is by design. Blame the arsonist, not the fire. I understand, I know about the differences with federal and Michigan as it pertains to my purchases and I've been around awhile. I was truly trying to help them understand Michigan law regarding pistols but what I didn't foresee is they thought maybe it was an ego thing as they were young and did have the FFL. I was excited getting my new plinker. Next time I'm not going to correct them. Would they be in trouble if they transfered it as a rifle and me knowing it was a "Michigan Pistol" I took it to a police station to register it properly? ETA: I do plan on stopping at a police station to make sure it is registered. I don't agree with Michigans gun laws but on the other side I don't need the problems with a purchase that wasn't properly done. Again those people have always been respectful and nice, until this time. I'm not holding it against them as Michigan should just align with Federal laws. |
|
MI's pistol definition is a mess and they have never really fixed the law to delineate things clearly (Part of the reason I didn't purchase a AUG in 2008/9 when Steyr re-released them) Sorry you are in this mess OP. That being said I've had to drop multiple FFL's from my options list specifically due to lack of understanding (minor to "lol wut") with NFA items and the process. |
|
Originally Posted By fmkenner: I understand, I know about the differences with federal and Michigan as it pertains to my purchases and I've been around awhile. I was truly trying to help them understand Michigan law regarding pistols but what I didn't foresee is they thought maybe it was an ego thing as they were young and did have the FFL. I was excited getting my new plinker. Next time I'm not going to correct them. Would they be in trouble if they transfered it as a rifle and me knowing it was a "Michigan Pistol" I took it to a police station to register it properly? ETA: I do plan on stopping at a police station to make sure it is registered. I don't agree with Michigans gun laws but on the other side I don't need the problems with a purchase that wasn't properly done. Again those people have always been respectful and nice, until this time. I'm not holding it against them as Michigan should just align with Federal laws. I don't doubt that you were just trying to help. The attitude from them was uncalled for but I can understand why it happened even if I don't agree. There is just so much ego tossed around in the gun community that alot of people become resentful and figure everyone is just an insufferable know it all and they check out. All of the overly complex and unnecessary laws just adds to the confusion and frustration. |
|
Originally Posted By Bebop_941: I don't doubt that you were just trying to help. The attitude from them was uncalled for but I can understand why it happened even if I don't agree. There is just so much ego tossed around in the gun community that alot of people become resentful and figure everyone is just an insufferable know it all and they check out. All of the overly complex and unnecessary laws just adds to the confusion and frustration. Yeah I understand why it happened too. I actually didn't read the room right and didn't see it coming. It did work out but left me thinking. Michigan laws are weird. Maybe with this interaction they learned something, which should be helpful as they won't be in trouble with the atf. I even called them when I got home and told them how sincere my apology was. Not my place to educate someone with a ffl, and going forward I won't do that again. I was curious how other people would of reacted to my situation. |
|
Originally Posted By fmkenner: I understand, I know about the differences with federal and Michigan as it pertains to my purchases and I've been around awhile. I was truly trying to help them understand Michigan law regarding pistols but what I didn't foresee is they thought maybe it was an ego thing as they were young and did have the FFL. I was excited getting my new plinker. Next time I'm not going to correct them. Would they be in trouble if they transfered it as a rifle and me knowing it was a "Michigan Pistol" I took it to a police station to register it properly? ETA: I do plan on stopping at a police station to make sure it is registered. I don't agree with Michigans gun laws but on the other side I don't need the problems with a purchase that wasn't properly done. Again those people have always been respectful and nice, until this time. I'm not holding it against them as Michigan should just align with Federal laws. Isn't it now the seller's responsibility to submit the RI-60 form? That changed recently once they implemented their stupid UBC scheme. |
|
Originally Posted By MrFisher: Isn't it now the seller's responsibility to submit the RI-60 form? That changed recently once they implemented their stupid UBC scheme. Not sure. The FFL's I had been dealing with would, I would have to bring a purchase permit. That wasn't the problem as I already had the permit, they wanted to transfer it as a rifle. They even questioned whether it was an SBR or not. |