Interesting experience at an FFL today

[jeffery_1965]

As a Washington resident, I went to an oregon FLL today to perform a trade of firearms with an Oregon resident. I was looking to trade a handgun for a rifle. Much to our surprise, the FFL said it couldn't be done with both of us and the firearms there at the Oregon FFL. Was told the Oregon resident would need to travel to Washington, and then have the pistol shipped back to Oregon FFL, and we were looking at over a $100 in FFL fees.

From what I've been able to understand from this website and the web in general, we should have been able to move forward. Can anyone help shed light on this? Are we now to the point that trading a pistol for rifle between our neighboring states is really not an option if one wants to keep the costs down?

Thanks for any thoughts,

Jeff

Read More

 

[Lilhigbee]

As long as the recipient of the pistol was in his home state all should have been good. No LEGAL reason for it not to be okay, maybe the FFL has a policy against it or else doesn't understand the law.

 

[Stomper]

He's wrong. A legal purchaser must buy/transfer an interstate handgun through a FFL in the purchaser's state of residence. You could have a FFL in your state of residence ship it to the FFL in the purchaser's state of residence, or you could directly ship the handgun via "common carrier" to the FFL in the purchaser's state of residence, or you can drive it "over the river" yourself to the FFL in the purchaser's state of residence.

Legal long gun purchases/transfers can be made outside the purchaser's state of residence through a FFL in the state of the purchase, provided the firearm is legal to own inside the purchaser's state of residence.

In either case above, a FFL is required to make the transfer/purchase.

 

[KKG]

Yep, that nasty 'ld Handgun is the hang-up in this case.

 

[jeffery_1965]

LOL, just like what I was finding on the web. Support for both sides of the issue. How sad is it that we can't get a straight answer on a simple transaction. The laws alone should be struck down based on complicating the matter so much that nobody knows the answer...

Jeff

 

[11Charlie]

He's wrong. A legal purchaser must buy/transfer an interstate handgun through a FFL in the purchaser's state of residence. You could have a FFL in your state of residence ship it to the FFL in the purchaser's state of residence, or you could directly ship the handgun via "common carrier" to the FFL in the purchaser's state of residence, or you can drive it "over the river" yourself to the FFL in the purchaser's state of residence.

Legal long gun purchases/transfers can be made outside the purchaser's state of residence through a FFL in the state of the purchase, provided the firearm is legal to own inside the purchaser's state of residence.

In either case above, a FFL is required to make the transfer/purchase.

I couldn't have said that better myself.

 

[Lilhigbee]

LOL, just like what I was finding on the web. Support for both sides of the issue. How sad is it that we can't get a straight answer on a simple transaction. The laws alone should be struck down based on complicating the matter so much that nobody knows the answer...

Jeff

Not sure how much straighter you want it. Three people saying the recipient/purchaser of the handgun has to be in his state of residence.

 

[jeffery_1965]

I was referencing KKG's post, that said the pistol is the problem in the deal I was trying to make work. 2 yes's and 1 no at the time of my post, with an included . Sorry for the comment.

Jeff

 

[Lilhigbee]

I was referencing KKG's post, that said the pistol is the problem in the deal I was trying to make work. 2 yes's and 1 no at the time of my post, with an included . Sorry for the comment.

Jeff

No worries. I left KKG's comment out of my accounting since it didn't really address the question.

 

[jeffery_1965]

Yeah, it does seem like the deal should have happened. After that rush hour trip into Portland it was a bit of a let down. Maybe it can be salvaged if I can find an FFL to actually perform what seems to be legal so far.

Jeff

 

[jbett98]

Care to mention which FFL turned you away.

 

[djharteloo]

Huh. Might I ask which ffl told you this?

 

[jeffery_1965]

My thoughts are, as I gather more information, that I would rather call the FFL and let them know what I found out, and not spread their name across the web for anyone to use it against them. If they were either confused or just didn't want to do it, then that is their right as a business.

Sorry, just the way I feel.

Jeff

 

[Joe13]

OP, the ffl you went to is a moron - avoid him in the future from now on.

As a WA resident I can personally drive into OR and meet an OR resident (or visa versa) and have an ffl transfer a handgun to the purchaser in their home state.

Long guns can go either way.

It's simple.

 

[Joe13]

People seem to like Tigard pawn as an ffl, but I've never used them.

 

[mrblond]

People seem to like Tigard pawn as an ffl, but I've never used them.

I have used them, cheap and easy transfer.

 

[djharteloo]

My thoughts are, as I gather more information, that I would rather call the FFL and let them know what I found out, and not spread their name across the web for anyone to use it against them. If they were either confused or just didn't want to do it, then that is their right as a business.

Sorry, just the way I feel.

Jeff

Not a problem. Just trying to avoid the same hassle.

In other news it must be pretty easy to get an FFL, don't even have to understand the law.

 

[2A2Dend]

Interesting bit of info, there @Stomper.
Thank you

 

[Crohnos01]

Not a problem. Just trying to avoid the same hassle.

In other news it must be pretty easy to get an FFL, don't even have to understand the law.

Well, it kind of makes sense when you think about it... after all, to write gun laws you obviously don't have to understand guns.....

 

[66PonyCar]

After you clarify the issue with the FFL and if he still insists that the transfer could not be done; then I think you should post the name of the FFL so that any forum members who may be contemplating a similar transaction could avoid him and go to an FFL who is willing to do the transaction. If the FFL concedes he was wrong and completes the transaction then there is no need to name him. My $0.02's