Interesting phone call.

[Bellerophon]

Ok so here's the story.

I had used a handgun for a trade with an FFL dealer at a gun show late last year. He took my information and as it was a trade for another handgun he did the transfer paperwork and call for the other firearm.

I received a phone call from a police officer a little while ago concerning the what was now an FFL traded firearm. Apparently it showed up in a vehicle outside of a moderately sized PA city and is still registered in my name.

The officer seemed pretty easy going and didn't seem to mind after I explained the situation to him. He wanted to make sure the firearm wasn't stolen or obtained illegally. Apparently the other person involved has also bought the gun at a gun show and is surprised about the situation.

I'm not sure if I need to consult an attorney just yet.

What are my options here? I'm out of town and I'm not sure if I still have the FFL information at this point (I need to check and contact him if I do. Ill be home Monday) but I do have the date and location of the gun show so I'm not sure how to handle this whole debacle.

[IV_Warrior]

Remind the officer that there is no registration in PA and his use of the record of sale as such is illegal?

[Nate7667]

Dont worry about it. The PSP is prob close to a year on back log of the nonexistant data base to record the transfers.
Had it happen to me as well as a dealer.
As long as its not stolen and you know you sold/traded to a dealer, its your dealer who has to show proof in his A&D book. Incoming from you, outgoing to new owner and approval number for the 4473 and state form.

[Bellerophon]

Dont worry about it. The PSP is prob close to a year on back log of the nonexistant data base to record the transfers.
Had it happen to me as well as a dealer.
As long as its not stolen and you know you sold/traded to a dealer, its your dealer who has to show proof in his A&D book. Incoming from you, outgoing to new owner and approval number for the 4473 and state form.

I figured it was something like this.

The issue is I'm not sure if I still have the FFL information. I try to keep all my records if it's a private sale for a long gun but I can't remember if I put the sale form with his info on it in my sale folder with the others.

If I can't find it I do have the name of the sponsor and date/location of the show. I'm sure he could use that to figure out who specifically I was dealing with.

In probably worrying too much about this aren't I?

[marinville]

Tell the asshole it isn't a registry and to give the other guy back his gun.

This is yet another reason why you do not inform. (In case anyone out there is counting.)

[39flathead]

I figured it was something like this.

The issue is I'm not sure if I still have the FFL information. I try to keep all my records if it's a private sale for a long gun but I can't remember if I put the sale form with his info on it in my sale folder with the others.

If I can't find it I do have the name of the sponsor and date/location of the show. I'm sure he could use that to figure out who specifically I was dealing with.

In probably worrying too much about this aren't I?

IMO you are worrying too much.

I received a call like that must have been 20 years ago, last I ever heard of it.

[Xringshooter]

Not to be a contrarian but why does everyone immediately think the police did something wrong? Did the officer say he got the information from the sales database or did he just say that information showed that the OP was the last person known to have possession of it. It could have been that the police did what they were supposed to do and did a trace through the BATFE on the serial number and the trace lead back to the OP. Everyone is real quick to jump on the police for what they may think is incorrect procedure by the police but in this case, if they actually did the trace, they did it right. Here's how a trace goes:

1. manufacturer is asked what wholesaler/distributor the firearm was sold to
2. wholesaler/distributor is asked what FFL the firearm was sold to
3. FFL is asked who he sold the firearm to
4. buyer is asked where the firearm is
then 3 and 4 again depending on how many times it had been sold and bought

If the op was the last number 4, then he is the last person on record to possess the firearm and the police would question him to it's whereabouts. Once he told them he sold/traded it, they would then go to the FFL who bought it/took it in trade to find out who bought it from him (the FFL). They would then go to that person to ask where the gun is/what the story is.

These traces do not take a lot of time to get done (only several days usually) because, at least here in PA, there is a good paper trail from manufacturer to last person. Yes, there can be things that may skew this but I'm not talking about out of state transfers in states that don't have to have a handgun go through a dealer, yada, yada, yada.

[marinville]

Not to be a contrarian but why does everyone immediately think the police did something wrong? Did the officer say he got the information from the sales database or did he just say that information showed that the OP was the last person known to have possession of it. It could have been that the police did what they were supposed to do and did a trace through the BATFE on the serial number and the trace lead back to the OP. Everyone is real quick to jump on the police for what they may think is incorrect procedure by the police but in this case, if they actually did the trace, they did it right. Here's how a trace goes:

1. manufacturer is asked what wholesaler/distributor the firearm was sold to
2. wholesaler/distributor is asked what FFL the firearm was sold to
3. FFL is asked who he sold the firearm to
4. buyer is asked where the firearm is
then 3 and 4 again depending on how many times it had been sold and bought

If the op was the last number 4, then he is the last person on record to possess the firearm and the police would question him to it's whereabouts. Once he told them he sold/traded it, they would then go to the FFL who bought it/took it in trade to find out who bought it from him (the FFL). They would then go to that person to ask where the gun is/what the story is.

These traces do not take a lot of time to get done (only several days usually) because, at least here in PA, there is a good paper trail from manufacturer to last person. Yes, there can be things that may skew this but I'm not talking about out of state transfers in states that don't have to have a handgun go through a dealer, yada, yada, yada.

IMO, it was implied in the OP that the gun was seized from someone who was carrying it, when it did not come back as 'registered' to him.

The officer seemed pretty easy going and didn't seem to mind after I explained the situation to him. He wanted to make sure the firearm wasn't stolen or obtained illegally. Apparently the other person involved has also bought the gun at a gun show and is surprised about the situation.

[McSull]

How did he get your phone number?

[Xringshooter]

IMO, it was implied in the OP that the gun was seized from someone who was carrying it, when it did not come back as 'registered' to him.

No, he actually said "Apparently it showed up in a vehicle outside of a moderately sized PA city and is still registered in my name." This does not mean it was seized from someone carrying it. Nothing was said about the owner of the vehicle, or even if the vehicle was occupied.

And yes, actually a firearm is "registered" to you the moment you fill out the 4473 when you purchase a handgun at a FFL. Although the "registration" is held at the FFL and typically no one ever sees it unless there is a trace or the 4473 is subpoenaed it is still "registered" with the BATFE. If a handgun, in PA, when bought, along with the BAFTE Form 4473, there is the PSP paperwork (SP4-113) which is used to enter it into the sales database (which is many times used incorrectly by LEO's to determine if someone is the owner of a specific handgun), but the OP did not give any indication of how the police received the information that it was "registered" to the OP. That information could have been determined how I explained.

Getting he OP's phone number is not that hard if the police had his name and address, which could have been through a trace or through the incorrect use of the PSP sales database.