Son got in trouble in college (MIP) so that's on his record. No felony charges anywhere and he completed his diversion requirements several years ago.

Goes to buy a pistol and gets "delayed" by the (my mistake, EDIT) NCIS when he submits his background check. Store policy will not release the pistol after the 3-days as the ATF allows. Got to 30-days and the store told him he needed to come back and submit again so he did. Of course, he's delayed again.

What is the recourse here? He's clearly allowed to purchase a gun as he's NOT a felon, but he cannot.

Is the any point in trying to call the ATF? I thought he should just submit for a UPIN but that can take up to 90-days.

He found a nice deal on a used CZ75 and doesn't want to just give up. He's also pissed that he's being denied his constitutional 2nd Amendment rights.

agracer said:

---

Son got in trouble in college (MIP) so that's on his record. No felony charges anywhere and he completed his diversion requirements several years ago.

Goes to buy a pistol and gets "delayed" by the ATF when he submits his background check. Store policy will not release the pistol after the 3-days as the ATF allows. Got to 30-days and the store told him he needed to come back and submit again so he did. Of course, he's delayed again.

What is the recourse here? He's clearly allowed to purchase a gun as he's NOT a felon, but he cannot.

Is the any point in trying to call the ATF? I thought he should just submit for a UPIN but that can take up to 90-days.

He found a nice deal on a used CZ75 and doesn't want to just give up. He's also pissed that he's being denied his constitutional 2nd Amendment rights.

---

what store is this? we would love to know what store is violating his rights. go somewhere else or you can go make the purchase for him as a gift.

After 72 hrs the background check can no longer hold up the transfer process unless they issue a denial.

Plenty of deals to be had on a cz75 elsewhere, certainly not a unicorn, nor ideal to financially support a business that makes it a challenge to purchase from them.

Curious what store this is.

This is where a concealed carry license is very handy

I had the same thing happen to me about 3 years ago. I was delayed then denied. I have no criminal history whatsoever. But, there is someone with a similar name and date of birth that has an extensive criminal history including indecency with a child. I disputed the denial with the ATF and sent them several types of identification. They released the denial a few days later and gave me a "proceed". I was able to pick up my firearm from Scheels in the Colony without a problem. The ATF agent said I should apply for UPIN which I did. It has been 3yrs now and I still haven't received it. I ended up getting my LTC a month or two after being denied. Now, I have zero issues purchasing a firearm.

SKY1 said:

---

I had the same thing happen to me about 3 years ago. I was delayed then denied. I have no criminal history whatsoever. But, there is someone with a similar name and date of birth that has an extensive criminal history including indecency with a child. I disputed the denial with the ATF and sent them several types of identification. They released the denial a few days later and gave me a "proceed". I was able to pick up my firearm from Scheels in the Colony without a problem. The ATF agent said I should apply for UPIN which I did. It has been 3yrs now and I still haven't received it. I ended up getting my LTC a month or two after being denied. Now, I have zero issues purchasing a firearm.

---

He hasn't been denied, just delayed. Can't really appeal a delay.

It's Scheels that will not release the pistol, which honestly is not a huge surprise. Their a big corporation and I'm sure don't want the bad publicity of a 'delayed' back ground check gun being used in a crime.

Agree, you can't appeal a delay. I was just giving an example of what happened to me. Hopefully it doesn't come back denied. Just letting you know their is a way to appeal that if needed. Actually surprised the ATF got things going in a timely manner.

The MIP isn't what is holding him up. Likely some stupidity at the ATF. On a side note, if he ends up getting denied he needs to contact the ATF and get it cleared up like the previous poster did. A denied transaction file can lead to more denied transactions. Denied transaction files also show up as an NCIC hit.

DatTallArchitect said:

---

This is where a concealed carry license is very handy

---

Exactly. Saturday was a 23 minute drive each way to gun store. Time in the door to out with gun in my hand was 12 minutes as there were 3 other purchases in-process before me. Took me 4x to drive there and back than it did to complete the purchase.

I don't believe the MIP that he got several years ago is the hold up. Plus he completed the diversion program so it shouldn't be on his record. As another poster gave an example of an is issue with another person with a similar name having an extensive record. I was going to say this is a more likely scenario for your sons delay and denial. Could be lots of things though.

The FFL has the right to not complete the transfer. Federal law mandates that, if they are going to transfer it, they cannot do it for 3 days following the receipt of the delay.

And before you say it, the FFL is not violating his 2nd Amendment rights...

DatTallArchitect said:

---

This is where a concealed carry license is very handy

---

This.

Go support your local store. Plenty of deals on pistols of that type.

TX_COWDOC said:

---

Go support your local store. Plenty of deals on pistols of that type.

