CHSB Acquisition History

[Maj. Boom Boom]

Blue cards were used until 10/21/1998 for FTF and registrations. ALL blue cards were trashed and not computerized, so the nanny state has absolutely no record of these transactions. Nothing to fret about as only handguns are an issue where you might need "proof" of being in the nanny state when anyone wishes to dispose of them. Long guns aren't affected.

Chiefs used to hoard blue cards like they were gold. In all my years of working for the PD, there were NEVER any blue cards in the dispatch area. You always had to connect with the chief personally to get them and my chief had them in his personal desk, nowhere else.

thanks. thing is something like that almost happened to my friend, the one you met with me at ZH. he had sold a rifle and years later it was involved in a murder. they came looking for him and he remembered who he sold it to and had a copy. they said ok thank you and that was that. I don't have that information. aside from handing the blue card in at the pd and knowing where i got the shotty in the first place that's all i have. I don't know what would happen if someone were to get killed with it. if the cards were trashed there is no record that i ever sold it.

frankly, and i know this sounds far fetched, i don't recall doing any paperwork at walmart when i got the shooty. but that could just as well be faulty memories.

 

[drgrant]

Here's a thought.

Once you're on record requesting your history, aren't you OBLIGATED (in the eyes of the state) to provide them with updates and to clean up any errors or defficienies?

I think I'll remain ignorant of what their records show. I have confidence in MY records.

NO!

The law in MA does not require any of that crap. Period end, full stop. There is no compulsory firearm registration in MA.... only a requirement to report transfers and acquisitions as a resident of the state. (And with some debate, there may be circumstances where a buyer from an MA dealer is also not obligated to report- as in that circumstance the MA dealer is the obligated reporter. )

This is an important distinction as in some states (NY? CA? MI?) that have compulsory handgun registration and the like, having an "unregistered" firearm is a crime by itself, and in MA, there is no such crime... only "failure to report a transfer" which, depending on the circumstances involved, bears a much higher burden of proof for the state. The fact that one might own a gun which is not in the CHSB database is NOT "Prima Facie" type evidence that someone has committed a crime of "failure to report". Otherwise, every person who ever moved into MA with a bunch of guns would be an instant felon. (MA has an exemption in the law on FA-10 reporting for moving into the state with firearms. )

-Mike

 

[Titan]

Mike,

I understand you point and that the law tracks transfers and not registered guns. That's why I posted 'in the eyes of the state'.

My concern is that following some incident down the road, an attorney could argue that you checked your history, but never 'voluntarily' attempted to correct it, therefore suggesting your were engaging in deceipt of some sort.

I don't intend to give them the opportunity. I have no interest in what they think my history was.

The only reason I can think of to check it, is if you think they've got transfers attributed to you that don't belong on your record.

 

[M1911]

I understand you point and that the law tracks transfers and not registered guns. That's why I posted 'in the eyes of the state'.

Huh?

My concern is that following some incident down the road, an attorney could argue that you checked your history, but never 'voluntarily' attempted to correct it, therefore suggesting your were engaging in deceipt of some sort.

Anyone, even an attorney, can suggest anything. In that scenario that you suggest, what law would have been broken?

Answer: none.

If you properly registered your transactions, then you have completely filled your legal duty. The fact that the state can't keep its database correct is the state's fault, not yours, and there is no legal duty for you to correct the state.

MA laws are hard enough to keep straight as it is. Let's not make up laws that don't exist.

 

[Titan]

Huh?


Anyone, even an attorney, can suggest anything. In that scenario that you suggest, what law would have been broken?

Answer: none.

If you properly registered your transactions, then you have completely filled your legal duty. The fact that the state can't keep its database correct is the state's fault, not yours, and there is no legal duty for you to correct the state.

MA laws are hard enough to keep straight as it is. Let's not make up laws that don't exist.

If you'll reread my posts carefully, there is no suggestion of a new law. I make it very clear that my concern is over 'digging in the records' for no obvious purpose than to potentially alert someone that you've done so.

Do as you wish, and I'll stick to my previous stated intent and not go poking at my historical record.

 

[M1911]

If you'll reread my posts carefully, there is no suggestion of a new law.

Here's what you wrote:

Here's a thought.

Once you're on record requesting your history, aren't you OBLIGATED (in the eyes of the state) to provide them with updates and to clean up any errors or defficienies?

I think I'll remain ignorant of what their records show. I have confidence in MY records.

There is no such legal obligation. Suggesting that there is is making up laws.

There is no point to asking CHSB what is in their records. But suggesting that if you do so you are running a legal risk is simply false. MA laws are hard enough to understand without making @#$! up.

