Bronze Lifetime
- Messages
- 689
- Reactions
- 822
I got into an argument on the internet today because I'm pedantic, and I thought I'd drag my local experts into too.
The Background
We're using the "NRA Modern Gun Condition Standards" as defined here: http://www.nramuseum.org/gun-info-research/evaluating-firearms-condition.aspx
Specifically these definitions:
The Scenario
A modern firearm is sold with the description of "Good" condition. It arrives with a significant amount of rust on it. The rust does not impair functionality, but is deep enough to leave pitting if it were removed.
The Question
Does the firearm meet the standard of "Good" condition?
The Positions
Group A believes "Good" is the correct description because that standard does not specifically preclude rust. It is not significant enough to interfere with normal functionality, so the "No corrosion or pitting that will interfere with proper functioning" language covers its presence.
Group B believes that "Good" is not correct, because the "Fair" condition category specifically says "no rust" and it wouldn't make sense for an item to qualify for a given grade without meeting the requirements of the lower grades first. The "no rust" requirement is implied for every grade higher than the one it is specified in, and does not need to be repeated in every one.
Which group are you in and why?
The Background
We're using the "NRA Modern Gun Condition Standards" as defined here: http://www.nramuseum.org/gun-info-research/evaluating-firearms-condition.aspx
Specifically these definitions:
GOOD: In safe working condition, minor wear on working surfaces, no broken parts, no corrosion or pitting that will interfere with proper functioning.
FAIR: In safe working condition but well worn, perhaps requiring replacement of minor parts or adjustments which should be indicated in advertisement, no rust, but may have corrosion pits which do not render article unsafe or inoperable.
The Scenario
A modern firearm is sold with the description of "Good" condition. It arrives with a significant amount of rust on it. The rust does not impair functionality, but is deep enough to leave pitting if it were removed.
The Question
Does the firearm meet the standard of "Good" condition?
The Positions
Group A believes "Good" is the correct description because that standard does not specifically preclude rust. It is not significant enough to interfere with normal functionality, so the "No corrosion or pitting that will interfere with proper functioning" language covers its presence.
Group B believes that "Good" is not correct, because the "Fair" condition category specifically says "no rust" and it wouldn't make sense for an item to qualify for a given grade without meeting the requirements of the lower grades first. The "no rust" requirement is implied for every grade higher than the one it is specified in, and does not need to be repeated in every one.
Which group are you in and why?
Last Edited:
)
