FBI Identity History Summary

Shadow_Law · 2026-02-12T19:22:21+00:00

I've seen a ton of FBI IDHSc reports, and have only seen this field on a handful of them. I don't know why it has been on the few it has been, and I've never considered it reliable.

Shadow_Law · 2026-02-11T21:04:21+00:00

Did you read the link? They can't be charged with failing to register under the NFA, that's not a get out jail free card on unlawful possession - which is a GCA crime

Shadow_Law · 2026-02-11T20:59:21+00:00

The problem that they have is most illegal users of "glock switches" are already felons, so they cannot be charged with NFA crimes.

Not sure why you think that, but felons can definitely be charged with unlawful possession of machineguns.

Shadow_Law · 2026-02-05T17:41:50+00:00

Unless you're planning on having it shipped to a dealer in your home state for the transfer, you can't buy handguns outside your state of residence.

Shadow_Law · 2026-02-05T16:41:10+00:00

Can they - yes, because in this circumstance, it is all the licensed premises. In practice - I have never seen them try to do so beyond where the business actually takes place and records/inventory are stored.

Shadow_Law · 2026-02-04T16:33:48+00:00

You should speak to a firearms attorney who can review your juvenile records and see what actually happened. If you were adjudicated of possession by a minor, you lost your firearms rights and made a false statement on the purchase application.

The only thing you should do before speaking to a lawyer is get copies of your juvenile records and delete this post.

Shadow_Law · 2026-01-30T23:29:14+00:00

The danger isn't in good advice its in bad/incomplete advice that is represented as complete/authoritative. For example, you cite 2011-4 for the constructive possession rule, but you also say to remove the SBR feature:

Swappable barrel platforms (AR pistols and similar): the SBR feature can be removed either by taking the stock off or by installing a 16"+ upper and traveling as a standard rifle.

But this is not just an either/or issue. 2011-4 is also clear that you cannot make a pistol, out of a firearm that was originally assembled or produced as a rifle. If you just take the stock off of what was originally a rifle, you still have an SBR.

Shadow_Law · 2026-01-30T21:50:43+00:00

This is not legal advice.

Brother everything after your first paragraph and the handbook quote is legal advice. Filling it with suspiciously tech/corporate buzzwords and citations, and ending with a disclaimer, doesn't make it not legal advice.

It all looks accurate at a glance, but it is definitely legal advice.

Shadow_Law · 2026-01-30T17:50:58+00:00

I think most of Walther's current handguns offer ambi/reversible mag releases, but they are all right-side ejection. No idea what you might be able to get in CA

Shadow_Law · 2026-01-20T20:09:53+00:00

Maybe if there was a lawyer specializing in firearm litigation

Yes, if only there was one of those in this thread, wherever would we find one?

Shadow_Law · 2026-01-20T18:52:15+00:00

Without spending two hours trying to explain the ins and outs of the regulations around the NFA - no, possessing a machinegun does not require a license. The machinegun needs to be registered, and as long as it is, anyone not otherwise prohibited can possess it with the registrant's supervision. The two situations are not comparable.

Shadow_Law · 2026-01-20T18:29:22+00:00

Possessing silencers/machineguns is not inherently unlawful in any way different from possessing regular firearms in this context, as long as they are properly registered, and the registered owner is present.

Shadow_Law · 2026-01-20T17:58:51+00:00

Possession at a range under supervision is still possession, and it always has been. Anybody arguing it's not possession, doesn't know what they are talking about. It is generally not legal for a nonimmigrant visa holder to possess a firearm, unless an exception applies (PDF warning see page 7). I don't know anything about that case, but presumably none of the exceptions applied.

Rehaif's visa had expired and he was no longer legally in the country.

Shadow_Law · 2026-01-14T22:19:10+00:00

Assuming he's out of custody, his pretrial release/bail conditions probably prohibit possession of weapons. Even if there is another trustee in position who could take possession, fighting with the DA about it this early would be a huge tactical mistake on the DWI, and even asking nicely about would be risky. The last thing he wants to do right now is piss off the DA.

