New ATF regulation forces CCW holders to submit NICS check When purchasing guns.

[citizen]

What I have gathered:
(some)NV Sheriffs were exposed in BATFE audit to not complying with required (recommended) annual BG check of criminal records for CCW holders, and the exemption for those people was eliminated; incurring inflated fee for each purchase. Most recent flak indicates Sheriff's Assoc. in general approval for requesting time extension for compliance, restoring NICS exemption. Really, a bunch of bureaucratic BS. Like all things political, however; it ain't over 'til "The Fat Lady Sings"......usually a slow process, though indications are it may be resolved within several weeks (we hope). Many people NOT happy.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

background checks for purchase in TN

In Tennessee, the Instant Check System is handled by the TBI
(Tennessee Bureau of Investigation).
The Handgun Carry Permit is administered by TNDOS
(Tennessee Department of Safety).
Two seperate agencies, two seperate budgets, two sources
of revenue.
TCIS under TBI is kept very, very current.
The HCP system under TNDOS is dependent on the court
system pulling the permit from an arrested person (the HCP
number is the same as the drivers license number, so a judge
should know if an arrested person ID'd by DL has a CHP).
HOWEVER, the TCIS under TBI is considered to be quicker
updated than the CHP under TNDOS (as by 24 hours) so
the TCIS is used for background checks at dealers instead
of using the HCP.
The background check fee in Tennessee is $10.00
Some dealers charge $30.00 IF the purchase is denied to
keep ineligable riff raff out of the shop.

 

[clange]

This is Nevadas fault plain and simple. 1) The $25 is a state issue that they chose to waive if CCW holders didnt need a NICS check. 2) ATF says 'you dont run any background checks after the permit is issued so who knows what happens over 5 years' and refuses to excempt CCW holders from skipping NICS. 3) CCW holders still need a NICS check and have to pay the BS $25 fee again.

 

[Old Dog]

It's an easy way for the State to make some $$$...quite discriminatory actually, I'd say it looked more like a "consumption" tax, but only applied to firearms purchases...

Well, MD_Willington, I noticed you're up here in WA State, where we have no fee charged for the NICS check -- but where CPL holders are still, and have always been subject to NICS (but do not have to endure the waiting period non-CPL holders do).

What I have gathered:
(some)NV Sheriffs were exposed in BATFE audit to not complying with required (recommended) annual BG check of criminal records for CCW holders, and the exemption for those people was eliminated; incurring inflated fee for each purchase.

So this situation in Nevada appears to have resulted because the CCW-permit issuing authorities were not doing their jobs (required annual review of CCW-permit holder rolls)? Seems to me then, to be a case of BATFE simply trying to force the CCW-permit issuing authorities to do their jobs by any means necessary. Not that it should ever come to this, but it's understandable ...

In which case the gun-owning citizenry will once more lose out because the permit-issuing authorities will again fall back on the now-common position of law enforcement agencies everywhere that they are not staffed and funded to keep up with all the administrative responsibilities foisted on them for managing the permit and background check systems ...

 

[F4GIB]

ATF is wrong again.

ATF removed Nevada from the Brady-compliant list because " the permits last five years, so the agency was concerned a person could become a prohibited buyer and still have the permit."

compare: The ACTUAL federal statute,

18 USC 922 (t)

(3) Paragraph (1) [the NICS check] shall not apply to a firearm transfer between a licensee and another person if--

(A)(i) such other person has presented to the licensee a permit that--

(I) allows such other person to possess or acquire a firearm; and

(II) was issued not more than 5 years earlier by the State in which the transfer is to take place; and

(ii) the law of the State provides that such a permit is to be issued only after an authorized government official has verified that the information available to such official does not indicate that possession of a firearm by such other person would be in violation of law; * * *

The word "annual" does not appear in the Brady law because Congress deliberately didn't put it in there.

ATF has been allowing 5-year permits to qualify ever since the beginning. What's the difference between 4 and 5 years in regard to the BC going "stale?" Or 1 year vs. 6 months? None. Congress choose "5 years." Last I heard, they, not ATF, make the policy decisions.

Also notice that the validity of the permit is based on what "the law of the State provides" not what the local Sheriff actually does. Congress did not want ATF auditing or disciplining the local authorities. All they can do is "compare" the requirements state statute to the provisions of 922(t)(3).

Doing so, Nevada still complies and no NICS check is required for a carry permit holder.

The Nevada AG need to follow the lead of the Wyoming AG and tell ATF to "stick it."

 

[F4GIB]

I just heard that the Nevada state Sheriff's group wants an extension from ATF so they can apply for a big increase in licensing fees to “fix” the problem.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

ATF removed Nevada from the Brady-compliant list because " the permits last five years, so the agency was concerned a person could become a prohibited buyer and still have the permit."

Texas just extended their permit to 5 years this last legislative session and ATF hasn't removed them from the Brady-compliant list. Where did you get the information that the above was the reason for the change in Nevada's policy?

 

[tc300mag1]

Ive always had Nics checks here even with a ccw doesnt exempt you here .. Never had to pay either for a nics check

 

[Byron Quick]

Georgia has always had a five year carry permit. As far as I know, we don't have this. I think our NICS check fee is five bucks, but I could be mistaken. I've never paid it. Cost of fingerprinting is eighteen bucks at my local sheriff department. Which I think is reasonable considering the time and effort involved with not only taking the prints but supplying forms and material and processing the result.

I don't think the permit process as a whole is reasonable. Or constitutional.

 

[solareclipse]

actually if you have passed 3 years ago there is not guarantee you will pass today.

permits aren't checked in real time if they have been revoked or cancelled, so someone who might have something on record can have a clean permit (duh) and sail through.

byron, there is no longer a fee ever since the feds took over the checks. it was 5 bucks when the state did them. feds are prohibited from charging a fee for that service