I may have a problem getting a home based FFL, i need some imput

Im in the process of getting everything together to send off my application for a home based FFL. My biggest fear is, my wife runs an in home daycare in our house also. We are already planning on having the daycare shut down on the day of the interview with the agent. But is there any way they will find out about the daycare? She is licensed through the state, but doesnt have a city license. Im not going to lie about it, but im also not going to volunteer the information either. The gun shop will be ran out of the garage that is in the basement of the house. What do you guys think, will there be an issue? Thanks

I don't know but sounds like a bad idea. When the word gets out and it will . and the county sherif or town chief that must sign off on it.
Like I said , I don't know

Not to rain on your parade, but it sounds like oil and water to me...

On a logistics side, I could see some problems once the day care people cross paths with the gun people...
I think the day care biz will eventually take a hit, once the parents find out you are selling "evil high powered assault rifles" out of the garage within yards of their children.
They will probably find other care providers where guns are not in such close proximity (whether they are locked down, inert or otherwise, makes no difference, remember "guns are evil")


google?

No matter how underground you intend to make your business, "they" (parents, ATF, Local law) will find out about the activities that go on at your address (google, googlemaps, etc...)
Especially if you are truly "doing business" as required to legally maintain the FFL. (advertising, selling, etc...)

There might be other legal considerations too
I know at least in Michigan day care centers (private or public) are "PFZ" Pistol free zones, so that would be a problem in a lot of ways. (personal firearms, inventory, customers carrying on premises, etc...)
Citation

Just some things to consider...

ETA: agree with renegadeX on the ATF side, they want to see zoning compliance. But I was thinking of the big picture of the two businesses, and maybe some other aspects to consider.

Non issue with the BATFE.

It should be a non issue with the daycare side too. We only have 4 or 5 kids that we watch. 3 of the parents are nra members. Im not concered about the parents one bit. The state already knows there is alot of guns in the house.

They are in a locked room and locked up in a safe in that room. And the room is the next room over from the daycare room. The state has been in that room many times, they have to go in there to check to make sure the smoke alarm works.

The state is more concerned about us having a swimming pool or a hot tub then they are guns. And i dont see what difference it makes if i operate a business after daycare hours. There are no zoning laws for either business. So im clear on the city and county side. My only concern was the ATF. And i guess really, all they would do is say no more if they find out.

Thanks for the input guys

I would be more than happy to let you keep my child SAFE while I was away. I think all daycare's should have militia security...There is nothing more precious than my savior and children.

Get separate addresses for the two parts of the building, even if just as simple as 1234 Your St Suite A.

how would you get a seperate address?

What sheriff or chief? No one other than the ATF has to sign off on an FFL app.

The CLEO must receive a copy of the FFL application; there's no approval involved, but they certainly could contact ATF if they believed that issuance of the license would be incompatible with any local law or regulation. ATF would be more than happy to deny the license on that basis.

Actually, no they wouldn't. The belief that having an FFL would be incompatible with a local law/regulation is not the same thing as being in violation of such. CLEO input has pretty much 0 influence in the application process.

I, and the ATF, beg to differ. From the Form 7 FFL application, in the Information for the Chief Law Enforcement Officer section:



Perhaps I should have been more clear when I referred to the CLEO's "belief" that the business is "incompatible" with local law. By this, I meant that the CLEO believes it is indeed in violation of the law. ATF would take that CLEO input very seriously. That is, after all, why they solicit CLEO information.

Believe what you may, but the notification is there primarily to provide the CLEO's an opportunity to provide ATF with knowledge of any pending charges against the applicant that would disqualify them. Go read questions 24, 25, and 26... In most cases, the FFL background process would not include information about pending charges or charges that were never reported to NCIC.

CLEO really has no input on your premises. That is planning and zoning. CLEO can believe whatever they please, but if P&Z say it's OK, then the CLEO can screw off.

So, when the application states "Also, ATF may not issue a license if the business would be in violation of State or local law", what sort of information do you think it is soliciting from the CLEO?

Remember, the whole FFL licensing process was set up back in 1968, well before FedGov had access to the information systems of today. Populations were smaller and the local CLEO had more personal knowledge about the folks who lived in his jurisdiction than today. So, the notification requirement was set up to give the local fuzz a chance to weigh in on the process.

If having the 2 businesses in the same address is not in violation of state or local law, then there is no grounds to deny the license. End of debate. You think you're the first FFL who has had a wife that runs a daycare out of the home? I bet there are dozens of others.