---

We've talked about that, but he's a stubborn SOB (got that from him mom ) and is set on exercising his 2nd Amendment rights with the pistol he found!

agracer said:

---

TX_COWDOC said:

---

Go support your local store. Plenty of deals on pistols of that type.

---

We've talked about that, but he's a stubborn SOB (got that from him mom ) and is set on exercising his 2nd Amendment rights with the pistol he found!

---

There is nothing he can do to force the FFL to transfer the firearm. Absent an NCIC denial that he can appeal to get approved, he will be SOL.

agracer said:

---

TX_COWDOC said:

---

Go support your local store. Plenty of deals on pistols of that type.

---

We've talked about that, but he's a stubborn SOB (got that from him mom ) and is set on exercising his 2nd Amendment rights with the pistol he found!

---

Wonderer beat me to it, but the business has no obligation to sell him that weapon, despite the law saying its ok. Money talks, so does a review of his experience on one of the many sites that critique businesses. This isn't a 2nd amendment issue. This is a spat with a big box store and their corporate policy, which your son won't change by going in and raising hell.

TGT

That lovely new bill with the red flag bribery scheme, and enhanced background checks for minors went into affect. As part of that bill, everyone between the ages of 18 and 21 are being delayed to allow for their minor records to be checked, and it also pretty much did away with the minimum waiting period. So he could be flat out of luck if in that age range. It also requires the dealer to send additional personal information ie full address etc for anyone who gets a delay for any reason. Used to only be denials that got the full workup.

NM....

The Wonderer said:

---

The FFL has the right to not complete the transfer. Federal law mandates that, if they are going to transfer it, they cannot do it for 3 days following the receipt of the delay.

And before you say it, the FFL is not violating his 2nd Amendment rights...

---

Something something, shall not be infringed. Seems pretty clear.

I'd have already bought the gun for my son. F them.

JSKolache said:

---

The Wonderer said:

---

The FFL has the right to not complete the transfer. Federal law mandates that, if they are going to transfer it, they cannot do it for 3 days following the receipt of the delay.

And before you say it, the FFL is not violating his 2nd Amendment rights...

---

Something something, shall not be infringed. Seems pretty clear.

---

Is the right to bear arms the same as the right to buy arms from a non-consenting seller? Come on, you are making us 2A supporters look dumb with that take.

DatTallArchitect said:

---

This is where a concealed carry license is very handy

---

Or just buy a gun off the street. I never fill out 4473s




To the OP, it has nothing to do with his MIP or whatever it was.

JSKolache said:

---

The Wonderer said:

---

The FFL has the right to not complete the transfer. Federal law mandates that, if they are going to transfer it, they cannot do it for 3 days following the receipt of the delay.

And before you say it, the FFL is not violating his 2nd Amendment rights...

---

Something something, shall not be infringed. Seems pretty clear.

---

Infringed by the government, not a private company. This is like saying your boss can't fire you for telling him to eff off because this is a free country with the 1st Amendment, *******it!

fire09 said:

---

JSKolache said:

---

The Wonderer said:

---

The FFL has the right to not complete the transfer. Federal law mandates that, if they are going to transfer it, they cannot do it for 3 days following the receipt of the delay.

And before you say it, the FFL is not violating his 2nd Amendment rights...

---

Something something, shall not be infringed. Seems pretty clear.

---

Is the right to bear arms the same as the right to buy arms from a non-consenting seller? Come on, you are making us 2A supporters look dumb with that take.

---

i disagree. it's not the FFLs job to determine who can exercise their 2nd amendment rights. if the feds cannot get their crap together, that is on them.

Furlock Bones said:

---

fire09 said:

---

JSKolache said:

---

The Wonderer said:

---

The FFL has the right to not complete the transfer. Federal law mandates that, if they are going to transfer it, they cannot do it for 3 days following the receipt of the delay.

And before you say it, the FFL is not violating his 2nd Amendment rights...

---

Something something, shall not be infringed. Seems pretty clear.

---

Is the right to bear arms the same as the right to buy arms from a non-consenting seller? Come on, you are making us 2A supporters look dumb with that take.

---

i disagree. it's not the FFLs job to determine who can exercise their 2nd amendment rights. if the feds cannot get their crap together, that is on them.

---

But it is their job to decide who they sell to.

The FFL is not obligated to sell a weapon to an individual, regardless of background check results. The 2nd amendment does not protect you from a private business and their policies. It protects you from the government. There is already a law in place with the background check system that says the FFL can transfer the firearm (if they choose) after 72 hours of a delay. I still am confused why we are mixing up the second amendment into this discussion. It's not relevant.

fire09 said:

---

The FFL is not obligated to sell a weapon to an individual, regardless of background check results. The 2nd amendment does not protect you from a private business and their policies. It protects you from the government. There is already a law in place with the background check system that says the FFL can transfer the firearm (if they choose) after 72 hours of a delay. I still am confused why we are mixing up the second amendment into this discussion. It's not relevant.