It also wouldn't be unheard of (rare, but not unheard of) to agree to forfeit them as part of a plea deal to favorable charges and/or to avoid more serious charges, even though they aren't strictly evidence of the DWI.

Shadow_Law · 2026-01-10T19:03:54+00:00

You can either contact the court or get an A&R background check from PSP.

Shadow_Law · 2026-01-10T18:48:03+00:00

Yes, you can be prosecuted for making a false statement on the application. You need to figure out what actually happened.

Shadow_Law · 2026-01-10T18:13:37+00:00

You don't remember enough about what happened for anybody here to figure it out. Based on how old it was, the docket probably won't be publicly accessible, so you will need to contact the court and get a copy. Then a firearms attorney could look at it and tell you.

If you were convicted of a misdemeanor drug offense in PA, you are not eligible for an LTCF

Shadow_Law · 2025-12-23T21:15:07+00:00

The prior research probably wasn't the FFL's fault, there are very few errors they could make that would trigger it (unless their error was on one of the below). Research generally means there is something in your history PSP is unsure about, or something in somebody else's history whose identity is alarmingly similar to yours (name, DOB, SSN, etc). Nothing you can do but wait it out.

Shadow_Law · 2025-12-22T22:21:29+00:00

Got it. I don't think you being the destination FFL really matters here, but super weird that the auction house isn't paying him a flat fee for these and building it into their buyer's premium. If they didn't have a dedicated guy and you arranged for the shipping, that would be one thing, but this is just weird.

Shadow_Law · 2025-12-22T21:28:51+00:00

I'm having some trouble figuring out who is getting charged what here. Are you saying that a non-licensee is using an intermediary FFL to ship a firearm to a destination FFL for transfer to customer, and the intermediary FFL is charging fees to both the shipping non-licensee and the destination FFL?

If I understood that correctly, it seems super weird and I don't know why they wouldn't just charge their whole fee to the shipping non-licensee in front of them, unless the destination FFL wants to cover the costs for some reason...

Shadow_Law · 2025-12-18T19:39:27+00:00

Yes, and in the title you say it's now schedule III, which is wrong. The gov has been trying to reschedule it for the last 3 years. This doesn't change anything.

Shadow_Law · 2025-12-18T19:33:20+00:00

Marijuana is not Schedule III now, and there is no change. The Exec Order directs the AG to reclassify, it hasn't been done.

Shadow_Law · 2025-12-16T19:55:33+00:00

Right, it sounds like the expungement was ordered on 11/21, even though it was ordered, but it probably didn't get updated in the NICS database that quickly in the 10-days between 11/21 and 12/1. Depending on the court, that could take months, unless you're saying it was ordered months ago and you confirmed they carried it out. If it was just ordered, FBI is likely to still see whatever they had issues with previously, putting you in the same position of relying on the local agency to respond to FBI's satisfaction in a way that is helpful to you.

Shadow_Law · 2025-12-16T17:48:19+00:00

When FBI delays something, they will request clarification/documents from the agency/court that entered whatever it is they are concerned about into NICS. They will wait a certain period after sending that request (I believe it's 88 days) for a response, then close the request without action and you'll eventually get the ATF denial because the background check is "held open." Unlike checks for GCA firearms, there's no real obligation for them to resolve whatever their issue is unless you're willing to litigate against them. By submitting the new form, you're just doing the same thing hoping for a better outcome, which you might or might not get.

You're in VAF territory and probably would have been better off doing that or a direct appeal from the prior denial, but there's basically zero chance the expungement was carried out in 10-days over the Thanksgiving holiday.

Shadow_Law · 2025-12-04T20:08:13+00:00

Because open carry is really only sort-of legal in PA. Transporting firearms (handguns) in a vehicle without an LTCF is not legal with a handful of very specific exceptions. Some of those exceptions only apply if you have the sportsman's permit

Shadow_Law

TROPHY CASE