Bubbles,

The FFL process was re-vamped in 1995. That is when the CLEO notification, zoning, and all that other crap was installed.

ttolhurst,

CLEO Notification is just that. Notification, it is not soliciting for input or anything else ("It requires no action on your part"). One of the complaints CLEOs had before the re-vamp is there could be FFLs with tens of thousands of guns, ammo, etc., in warehouses in their jurisdiction and they did not know since nobody told them. Now they know. CLEO Notification has nothing to do with CLEO giving BATFE info about the applicant. Obviously if he does have info he should report it, but it is highly unlikely since BATFE can access all criminal history anyway.

Then it's rather odd that they ask the CLEO to provide any disqualifying information they may have ("should you have information that may disqualify the person from obtaining a Federal firearms license, please contact the Federal Firearms Licensing Center"), including potential violations of local law ("Also, ATF may not issue a license if the business would be in violation of State or local law"), isn't it?

The side-effect of CLEO notification is that the locals get to know there's gonna be a new FFL in town; the real purpose is to discourage and disqualify applicants. You'll note that the CLEO notification doesn't mitigate any on the CLEO's complaints –– they still don't know how many of what kinds of guns and ammo will be kept by the FFL; it could be a one-horse gunsmith shop with little to no stock, or it could be RSR Group's new supercenter come to town.

I do not see anything odd about telling LEOs they help other LEOs enforce the law. Seems like common sense.

The FFL is a SHALL-ISSUE license, so there is nothing the CLEO can do to stop you from getting it, that you should not have done yourself.

So you think that language is ATF's way of telling the CLEO, "We've got your back, buddy"? Even though in the prior sentence they were soliciting information?

If the purpose of the CLEO notification is as you say, why do you suppose ATF makes applicants send a copy of the application to the CLEO? If the purpose is to inform the CLEO of a new FFL in his jurisdiction, why wouldn't ATF send the CLEO a postcard after the license is issued? Oh, wait! They do! 18 USC 923 (l):



The only reason to notify the CLEO before license issuance is to allow the CLEO opportunity to respond to the application. No, the CLEO cannot veto the license on a whim, meanspiritedness, general stubbornness or because he just doesn't like the idea of you having an FFL. As you say, an FFL is a shall-issue license. But it is predicated on complete compliance with all applicable laws, regulations and permissions. The CLEO certainly can inform ATF that the applicant would be in violation of State or local law, or has failed to obtain some State or local permit, license, or approval. And that's exactly what ATF is fishing for with the CLEO notification.

NO.

ATF does not make applicants do this.

This is mandated by Congress, who wrote the law. ATF is just doing what Congress told them to do.

I suggest you read the Congressional Record and the C-SPAN transcripts if you want to know why CONGRESS added CLEO notification to the FFL application process, if you do not want to believe what you have been told here.

ETA:

Here is the law. Note it is notification ONLY, and there is not even a hint of asking the CLEO for input.

(iii) that the applicant has sent or delivered a form to be 
        prescribed by the Attorney General, to the chief law enforcement 
        officer of the locality in which the premises are located, which 
        indicates that the applicant intends to apply for a Federal 
        firearms license; and

Note also it is about WHERE THE PREMISES ARE LOCATED, not who/where the applicant's are living. The applicant's might not be located anywhere near the CLEO' jurisdiction, especially true for Big Box Retailers.

ETA2:



That was not part of the original law, it was added in 1996. One of the problems of CLEO notification, was it was notification of application, and nothing else. It did not meet the needs the CLEOs asked for - who has an FFL in my jurisdiction? This fixed that oversight. Note they do not get a 'postcard' as you claim, they get a full list of all FFL in the state, the majority of which are not going to be in or near their jurisdiction.

And today it is even more simple, as BATFE publishes on their web site a list of all FFLs so that is not really needed anymore. A CLEO can get info faster, and more accurate by just going to the ATF web site.

Oh, my, we're getting rather literal. Yes, ATF doesn't require applicants to copy the CLEO, Congress did. Of course. While we're at it, let's be sure to underscore that ATF doesn't even require you to have an FFL to deal in firearms. Congress does!

No, ATF doesn't literally send a "postcard"; I wonder if I'd said Candygram instead of postcard if you'd still think I meant it literally.

Have it your way. ATF would never ask for information from the CLEO regarding any violations of local law which would preclude issuance of an FFL. I'd be shocked, *SHOCKED*, if that were the case.

Government is so overly bureaucratic and ineffective they might never realize you are doing both. That stuff for the most part is in different databases.

If they found out, you might have problems, local and state law will vary.

I have the opposite problem. I have a home ffl, and my wife has pondering doing a day care. Not sure if it would be a problem or not, but likely we aren't going to pursue the daycare so it will solve itself by lack of pursuit.

I kinda figured they wouldnt be able to connect the dots. Especially since she doesnt have a city license. She does however have a state license. But i think you are right, i dont think they have the man power or even care for that matter to research it that much.

And im not really sure how this thread got so far off topic...

Copyright © 1996 - 2013 :: AR15.Com LLC :: All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.