---

When nics sees a charge, they may contact the arresting agency for disposition and clarification by paper inquiry. That's what has the hold going on, and there's very little you can do with it unfortunately

fire09 said:

---

The FFL is not obligated to sell a weapon to an individual, regardless of background check results. The 2nd amendment does not protect you from a private business and their policies. It protects you from the government. There is already a law in place with the background check system that says the FFL can transfer the firearm (if they choose) after 72 hours of a delay. I still am confused why we are mixing up the second amendment into this discussion. It's not relevant.

---

While I agree that a business should have the freedom to make their own policies, the words in your argument could just as easily be changed to "The baker is not obligated to bake the cake for an individual, regardless of their protected rights".Different situation, but the principle is the same, and we all know how that one went down. Protected rights should win out here.

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

fire09 said:

---

JSKolache said:

---

The Wonderer said:

---

The FFL has the right to not complete the transfer. Federal law mandates that, if they are going to transfer it, they cannot do it for 3 days following the receipt of the delay.

And before you say it, the FFL is not violating his 2nd Amendment rights...

---

Something something, shall not be infringed. Seems pretty clear.

---

Is the right to bear arms the same as the right to buy arms from a non-consenting seller? Come on, you are making us 2A supporters look dumb with that take.

---

i disagree. it's not the FFLs job to determine who can exercise their 2nd amendment rights. if the feds cannot get their crap together, that is on them.

---

But it is their job to decide who they sell to.

---

Only under certain conditions.

For example, if they decide not to sell to somebody because they are a muslim, they get sued. Same for not selling to a woman, or a black person, or a Mexican because they think he's a cartel member on the basis of him being Mexican. Or gay or trans or whatever other made up protected class we have these days. Stores have to be careful about who they decide not to sell to these days, which is really kind of unfortunate when you think about it.

If I were the OP, I'd either go buy it for my kid (hell, take him with you and gift it to him in front of them just to be a thorn in their side), or find it elsewhere and let them know they lost business because of what amounts to a stupid policy. I'd also contact the local ATF branch and find out why there is a delay, and why the delay is taking a month or more so that I might see if there is something that can be done to fix the glitch in the matrix.

fire09 said:

---

The FFL is not obligated to sell a weapon to an individual, regardless of background check results. The 2nd amendment does not protect you from a private business and their policies. It protects you from the government. There is already a law in place with the background check system that says the FFL can transfer the firearm (if they choose) after 72 hours of a delay. I still am confused why we are mixing up the second amendment into this discussion. It's not relevant.

---

Well, for starters because we have to ask the federal overlords for permission to purchase a firearm from a dealer, which directly involves the 2nd amendment.

Second because the feds are so intertwined with the 2nd and their disdain for it, we have private business that create policies like Scheel's apparently has because they are afraid of blowback from the feds, who also have decided they get to approve and license who may and may not sell firearms, which is a direct impact on the 2nd Amendment.

Were we not to have to ask for permission and hope the feds grant it to buy a firearm, this discussion would never exist. Were there not repercussions hanging overhead for any FFL who does what the feds may not like, we would have have a discussion about a FFL choosing not to sell to somebody beyond the 72 hour period that the feds have arbitrarily implemented on sellers after asking permission and not getting an automatic green light from the same overlords that are limited by the Constitution, but don't actually care or adhere to said limitations.

What is that old saying....a right delayed is a right denied? Well, obviously there is a major delay here.

I was waiting for someone to bring this up. That specific case focused around discrimination laws and was prosecuted around the idea that the baker was discriminating against the customer, violating colorado anti-discrimination laws. This was such a stupid ruling by Colorado, it was overturned by SCOTUS because it violated the baker's constitutional rights to free speech (not the other way around).

It would be an interesting to determine whether there is a discrimination argument against the store policy that prevents delayed background returns from purchasing a firearm. I was not able to locate any case law or precedence that would suggest one way or another.

Ag_of_08 said:

---

When nics sees a charge, they may contact the arresting agency for disposition and clarification by paper inquiry. That's what has the hold going on, and there's very little you can do with it unfortunately

---

If the only charge is a MIP, that isn't even a felony and since it is "minor" in possession, should not be applicable to any current background checks as it is anyway.

Odds are that it is a mix up with somebody that either has the same name, birthday, etc. Although even that is stupid given the amount of information you have to provide to buy a firearm and the available data the feds have to know who is who today.

So you are arguing that a 72 hour waiting period on a delayed background check is denying a person his or her 2nd amendment rights. That's totally nonsequitar to the comment I made, but I completely agree. However that is how the law is currently written. I don't believe there is a penalty or even a flagging system associated with the ffl releasing a firearm for transfer after a 72 hour hold but I'm sure one of our resident ffls could explain that better