Explore The NRA Universe Of Websites

APPEARS IN News

Shipping Companies Prohibit the Lawful Shipping of Firearms

Monday, September 19, 2022

Shipping Companies Prohibit the Lawful Shipping of Firearms

Wondering what federal law says regarding individuals who do not have a Federal Firearms License (FFL) that need to ship firearms? Well, if you go to the website for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), select the Resources pull-down menu, and click on the Firearms option under Q&A, you will find links to a number of categories, although “shipping firearms” is not one of them. But you can find the information by clicking on the “Unlicensed Persons” link.

Once there, you will find that the ATF says, regarding shipping firearms NOT through the United States Postal Service (USPS):

A nonlicensee may ship a firearm by a common or contract carrier to a resident of his or her or her own state or to a licensee in any state. A common or contract carrier must be used to ship a handgun.

In addition, federal law requires that the carrier be notified that the shipment contains a firearm or ammunition, prohibits common or contract carriers from requiring or causing any label to be placed on any package indicating that it contains a firearm and requires obtaining written acknowledgement of receipt.

[18 U.S.C. 922(a)(2)(A), 922(a)(5), 922(e) and (f); 27 CFR 478.30 and 478.31]

ATF also states, regarding mailing firearms via USPS:

A nonlicensee may not transfer a firearm to a non-licensed resident of another state. A nonlicensee may mail a shotgun or rifle to a resident of their own state or to a licensee in any state.

The U.S. Postal Service recommends that long guns be sent by registered mail and that no marking of any kind which would indicate the nature of the contents be placed on the outside of any parcel containing firearms.

Handguns are not mailable. A common or contract carrier must be used to ship a handgun.

[18 U.S.C. 1715, 922(a)(5) and 922 (a)(2)(A); 27 CFR 478.31]

Clearly, there are a number of options for non-FFLs to lawfully ship their firearms. Or, rather, there were.

The two largest US common carriers, United Parcel Service (UPS) and Federal Express (FedEx), recently decided they would no longer allow non-FFLs to use their service for lawfully shipping firearms.

The FedEx website states, under How to Ship Firearms:

Only customers holding a Federal Firearms License (FFL) and federal, state, or local government agencies may ship firearms with FedEx. 

UPS, on the other hand, has taken a far more extreme approach to restricting the lawful shipping of items via its service. Under the heading How To Ship Firearms, UPS states:

Shipments containing Firearm Products are accepted for transportation only from shippers who are federally licensed and have an approved UPS agreement for the transportation of Firearm Products.

Digging a little deeper, one finds that UPS defines “Firearm Products” to include “Firearm Parts,” which it explains are:

“Firearm Part” is any part or component of a Firearm that does not by itself meet the definition of a “Firearm.” By way of example only, Firearm Parts include, but are not limited to, barrels, stocks, grips, firing pins, sights, and magazines/clips.

For some reason, UPS has decided that scopes are not considered a “Firearm Product,” so they are allowed to be shipped by anyone. Why sights are specifically listed as prohibited, while scopes are not, is somewhat of a mystery, considering they serve the same general purpose on a firearm.

It would seem that UPS is trying to signal to the anti-gun crowd that it is willing to deliver the goods (pun intended) when adopting policies aimed at imposing more strict regulations on shipping firearms and firearm-related items than federal law requires.

A recent article from Ammoland.com indicates UPS wants to not just shut out non-FFLs from using its service, but is also targeting many, if not most, FFLs. According to the article, UPS has told FFLs that operate online that they would have to “ship an average of 50 handguns daily to use its 2nd Day Air service.”

The article goes on to state, “The volume necessary means that most online retailers and manufacturers are now cut off from shipping guns through the carrier unless the handgun is shipped using the expensive Next Day Air service.”

Anti-gun organizations have been pressuring UPS (along with, presumably, FedEx) to sever ties with the firearms industry, according to the article.

In fact, a July Ammoland article had earlier exposed UPS apparently caving to the anti-gun agenda. The shipping company not only cancelled the account of a Florida retailer that specialized in parts that can be used to build firearms, but UPS told the retailer that any of its products that were in the shipper’s system “may be seized and destroyed.”

For decades, anti-gun extremists have regularly failed to achieve their goal of completely eviscerating the Second Amendment through legislation. With landmark Second Amendment cases like Heller, McDonald, and Bruen, courts have been striking down many of the obvious infringements on the rights of law-abiding gun owners, and we expect that trend to continue. Based on the actions of the anti-gun movement, they expect the same.

With legislative victories few and far between, and doom for the gun control agenda on the horizon in the courts, we can only anticipate a heightened pressure campaign on businesses like UPS and FedEx from anti-gun extremists. Anti-gun billionaires like Mike Bloomberg and George Soros will do everything they can to assist in these efforts; utilizing their unique access to their fellow elites in any number of industries who can make business decisions designed to undermine the Second Amendment through the private sector.

