documentaion of cpl on long guns in ftf transactions in washington state

[fry]

its your junk you can sell it how ever you want.

i love the sellers who require a drivers license and cpl and want to document all the numbers on your id to make a washington state ftf deal on a mossberg shotgun. why not just require an ffl in the transaction? Really.

it seems like the farther north you go, the nuttier the fruitcakes are.

i suspect the WAC club plays a part in the paranoia. i am a member of the WAC and understand why they have their club rules at shows. thinking this paranoia carries over to club members who are new to ftf selling outside their club setting.

no one wants to put fire arms in the hands of a bad guy but asking to document a cpl on a ftf rifle or shotgun deal makes me laugh hard.

trying hard to think if i have ever seen an oregon based ad where the seller has "required" this as a condition on a long gun ftf deal.

these ads make me wonder if these folks are only selling their junk to other people with the same mindset?

Read More

 

[G1GRANDEUR]

Better safe than sorry, no matter how junk it is, it's still a firearm.

It's a seller rule, since nowadays so many crimes and crazy stuff going on.

 

[erudne]

I've got no problem with it as it discourages the crims from buying from this web site.

 

[unklekippy]

I usually engage in phone conversations and email or PM exchanges prior to the meeting to get a feel for the individual. If I felt worried enough about an individual that I felt I needed a CHL from them, I would not deal with him/her. If someone wanted my info, shy of my SS#, I would have no problem giving it to complete the deal. In fact, if the other party wanted my DL# for a bill of sale, I would actually feel better about that person and the "legal status" of the goods in question. To each their own. I am not a dealer and it is like selling any other tool. Kip.

 

[deen_ad]

As was said, the seller sets the rules. Don't like them then buy somewhere else. Personally I want to see a DL and CPL that match. Any criminal can have a DL, but they usually won't have a CPL. That way I have some assurance that I'm not selling to a criminal with a record that disqualifies them from gun ownership. If that keeps someone from buying, then so be it.

 

[Jammer Six]

No one can predict what someone will do with a weapon.

The more choices you make, the more moral responsibility you assume.

If you don't require anything, you don't assume any moral responsibility.

If you require proof of this and proof of that, as well as upstanding moral character, a minimum height, age and short hair, if you choose wrong, you've assumed some level of moral responsibility.

Some people believe that criminals, ex felons, felons and other neer-do-wells have a right to self defense, too.

I don't believe any of you can accurately predict anything about anybody.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

It's called CYA. We live in a very dangerous time where this monster called the BATF exists.. do you even know what that is?

 

[Blitzkrieg]

No one can predict what someone will do with a weapon.

The more choices you make, the more moral responsibility you assume.

If you don't require anything, you don't assume any moral responsibility.

If you require proof of this and proof of that, as well as upstanding moral character, a minimum height, age and short hair, if you choose wrong, you've assumed some level of moral responsibility.

Some people believe that criminals, ex felons, felons and other neer-do-wells have a right to self defense, too.

I don't believe any of you can accurately predict anything about anybody.

I do not believe any violent or crazy person has the "right' to self defense.. neither did the Founders

 

[PX4WA]

Bottom line is everybody has a different comfort level with gun sales.

I dont get why somebody would question a person's preferences or look down on them because they have a different preference.

If you are not comfortable with the sale requirements then pass on the sale...

I personally want to sleep better after a sale knowing i did my due diligence. the requirements are for my own peace of mind and not the buyers or other shoppers...

 

[97321]

I have no problem with it. You can't prevent risk, but you can do a lot to minimize it. These guys are just managing their liability. ... That being be said, I wouldn't make the same requirement. I like to document who I sold it to (or bought it from), and make sure they have an OR license. That covers my rear end effectively enough.

 

[G1GRANDEUR]

Even though it's not required, you can fill out the form (sale receipt) and send it to ATF. That was you really don't have to worry.

