Selling without a FFL transfer

[tionico]

I have no facts to back it up but I suspect at least in Washington the new law has resulted in more guns in the hands of law abiding folks.

Prior to I594 I would try to exhaust all hope of buying used before I would consider new and often would sell stuff that I had lost interest in to fund new purchases.

Since it went into effect I have not sold a single firearm and everything I have bought has been new (I would have to scratch my head for a minute but including NFA stuff I would say I bought close to 20 "firearms" in 2015 although many where suppressors and one a SBR)

So at least for me personally my collection grew significantly because of the hassle of private FFL deals.
I understand that is probably not typical but I would bet that across the board there is no doubt that it had a significant effect on the number of legal guns in good folks hands.

Not that I think the law is acceptable, but more guns is a good thing regardless

I considered listing few "items" on GunBroker, as I was short of cash and the mortage moster was sending his Boys round with the dog and the double barrelled gun..... but, a few things fell into place and I decided not to list... one in particular is a real sweet one that is probably 20 years old, and I bought it as new for CIF (Casn in Fist) no paoers, fully legal at the time. SO.. the BATF trace will, at best, turn up at the doorstep of a dead guy whose state got liquidated through private sales by a friend..... for the estate. No record was kept of what he had, nor how it became someone else's. SO, that little sweetie is a complete unkonwn to anyone who wants to know but shouldn't... he won't anyway. No record. I'm certain the FFL from which it was first purchased has gone away years ago....

 

[OutlawHoss]

Not withstanding other statements/issues here, does nobody know/remember that a few months ago there was a raid and confiscation resulting from an ad placed here on NWFA, in Southern Oregon, by an undercover LEA? Talk about CYA, and the first rule of fight club; some hens can't help clucking even when the fox is at the door, seriously!
Careful who you share your foxhole with.

 

[IronMonster]

hu? No, I did not know that.

What are the details?

 

[OutlawHoss]

It was in an article in the local news (Rogue Valley). Mailtribune, or KDRV's website. It would be archived by now so I'm recalling from memory. I will try to find it so standby for a link- I can't believe no one else has read this?!

 

[tionico]

Yes the FFL form in my opinion is based registration on how records are kept, for how long and with what details. The OSP has been very tight lipped on confirming how long they keep information and policy is up to them not any law. So if they decide tomorrow to keep them 100 years they could as no law prevents it. Furthermore FFL's are required to have records awhile too and some keep them forever. There is a local store here that just has them stacked up equalling decades none of the laws tells them how long they "cant" keep them, laws only cover minimums not maximums. And even all of this is not in stone really but rest assured if a Person does a transfer I would bet on it everyone including the OSP has records way longer then they are saying. They say its records its registration. When you go to college they register you each year why because the old records don't matter. So why does the OSP and FLL keep them after a few months why would it matter unless the long term goal is to have more and more firearms records. Just my two cents.

the FFL must keep his copy of the 4473 and his Sales Book for 20 years. Then, if he closes the business, he must surrender all those records to BATF. BUT..... each FFL's stack of 4473's and the sales book are just that//// stacks of papers and a hundred pluc page book, with maybe 20 entries on each page.. every gun in and out of his place. SO.. coppers come round knocking up his door and ask for the record of sale of a S&W M&P Nine, SN 234455667. NO CLUE of date of sale. They don't know even if this dealer sold it, but it was used in a crime not far from here..... coppers then must sit down, open the box of donuts, and search, page by page, looking for THAT gun..... no idea who may have bought it, or even whether, from this FFL.

On the other hand, I;ve read accounts of BATF BASTrds asking to see a dealer's Book.... dealer looks over to the desk after a while and realises the clown's got a pocket scanner and is scanning page after page..... one dealer got hot, seized the scanner and memory ship, and threw the guy out. THAT"S ILLEGAL. Seems every move is to create a searchable database on our guns. So they will, maybe 300 years from now, be able to kick their computer and KNOW with 99% certainly that YOU own these forty seven guns...... then come knocking round YOUR door with a cart to take them all away.

Until this nonsense blows away, I'm keeping every one I possibly can. They have no certain record if what I still have. I rather like it that way.

 

[OutlawHoss]

Here you are: http://www.mailtribune.com/article/20151218/NEWS/151219622/0/SEARCH

So this guy is a convicted felon from a drug conviction, and it doesn't say that he was selling the gun sans BGC. But he had an ad on this site, and the BATFE responded to it.

 

[DuneHopper]

Here you are: http://www.mailtribune.com/article/20151218/NEWS/151219622/0/SEARCH

Good article, and another good reason to do business with people you know, I do not do any of my business of Forums, AL,GB or FB. We have a different system . I do recall this and the issue was not so much it violated SB941 but that a felon was involved in the sale. To date so far I am not aware of any arrest or convictions on private sales w/o a BGC. Someone correct me if I am wrong on that.
I doubt the OSP would find much here I was involved in the same boating accident many had that same day and no longer have any firearms. I have a slingshot and a pellet gun left.