For now, there are still avenues available for the lawful shipping of firearms by non-FFLs, either through USPS, or an FFL that has not had all of its shipping accounts cancelled by an activist shipping company. Come the midterm elections, unless we vote in pro-Second Amendment candidates to Congress, that could change. If Joe Biden is given a Congress completely controlled by anti-gun extremists like U.S. Senator Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and U.S. Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who knows what anti-gun laws they will be able to impose on law-abiding gun owners?

Every election matters, but this year’s midterms matter more than any in recent memory. Make sure you are prepared to work harder than ever to elect supporters of the Second Amendment come Election Day, November 8.

IN THIS ARTICLE
shipping a firearm UPS FedEx USPS
TRENDING NOW
Massachusetts: Progressives Pass Radical Gun Control Bill

Friday, July 19, 2024

Massachusetts: Progressives Pass Radical Gun Control Bill

Progressive politicians in Massachusetts just passed one of the most extreme gun control bills in the country.

Massachusetts: Gov. Healey Signs Radical Gun Control Into Law

Thursday, July 25, 2024

Massachusetts: Gov. Healey Signs Radical Gun Control Into Law

On Thursday, July 25th, Governor Maura Healey (D) signed H. 4885, "an act modernizing firearm laws," one of the most extreme gun control bills in the country, into law.

Trump’s Running Mate, JD Vance, is a True Second Amendment Champion

News  

Monday, July 22, 2024

Trump’s Running Mate, JD Vance, is a True Second Amendment Champion

Last week, Sen. JD Vance (R-OH), accepted the Republican party’s nomination for vice president at the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee, WI.

Massachusetts: Senate Passes Sweeping Gun Control Without Public Hearing

Friday, February 2, 2024

Massachusetts: Senate Passes Sweeping Gun Control Without Public Hearing

On Thursday, February 1st, the Senate passed S.2572 late in the night without the bill ever receiving a public hearing, ignoring the concerns of Minority Leader Bruce Tarr and second amendment advocates across the state. 

NRA Scores Legal Victory Against ATF; “Pistol Brace Rule” Enjoined From Going Into Effect Against NRA Members

Monday, April 1, 2024

NRA Scores Legal Victory Against ATF; “Pistol Brace Rule” Enjoined From Going Into Effect Against NRA Members

NRA Members Among the Largest Class Protected from Draconian Rule

NRA Files Lawsuit Challenging ATF’s “Engaged in the Business” Rule

News  

Second Amendment  

Monday, July 22, 2024

NRA Files Lawsuit Challenging ATF’s “Engaged in the Business” Rule

The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) has filed a lawsuit challenging the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF) “Engaged in the Business” Final Rule. The ATF’s Final Rule unlawfully redefines when a person ...

Appeals Court: 21+ Age Requirement for Carry Permits is Unconstitutional

News  

Monday, July 22, 2024

Appeals Court: 21+ Age Requirement for Carry Permits is Unconstitutional

In another Bruen-based invalidation of a gun law, a federal appeals court has struck a Minnesota law that prohibits 18 to 20-year-olds from being eligible for a carry permit, declaring the law to be invalid and ...

Third Circuit Affirms Denial of Preliminary Injunction in NRA-ILA-Supported Challenge to Delaware’s ban on “assault weapons” and “large-capacity magazines.”

Tuesday, July 16, 2024

Third Circuit Affirms Denial of Preliminary Injunction in NRA-ILA-Supported Challenge to Delaware’s ban on “assault weapons” and “large-capacity magazines.”

On Monday, July 15, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction in Delaware State Sportsmen’s Association v. Delaware Department of Safety & Homeland Security, NRA-ILA’s lawsuit challenging ...

District Court Denies Preliminary Injunction in NRA’s Challenge to New Mexico’s 7-Day Waiting Period Law

Tuesday, July 23, 2024

District Court Denies Preliminary Injunction in NRA’s Challenge to New Mexico’s 7-Day Waiting Period Law

Yesterday, in Ortega v. Grisham, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico denied the plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against New Mexico’s law requiring individuals to wait 7 ...

VA Tells Congressional Panel it “Could Not” and “Would Not” Comply with Pro-gun Legislation

News  

Monday, July 15, 2024

VA Tells Congressional Panel it “Could Not” and “Would Not” Comply with Pro-gun Legislation

Last Wednesday, the Subcommittee on Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs of the House Veterans Affairs Committee held a legislative hearing on a number of proposed bills that would change various procedures and standards for how the Department ...

MORE TRENDING +
LESS TRENDING -

More Like This From Around The NRA

NRA ILA

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.