26 November 2008, 22:50
Rusty Marlinnew form 4473 line 30
what do you put here if you are transfering an unbarreled reciever?
26 November 2008, 23:25
J BennettRusty
Don't take this to the bank but I put NA for non applicable.
James
27 November 2008, 06:38
Rusty MarlinThat's proably a better answer than TBD, To Be Detirmained.
I shot this question to the ATF today, but no answer yet. I'll let you know what they come back with.
27 November 2008, 07:01
GeoffM24My FFL has marked this N/A, one thing to keep in mind is that during the original AWB the law stated that a rifle had to be fully assembled prior to the ban. A 4377 which listed no barrel was therefor no proof of this.
27 November 2008, 19:49
Jim KobeWhat is form 4377? Excuse my ignorance please.
29 November 2008, 00:41
Rusty MarlinStandard BATFE firears transfer form, did I transcribe the numbers??
AH so, 4473 not 4377, sorry about the confusion.
The question still stands though.
01 December 2008, 20:43
Jim KobeI went through this very thing on my compliancee check about a month ago. The two agents that were here wanted to know why I had some entries in my book listed as action only. They kept asking me "what caliber is it?" the only thing I could honestly say is "I don't know" To which they asked "is it a rifle" Again I said "I Don't know" (It could have come off an XP100). He asked again what caliber was it and I said I didn't know. To which he said, and I quote, "I have never heard of such a thing" Well it gets better, I then handed him a new, in the box, still in the sealed wrapper all of the parts of a Sako L691 action, still in the white and asked him how I would log this in. To which he repeated, "What is it, a rifle?" Again I said I didn't know. He then said "what caliber" and I said I didn"t know and then explained to him that it came out of the Sako factory like that and never had a barrel so it never had any caliber designation. He then uttered that all too familiar phrase, "I never heard of such a thing" and sounding like I was trying to pull the wool over his eyes.
01 December 2008, 22:56
BECoolequote:
Originally posted by GeoffM24:
My FFL has marked this N/A, one thing to keep in mind is that during the original AWB the law stated that a rifle had to be fully assembled prior to the ban. A 4377 which listed no barrel was therefor no proof of this.
There was no way to enforce that in the first place because there was no law that required documentation of assembly date before the AWB took effect.
It was therefore incumbent upon the Gov't to prove that the firearm had NOT been assembled before the AWB.