 

[Titan]

Here's what you wrote:


There is no such legal obligation. Suggesting that there is is making up laws.

There is no point to asking CHSB what is in their records. But suggesting that if you do so you are running a legal risk is simply false. MA laws are hard enough to understand without making @#$! up.

Sorry if you were confused. 'In they eyes of the state' was intended to mean in some bureacrat's view. 'In the eyes of the law' is different and not what I intended.

I'll try harder to communicate effectively with you in the future.

 

[drgrant]

My concern is that following some incident down the road, an attorney could argue that you checked your history, but never 'voluntarily' attempted to correct it, therefore suggesting your were engaging in deceipt of some sort.
.

Again, there is NO OBLIGATION UNDER THE LAW to ensure that their data is correct. None. I'm not really sure of what the attorney would be arguing, since their argument would have no basis off of
anything in MGL.

-Mike

 

[Len-2A Training]

MA laws are hard enough to keep straight as it is. Let's not make up laws that don't exist.

HEAR! HEAR!

BTW: I do a private Bill of Sale on any gun I buy/sell privately. Only two copies and the two people involved have their asses covered . . . or the other person can destroy it if they wish. The only way that anyone else (other than a dealer if I'm selling) gets to see my copy of the FA-10 or BOS is with a Search Warrant for that info. I also created spreadsheet for all purchases/sales for my own purposes. It's like a personal bound book and printed out occasionally to be stored in a safe.

I don't care what the state thinks I own or sold, etc. NOT MY PROBLEM. I do what needs to be done to follow the law, once it is out of my hands, it is out of my hands.

 

[Maj. Boom Boom]

well i did what needed to be done, i just don't have proof in this one instance. at the time it was the first blue card i had ever done and i was stupid enough to think i wouldn't need a copy because they would have it. I should have known better.

 

[Len-2A Training]

aside from handing the blue card in at the pd and knowing where i got the shotty in the first place that's all i have.

frankly, and i know this sounds far fetched, i don't recall doing any paperwork at walmart when i got the shooty. but that could just as well be faulty memories.

If this is what you did, you didn't follow the law at the time of the registration. Blue cards were obtained from the PD, but mailed to MSP HQ, never turned into the PD. However, since they never did anything but put them in shoeboxes and then throw them out, no harm, no foul. I just would never tell anyone in LE that you did it that way . . . only if asked, tell them that you "sent in the blue card" (not a lie).

WM has always been anal about paperwork. If you bought it there, you filled out a 4473 (we never get copies of them) and if it was in MA, the FA-10. If in another state, it was likely 4473 only.

 

[M1911]

Sorry if you were confused. 'In they eyes of the state' was intended to mean in some bureacrat's view. 'In the eyes of the law' is different and not what I intended.

I'll try harder to communicate effectively with you in the future.

Try harder to stop making @#$!! up.

 

[Titan]

Again, there is NO OBLIGATION UNDER THE LAW to ensure that their data is correct. None. I'm not really sure of what the attorney would be arguing, since their argument would have no basis off of
anything in MGL.

-Mike

One more time, I understand there is no legal obligation. My point was that once you make an inquiry, more could be made of the attempt in the future.

Why do you think they're offering the history reports? To help you as a gun owner?

My suspicion (and that's all it is) is that they may have an ulterior motive.

Ignore it or consider the possibility as you see fit.

 

[Titan]

Try harder to stop making @#$!! up.

It's called creating a hypothetical. It's done all the time. NOTE: This is a discussion forum.

Try to chill out...this level of angst can't be good for you!

 

[Scrivener]

Let the record reflect that I had NO part in this discussion.

 

[flotter390]

Fred

 

[Maj. Boom Boom]

If this is what you did, you didn't follow the law at the time of the registration. Blue cards were obtained from the PD, but mailed to MSP HQ, never turned into the PD. However, since they never did anything but put them in shoeboxes and then throw them out, no harm, no foul. I just would never tell anyone in LE that you did it that way . . . only if asked, tell them that you "sent in the blue card" (not a lie).

WM has always been anal about paperwork. If you bought it there, you filled out a 4473 (we never get copies of them) and if it was in MA, the FA-10. If in another state, it was likely 4473 only.

yes it was a WM in ma. I have the receipt so i know which WM, date, Price etc. but now that you say that about the blue cards maybe what i am remembering is picking it up at the pd. then i sent it in. anyway I know i did what was needed because thats the type of person i am, i would have made sure i did it. I know, lots of people say that. with me it's true. in fact i'm not even stressing that, what i'm stressing is that i can't prove i did it. I hope they got it and it is listed under the new owner, but i guess i'll never know unless they come knocking. i don't believe there is a way for me find out. the most i could find out would be my own history and i already know i had it.

