ARs

[Artos]

I talked to another 07 today & he could not imagine not filling it out & hasn't seen any formal regs stating otherwise...I too am tired of his nonsense.

He won't acknowledge if he fills them out or not for his own paperwork, he just continues to tout the one email as a formal doc of hard data...which it is not. I have a verbal from my ffl gal & several other 07's saying they all feel required to fill out the form.

He thinks he won...I think I won. I know he ain't gonna pay up the same reason I won't. I believe my agent, he believes his.

out...frick'n obnoxious.

[BBReezen]

no points that were part of the bet are missing, you are looking for personal info on me.

I see you are an FFL, have you emailed your IOI to ask? Yes im taking about selling to the average joe who walks in a gun store. It was clear in the first part when i got called out by you, artos, and big tex...and maybe one other.

I have no dog in the fight but I have been following this to see an outcome. I'm on nobody's side but I guess I have gotten slightly mixed up here. The conversation is about I & M and their requirements to fill out the multi sale form to unlicensed individuals (average joe)? You just stated that you are talking about an unlicensed individual (average Joe customer) walking into a gun store (licensed FFL dealer). So going by the link and post from MikeD on #170, that gun store is required to fill our such form in the situation you just stated that you were talking about, right?

As for the I & M allowed to deal in the premises in which they manufacture, it would be dumb not to be able to deal the product you manufacture. But they cannot deal any other product other than that they produce, unless acquiring a dealers license to cover that. The way I interpret this stuff for I&M is that they do not require the multi gun form to FFL license holders is because it is for inventory of FFLs store and they are not the end user. Kinda like how sales tax is not required on transactions that a product is to be re-sold to the end user with tax applied? But I don't see how they could get around not being required to do multi gun paperwork to any average joe since they are "dealing" their own product as a dealer to the public.

I'm not against you JCL but i don't see anything stating the I&M get any special requirement just because their licenses are for one thing but cover "dealing" under its umbrella. No multi forms to FFLs but as soon as they "deal" their product to Joe off the street, their license as I&M puts them into "dealer" status and thus would require them to follow the dealer rules. Just my opinion and interpretation of this.

[bphillips]

I have no dog in the fight but I have been following this to see an outcome. I'm on nobody's side but I guess I have gotten slightly mixed up here. The conversation is about I & M and their requirements to fill out the multi sale form to unlicensed individuals (average joe)? You just stated that you are talking about an unlicensed individual (average Joe customer) walking into a gun store (licensed FFL dealer). So going by the link and post from MikeD on #170, that gun store is required to fill our such form in the situation you just stated that you were talking about, right?

As for the I & M allowed to deal in the premises in which they manufacture, it would be dumb not to be able to deal the product you manufacture. But they cannot deal any other product other than that they produce, unless acquiring a dealers license to cover that. The way I interpret this stuff for I&M is that they do not require the multi gun form to FFL license holders is because it is for inventory of FFLs store and they are not the end user. Kinda like how sales tax is not required on transactions that a product is to be re-sold to the end user with tax applied? But I don't see how they could get around not being required to do multi gun paperwork to any average joe since they are "dealing" their own product as a dealer to the public.

I'm not against you JCL but i don't see anything stating the I&M get any special requirement just because their licenses are for one thing but cover "dealing" under its umbrella. No multi forms to FFLs but as soon as they "deal" their product to Joe off the street, their license as I&M puts them into "dealer" status and thus would require them to follow the dealer rules. Just my opinion and interpretation of this.

That's how I read it too and have seen nothing proving otherwise

[jcl]

I talked to another 07 today & he could not imagine not filling it out & hasn't seen any formal regs stating otherwise...I too am tired of his nonsense.

He won't acknowledge if he fills them out or not for his own paperwork, he just continues to tout the one email as a formal doc of hard data...which it is not. I have a verbal from my ffl gal & several other 07's saying they all feel required to fill out the form.

He thinks he won...I think I won. I know he ain't gonna pay up the same reason I won't. I believe my agent, he believes his.

out...frick'n obnoxious.

I absolutely will pay up just prove you won.

[BigTex.308]

I left this thread because I have a strict policy of not arguing with idiots. Which will not change.

One thing I would like to point out is IOIs do not make ATF policy nor do they always properly interpret it. Kinda like how cops don't determine what is and what is not legal.