 

[DuneHopper]

I understand what you are saying and it all makes sense. The only thing I do not understand is how they can trace these sales if the state is not supposed to be keeping track of the sales. They are only supposed to keep a temporary record long enough to check to see if the buyer has a criminal record. At least that is what they said here in Oregon. Has that changed?

Ya know now with this new BGC with Obama I am unsure how this will play out. If you look at the article posted by Outlawhoss http://www.mailtribune.com/article/20151218/NEWS/151219622/0/SEARCH
Its pretty clear they were able to check where a 22 bought a year earlier from Gun R Us . The other they found a receipt but doesn't say that about the 22.

 

[OutlawHoss]

Good article, and another good reason to do business with people you know, I do not do any of my business of Forums, AL,GB or FB. We have a different system . I do recall this and the issue was not so much it violated SB941 but that a felon was involved in the sale. To date so far I am not aware of any arrest or convictions on private sales w/o a BGC. Someone correct me if I am wrong on that.
I doubt the OSP would find much here I was involved in the same boating accident many had that same day and no longer have any firearms. I have a slingshot and a pellet gun left.

. . . yeah, but that may be too little, too late. Remember: Now your name is on a list, and your rights might already been secretly diminished without due process (say like the "No Fly List"). Also remember that legislation was introduced (not passed, but still tabled somewhere) to make forums like this, where even minor advice about gun use, etc. would be a federal crime. Doesn't matter where you stand, they'll move the legal goal posts right past you. Welcome to the new normal.

"Screw your courage to its sticking place . . . . "

 

[ZigZagZeke]

All of my guns owned prior to 8/9/2015 were sold before 4/1/2015. They were sold privately, without records for cash. Completely legal.

 

[DuneHopper]

. . . yeah, but that may be too little, too late. Remember: Now your name is on a list, and your rights might already been secretly diminished without due process (say like the "No Fly List"). Also remember that legislation was introduced (not passed, but still tabled somewhere) to make forums like this, where even minor advice about gun use, etc. would be a federal crime. Doesn't matter where you stand, they'll move the goal posts past you. Welcome to the new normal.

I am not overely concerned even in my past prior to SB941 I never sold on NWFA, AL, FB or GB. And have not incriminated myself on NWFA stating I ever did a transaction. I have read all my post here and was pretty clear in my words and never stated I would or have or would violate any laws I would hope others would realize that doing so would be a very bad idea because if that bill was brought up they would look here first. I did say people should oppose the law and make a stand and do what is needed. Joining the ranks of others does not confirm or deny any acts on my part. I take precautions and I would hope others do as well so their law abiding ways are not misconstrued.
I notice you said my name, one would assume as well yours would be too hopefully you as well are taking precaution participating in a discussion called Selling without a FFL transfer, which I have been clear was a warning of what could happen and is clear to suggest people do not violate the law. But my next sale if/when ever it will be will be at a FFL, of that I am sure of at this time.

 

[OutlawHoss]

Yes, let's all post secret love letters to the PTB declaring our chaste faith and adherence to state doctrine; that'll convince them! These aren't the droids you're looking for! Personally, all I've got left are stale bagels and the rocks in my yard: COME AND TAKE THEM!

Yes, I am being sarcastic. But really, it's stale bagels and rocks from here on out. Turkey season is going to be interesting this year.

 

[OutlawHoss]

I am not overely concerned even in my past prior to SB941 I never sold on NWFA, AL, FB or GB. And have not incriminated myself on NWFA stating I ever did a transaction. I have read all my post here and was pretty clear in my words and never stated I would or have or would violate any laws I would hope others would realize that doing so would be a very bad idea because if that bill was brought up they would look here first. I did say people should oppose the law and make a stand and do what is needed. Joining the ranks of others does not confirm or deny any acts on my part. I take precautions and I would hope others do as well so their law abiding ways are not misconstrued.
I notice you said my name, one would assume as well yours would be too hopefully you as well are taking precaution participating in a discussion called Selling without a FFL transfer, which I have been clear was a warning of what could happen and is clear to suggest people do not violate the law. But my next sale if/when ever it will be will be at a FFL, of that I am sure of at this time.

Just FYI, I am speaking as devil's advocate here, and facetiously, and in no way do I intend to implicate you personally in case that doesn't come across in the text. Text is too two-dimensional for conveying things that are meant to be sarcastic but not actually meant to be an insult, so please pardon my lack of finesse.

 

[Skier]

Anyways, now how all that correlates to a registration scheme is up to you and how much you trust the govt is abiding by the laws. Keep in mind there is no accountability and no law preventing backups from being kept but "technically" speaking none of the guns sold in America are registered but there is a paper trail for up to 20 years... indefinitely if the FFL closed shop.

Close the government record keeping/registration loop-hole!!! ;-)

 

[torpedoman]

So there are many posts about people abiding by the SB941, now I am not suggesting anyone not obey laws that would be against NWFA rules.
So if someone is thinking of doing a non-FFL transfers in Oregon here are some major problems
to be considered so don't do it.