Thanks for the info LenS

 

[Half Cocked]

Let the record reflect that I had NO part in this discussion.

Your light work was handled for you.....

 

[Buckey Flinch]

I sent in the form today. There are a number of firearms that I bought from dealers before 1984. How do I show that they were legally in Mass before the "LIST"?

Or, does it matter?

I will post any response.

I got a reply from the criminal history board. It was a photo copy of each FA10 form. They were from 3 different addresses that I had lived at, and 2 different licenses . They only went

back to 1998.

 

[M1911]

They only went back to 1998.

Which is what LenS said. They threw out the earlier forms.

 

[Reptile]

I got a reply from the criminal history board. It was a photo copy of each FA10 form. They were from 3 different addresses that I had lived at, and 2 different licenses . They only went

back to 1998.

So, I guess that is the list that the police use to take guns from people being served with a 209a. I doubt I'll ever be served with a 209a but, if I was they would only get a fraction of the CHSB list because most are gone already.

 

[Mike1911]

So let's take this a step further. The cops come for whatever reason to check on your firearms with a print-out of the FA-10's you own. Some that you own were [STRIKE]registered [/STRIKE] transfered on 'blue cards' the state dumped years ago. You have no records showing where and when you purchased these firearms. Question is, are you in 'deep do-do' for having an "unregistered firearm(s) in your possession?

Edit: Transfered

 

[drgrant]

So let's take this a step further. The cops come for whatever reason to check on your firearms with a print-out of the FA-10's you own. Some that you own were registered on 'blue cards' the state dumped years ago. You have no records showing where and when you purchased these firearms. Question is, are you in 'deep do-do' for having an "unregistered firearm(s) in your possession?

No. Again, there is no compulsory registration in MA. (The requirement is only to report transfers, not maintain registration. )

-Mike

 

[Mike1911]

No. Again, there is no compulsory registration in MA. (The requirement is only to report transfers, not maintain registration. )

-Mike

Thank you clearing this up. I have a couple that I bought back in the '70's & early '80s and I was worried.

 

[vellnueve]

This is one reason that I'd like to sell every single gun I bought in Mass. once I move out west (other than a few hard to find items). The idea of the government having that database on all my guns makes me very uncomfortable.

That's funny, I could have sworn that's what you voted for in the past election.

 

[Maj. Boom Boom]

So let's take this a step further. The cops come for whatever reason to check on your firearms with a print-out of the FA-10's you own. Some that you own were [STRIKE]registered [/STRIKE] transfered on 'blue cards' the state dumped years ago. You have no records showing where and when you purchased these firearms. Question is, are you in 'deep do-do' for having an "unregistered firearm(s) in your possession?

Edit: Transfered

lol i was thinking the other way around. the cops show up with the print out and have a firearm on there that you already sold via a blue card. you have no proof that it was sold and don't have the firearm.

 

[Scrivener]

So, I guess that is the list that the police use to take guns from people being served with a 209a. I doubt I'll ever be served with a 209a but, if I was they would only get a fraction of the CHSB list because most are gone already.

It is highly unlikely that they have a list. The usual procedure is for the cops to appear at your door and demand you let them search your home. Note that the RO is NOT a substitute for a search warrant and, like the denial, revocation or suspension of a license, simply requires the immediate surrender of firearms and ammo.

Notwithstanding the utter lack of a warrant, the police will likely barge in, take all arms and ammo for which a license is required, then go on to take bows, arrows, bayonets, BB guns, etc. If you're lucky, you'll get a receipt.

 

[Reptile]

It is highly unlikely that they have a list. The usual procedure is for the cops to appear at your door and demand you let them search your home. Note that the RO is NOT a substitute for a search warrant and, like the denial, revocation or suspension of a license, simply requires the immediate surrender of firearms and ammo.

Notwithstanding the utter lack of a warrant, the police will likely barge in, take all arms and ammo for which a license is required, then go on to take bows, arrows, bayonets, BB guns, etc. If you're lucky, you'll get a receipt.

Will they take magazines, too?

 

[Len-2A Training]

Will they take magazines, too?

My understanding is . . . yes! And they usually will not be inventoried and just "disappear" frequently . . . at least if I were to believe much of what I've heard from accusations made when people attempted to claim their stuff at some future time.

 

[M1911]

Will they take magazines, too?

I would assume so. You need an LTC to possess large capacity magazines.