For any winner to be declared in this childish game that someone insists on playing you would need something officially in writing from the ATF. Not an IOI, but an official statement on the matter.


It would stand to reason, however, that since 07s are Manufacturers AND Dealers, that they would be held under the same requirements as an 02 or 01. They fill out 4473s and therefore should be doing everything a regular dealer should since they ARE DEALERS too. But there I go applying critical thinking and logic again


There has not been proof of either side of the argument provided in this thread. All I've seen is one particular individual that likes to play a bad *** on the internet.



Until the ATF issues a formal statement on the matter let's drop this. It's ****ing stupid.



Now if you'll excuse me I have more important things to do like setting record sales numbers.




-Ike

[BigTex.308]

....But they cannot deal any other product other than that they produce, unless acquiring a dealers license to cover that.....

Actually 07s are exactly the same as 01s with the exception that they can manufacture as well.

They are basically an 01 (dealer) that is also allowed to manufacture. They can do everything that a regular dealer (01) can AND more.



Ike

[jcl]

There has not been proof of either side of the argument provided in this thread. All I've seen is one particular individual that likes to play a bad *** on the internet.


-Ike

I never claimed to be anything bad.....

[BigTex.308]

I never claimed to be anything bad.....

I'm not claiming. I'm stating.



Seriously though. I think that was 5 years ago and pretty sure I was drunk at the time. lol.



Ike

[jcl]

You guys wanted me to prove why im right. So i did

Then you guys say my source is invalid and not good enough but provide no proof to the contrary.



Why dont your guys contact somebody to find real clarification of facts....Not "Best Practice" like you guys have been talking. We are only talking facts here.

[bphillips]

You guys wanted me to prove why im right. So i did

Then you guys say my source is invalid and not good enough but provide no proof to the contrary.



Why dont your guys contact somebody to find real clarification of facts....Not "Best Practice" like you guys have been talking. We are only talking facts here.

Neither side has actually proved they were right yet


I'm sure APR could chime in and let us know what they have to do if they see the thread

[Mike D]

You guys wanted me to prove why im right. So i did

Then you guys say my source is invalid and not good enough but provide no proof to the contrary.



Why dont your guys contact somebody to find real clarification of facts....Not "Best Practice" like you guys have been talking. We are only talking facts here.

C'mon man you have not providing anything that definitively says 07/02 is exempt. The only thing you have shown is the don't need an additional dealer's license. Since both 07 FFL and 02 SOT can acts as a dealer, why would an additional dealer license be required?

I'm still not following your logic.




"An honest government has no fear of an armed population".

[BigTex.308]

Neither side has actually proved they were right yet

My point exactly.


If it's such a big deal, then write the ATF. I have better things to do and honestly don't give a ****.


Nobody has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are right. NEITHER SIDE.


Ike

[jcl]

My point exactly.


If it's such a big deal, then write the ATF. I have better things to do and honestly don't give a ****.


Nobody has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are right. NEITHER SIDE.


Ike

IOI's are who deal with FFL's on a daily basis, set up new stores, and do store audits correct?

I have an email from mine stating that i do not have to fill out multi rifle forms and sales. Artos has this email.

[BigTex.308]

IOI's are who deal with FFL's on a daily basis and do store audits correct?

I have an email from mine stating that i do not have to fill out multi rifle forms and sales. Artos has this email.

Like I stated previously, IOIs do not make ATF policy nor do they always interpret it correctly.

IOIs are usually correct but "he said this" won't hold up in court nor is it a valid way to prove a point one way or the other.


Kind of the same concept as not asking cops for legal advise. Judges determine what is legal and what is not. Cops do not. Do you see the connection?

Write the ATF and get an official statement. Not an email from an IOI.


I've had 3 different IOIs tell me 3 different things when asked the same question on different visits.

I'm friends with many FFLs and am in social groups where folks from all over the country share experiences and discuss related issues. There are many reports of IOIs giving conflicting information.


I will say it a third time, IOIs do not make ATF policy nor do they always interpret it correctly.

Ike

[jcl]

Like I stated previously, IOIs do not make ATF policy nor do they always interpret it correctly.


Write the ATF and get an official statement. Not an email from an IOI.



Ike

So if emails dont work. Who should i ask and in what form? How high do i need to go for you to believe and everyone to believe that manufacturers do not have to fill out multi rifle forms in texas?