 

[97321]

Even though it's not required, you can fill out the form (sale receipt) and send it to ATF. That was you really don't have to worry. - Skang

I'm generally inclined to be supportive of the public services our government provides at all levels - local, state, and federal - despite my occasional frustrations with them. And I always document a firearms transaction. But I can't begin to imagine the circumstances in which I would inform the ATF. They don't need to know that much about me.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I'm generally inclined to be supportive of the public services our government provides at all levels - local, state, and federal - despite my occasional frustrations with them. And I always document a firearms transaction. But I can't begin to imagine the circumstances in which I would inform the ATF. They don't need to know that much about me.

If you have bought guns, ammo or accessories at retail (excepting non gun cash buys) in the past they know all about you already. The good news is there are too many of us to stop us, now

 

[Jammer Six]

CYA is baloney. You've covered everything you need to cover by selling the gun.

What someone else does with it is on them.

That's the basis of our right, and it's the reason our gun industry is so strong.

 

[PX4WA]

CYA is baloney. You've covered everything you need to cover by selling the gun.

What someone else does with it is on them.

That's the basis of our right, and it's the reason our gun industry is so strong.

Although you are technically right i dont see why it prevents me or anyone who wants to do so from asking for said documents for their peace of mind... And why it would make me wrong to do so...

Its like paying minimum on your credit card... You have the right to do that but i can decide to do more...

In the same line you have a right to not buy the item...

We are all adults and can make up our minds. Dont need a big brother to tell me what is baloney

 

[Blitzkrieg]

CYA is baloney. You've covered everything you need to cover by selling the gun.

What someone else does with it is on them.

That's the basis of our right, and it's the reason our gun industry is so strong.

I can see you do not understand Federal law. If you sell a gun to a prohibited person you can do 5 years in club Fed

 

[theguncrank]

Personally, I don't think there is a gun deal worth allowing a complete stranger to record my name, address, phone number, birth date, license, et cetera. For all I know, the "seller" could be using gun sales for bait to collect data for identity thieves or burglary rings, or at the very least not secure the information properly. Call me paranoid

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I don't record it but I do require seeing a WA State drivers lisc and also a CPL for handguns

 

[hermannr]

May I start by saying I am a "collector", therefore, by definition I do not sell, only purchase for my "collection"...That said:

What ever happened to trust in your neighbor? (BTW: your neighbor is anyone and everyone). Simply ask the question: "are you a prohibited person"...the person says "No", believe him/her. If they say "yes", don't sell to them. If they say don't know...hand then the RCW and then ask them again. If they now say they are or are not a prohibited person, see above...

By doing the above, you have complied with the law. If the purchaser lied, that is his problem, not yours. OK? How many of you purchased any firearms before the unconstitutional GCA1968 was passed? (BTW I was over 21 in 1968). I did, I did as a 16 year old, in a store, and the store knew I was 16...it was no big deal then, and should not be a big deal now. You could have 100 felonies before '68 and no-one would even ask...it just wasn't a problem.

I wouldn't sell to a prohibited person now, "knowing them to be such" because that is the law, but I trust my neighbors word...something I find almost completely lacking in the gun community...you do know that lack of trust is put there by the anti crowd?

I have a question for everyone here: do you think a prohibited person should have the right to self defence? Why? Why not?

 

[padd54]

May I start by saying I am a "collector", therefore, by definition I do not sell, only purchase for my "collection"...That said:

What ever happened to trust in your neighbor? (BTW: your neighbor is anyone and everyone). Simply ask the question: "are you a prohibited person"...the person says "No", believe him/her. If they say "yes", don't sell to them. If they say don't know...hand then the RCW and then ask them again. If they now say they are or are not a prohibited person, see above...

By doing the above, you have complied with the law. If the purchaser lied, that is his problem, not yours. OK? How many of you purchased any firearms before the unconstitutional GCA1968 was passed? (BTW I was over 21 in 1968). I did, I did as a 16 year old, in a store, and the store knew I was 16...it was no big deal then, and should not be a big deal now. You could have 100 felonies before '68 and no-one would even ask...it just wasn't a problem.

I wouldn't sell to a prohibited person now, "knowing them to be such" because that is the law, but I trust my neighbors word...something I find almost completely lacking in the gun community...you do know that lack of trust is put there by the anti crowd?

I have a question for everyone here: do you think a prohibited person should have the right to self defence? Why? Why not?

I couldn't of said it better. Well done!