In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Calling ADMIN. Legal assistance?
competentone
Member Posts: 4,696 ✭✭✭
Admin.
I just wanted to relate this to you; if it represents anything happening widespread, Gunbroker.com might be having difficulties.
I'm not an FFL; I had offered to sell my Marlin Camp-45 to someone who posted on the WTB forum; he's an FFL.
He told me that his local ATF office is telling him he can ONLY receive firearms from out-ot-State if they are shipped to him from an FFL. (I only have his statements for that; maybe he's misunderstanding what they are telling him.)
This is contrary to the info. you have on the auction site "For Sellers" (which quotes ATF rules) and I directed him to it for review, but I was thinking: If there are ATF agents who are "hassling" FFL's about private individuals sending firearms to them--it could affect your business.
This guy wanted me to pick up the extra expense of first transferring the rifle to an FFL, then having the FFL ship it to him; I didn't want the expense so no deal.
I'm thinking of putting a few of my personal firearms in the auction, but if the receiving FFL dealers are being told by the ATF that I can't ship to them; it will make sales more difficult/costly.
Do you have anything, like an attorney interested in "setting the ATF straight" on this issue if it arises for a seller/buyer using Gunbroker.com?
I just wanted to relate this to you; if it represents anything happening widespread, Gunbroker.com might be having difficulties.
I'm not an FFL; I had offered to sell my Marlin Camp-45 to someone who posted on the WTB forum; he's an FFL.
He told me that his local ATF office is telling him he can ONLY receive firearms from out-ot-State if they are shipped to him from an FFL. (I only have his statements for that; maybe he's misunderstanding what they are telling him.)
This is contrary to the info. you have on the auction site "For Sellers" (which quotes ATF rules) and I directed him to it for review, but I was thinking: If there are ATF agents who are "hassling" FFL's about private individuals sending firearms to them--it could affect your business.
This guy wanted me to pick up the extra expense of first transferring the rifle to an FFL, then having the FFL ship it to him; I didn't want the expense so no deal.
I'm thinking of putting a few of my personal firearms in the auction, but if the receiving FFL dealers are being told by the ATF that I can't ship to them; it will make sales more difficult/costly.
Do you have anything, like an attorney interested in "setting the ATF straight" on this issue if it arises for a seller/buyer using Gunbroker.com?
Comments
-- Life NRA Member
"If dishonorable men shoot unarmed men with army guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and not by general deprivation of constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
I know, I'm asking an awful lot, but hey, it's my license at stake and I need it to make a living (otherwise I wouldn't have one).
The Almighty Himself Entrusted the Future of All Living Creatures to a Wooden Boat.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -"Audemus jura nostra defendere"
Edited by - pelican on 04/22/2002 18:04:49
It wouldn't be the first time, and it won't be the last.
Unfortunately, deliberate statements are hard to prove w/o a witness.
During compliance inspections I have had woefully wrong statements, and instructions made to me.
Ie,. had some pre'68 22's, and a very rare Browning w/o s/n's. Was told to put some mark/number on them to identify them. Fed Regs forbid that. Asked to be shown where in the manual, and was smartly told I should know that, and where in the manual it was, so I should look it up.
When he came back to finish, he didn't see any 'identifying marks', and when I told him it was illegal, he dropped it.
Now, if I would have done it, I would have been written up.
Some just don't care about a dealers business.
Happy Bullet Holes!
http://www.gunbroker.com/user/ShippingGuide.asp
We have not heard any reports of the ATF hassling any dealer about unlicensed person to dealer transfers. Some licensed dealers assume that a licensed is required to ship a firearm and that assumption is incorrect. Others may be confused because the A/D book includes a column for the sender's FFL number which may be left blank if the item comes from an individual instead of another FFL.
http://www.gunbroker.com/user/ShippingGuide.asp
Pelican,
I understand what you're saying, but this guy was telling me it was a "legal requirement". (And I did offer to include a photo-copy of my SC Concealed Carry permit (a photo ID) and a copy (of the copy) of the ATF form from when I purchased the rifle.)
The Almighty Himself Entrusted the Future of All Living Creatures to a Wooden Boat.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -"Audemus jura nostra defendere"
Too often, however, we have heard complaints from customers similar to the one that begins this thread in which a dealer tells a customer that transfers are required by law to be FFL to FFL. If a dealer does not wish to do a transfer that is his right, but the dealer should not give incorrect information to the customer.
You know, kinda like I tells Mrs Pelican. Oops, she saw that
The Almighty Himself Entrusted the Future of All Living Creatures to a Wooden Boat.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -"Audemus jura nostra defendere"
I'm not quite sure I understand what some of you are saying about "knowing" the individual. A gun in the mail is a gun in the mail, unless you think it's hot, I guess...
If only you knew me well enough to ship ME guns without me getting an FFLer to handle it, then I could save some serious hassle (and money).
-- Life NRA Member
"If dishonorable men shoot unarmed men with army guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and not by general deprivation of constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
-- Life NRA Member
"If dishonorable men shoot unarmed men with army guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and not by general deprivation of constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878