1. If a person has bought a firerarm at a FFL prior to August 9th 2015, then if that person was to sell said firearm without and FFL, and the buyer years later was approached by law enforcement and was traced back to the FLL of sale through the past seller they both could be facing legal problems.

2. Any firearm that is not sold through a FFL and the buyer so chooses to sell the firearm either to another private party or FFL will in many case also will be in legal trouble as both the previous FFL and possibly police will have the transaction record if original new sale was after Aug 9th 2015 showing whom should own it.

3. If said firearm was purchased new prior to August 9th 2015, and was later sold after that date why records would not exist if the person said the private sale was close to August 9th where they bought and then quickly sold it might be considered a straw sale. Having a firearm and selling it or buying one prior to August 9th as date of transfer are 100% legal prior. So to have had a legal transfer the date of sale must be know before Aug 9th 2015.

As time goes on the distance between sales before August 9 and After will begin to space where eventually more firearms will be bought and sold via FLL because there is no other legal option.
So it is very important for anyone to find out when the firearm was first purchased as this will be the date inquired if there is an issue.
Of course multiple transfers between family members is 100% legal regardless of purchase date.

I am in no way suggesting that people use the above legal limits to circumvent the law.
And I provided no information with instruction how one might do this, this is only a warning of what people should be aware of in the law and possible results and problem. This is not legal advice please inquire of all laws prior to any transfer.

This has been a DuneHopper community service announcement !
I'm DuneHopper and I approve this message.

Well so much for no records being kept and "We are not building a gun owners registry" "Its just a way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals" and other bullbubblegum the government puts out.
There are about 70,000 denials for gun purchases a year. Under Bush, 15/100th of 1 percent of the cases were prosecuted. Under Obama, 8/100th of 1 percent of the cases were prosecuted.

It was never about stopping criminals from buying gun but about building a national gun registry of honest people who can and do use the legal background check system,



1 Like

 

[DuneHopper]

Just FYI, I am speaking as devil's advocate here, and facetiously, and in no way do I intend to implicate you personally in case that doesn't come across in the text. Text is too two-dimensional for conveying things that are meant to be sarcastic but not actually meant to be an insult, so please pardon my lack of finesse.

Thanks for clarifying I kinda got that part but being your account is very new just making sure I covered my self too I am sure you can appreciate that .

 

[Blastin]

Has anyone found a reasonable place to do an ffl transfer around Portland? Most the places I have called want $40 transfer fee plus a $10 back ground. That really starts to add up.

Didn't look through all pages here to see if somebody else said this, but cheapest place I know is $25(+$10) at a pawn shop. 136th and Powell, place called money market.

 

[eliduc]

Has anyone found a reasonable place to do an ffl transfer around Portland? Most the places I have called want $40 transfer fee plus a $10 back ground. That really starts to add up.

Gun Broker FFL Finder lists the FFL's in your zip code and their fees. I found one that charges $20 and another that charges $25 including Background.

 

[eliduc]

So there are many posts about people abiding by the SB941, now I am not suggesting anyone not obey laws that would be against NWFA rules.
So if someone is thinking of doing a non-FFL transfers in Oregon here are some major problems
to be considered so don't do it.

1. If a person has bought a firerarm at a FFL prior to August 9th 2015, then if that person was to sell said firearm without and FFL, and the buyer years later was approached by law enforcement and was traced back to the FLL of sale through the past seller they both could be facing legal problems.

2. Any firearm that is not sold through a FFL and the buyer so chooses to sell the firearm either to another private party or FFL will in many case also will be in legal trouble as both the previous FFL and possibly police will have the transaction record if original new sale was after Aug 9th 2015 showing whom should own it.

3. If said firearm was purchased new prior to August 9th 2015, and was later sold after that date why records would not exist if the person said the private sale was close to August 9th where they bought and then quickly sold it might be considered a straw sale. Having a firearm and selling it or buying one prior to August 9th as date of transfer are 100% legal prior. So to have had a legal transfer the date of sale must be know before Aug 9th 2015.

As time goes on the distance between sales before August 9 and After will begin to space where eventually more firearms will be bought and sold via FLL because there is no other legal option.
So it is very important for anyone to find out when the firearm was first purchased as this will be the date inquired if there is an issue.
Of course multiple transfers between family members is 100% legal regardless of purchase date.

I am in no way suggesting that people use the above legal limits to circumvent the law.
And I provided no information with instruction how one might do this, this is only a warning of what people should be aware of in the law and possible results and problem. This is not legal advice please inquire of all laws prior to any transfer.

This has been a DuneHopper community service announcement !
I'm DuneHopper and I approve this message.

it's all too confusing for me.

 

[fredball]

Not true in all cases
If original buyer lived in a state like Idaho where Commie rules don't apply yet no one is in trouble .

If he sold the fire arm in that state