Where Are All The Buyers At?

[gmerkt]

Okay, where are all the buyers was the question. Seattle Times, Weds., April 10, 2024, article by one of their staff reporters, David Gutman. The article headline is, "Washington's gun sales spike, then sink as laws take effect." There is measurable data for this development. In the form of background checks done. The article says, "Purchases for January-March dropped 50%-70% from 2023."

Doesn't that say it all? This was the purpose of the slug of new laws we've gotten in Warshington the past couple of years. Discouragement of activity. Particularly since the first of this year; it's observable in numerous gun shops.

 

[64MercurysRule]

Like the old saying .....if you want something to cease , tax it to death . If you want to discourage something try banning it .

 

[bcp]

The article says, "Purchases for January-March dropped 50%-70% from 2023."

"Known purchases"

Ban something--drive it underground.

Bruce

 

[CLT65]

All the threads about buyers and sellers and sales have always confused me a bit, because I rarely visit the classifieds here. I'll occasionally buy or sell something here, but not very often.

It hit me while reading this thread today; gun forums like this are more like virtual swap meet/gun shows for a lot of us here, aren't they?

 

[gmerkt]

It hit me while reading this thread today; gun forums like this are more like virtual swap meet/gun shows for a lot of us here, aren't they?

Might be for you lot in Oregon, but in Wash. sellers are fewer. I've made a couple of purchases by mail and one in person.

 

[gmerkt]

"Known purchases"

Ban something--drive it underground.

I wonder about that. There is the paper trail that follows so many guns now. As time goes by, there are fewer and fewer guns off paper. Potential future prosecution in some way or other may hold some people back on black market sales. That is something you can never know with certainty.

 

[billdeserthills]

I wonder about that. There is the paper trail that follows so many guns now. As time goes by, there are fewer and fewer guns off paper. Potential future prosecution in some way or other may hold some people back on black market sales. That is something you can never know with certainty.

In private sale States there is a seemingly inexhaustible supply of private sale/ghost guns

 

[arakboss]

All the threads about buyers and sellers and sales have always confused me a bit, because I rarely visit the classifieds here. I'll occasionally buy or sell something here, but not very often.

It hit me while reading this thread today; gun forums like this are more like virtual swap meet/gun shows for a lot of us here, aren't they?

The site is mixed use for me but it mostly comes down to entertainment. Firearms and discussions around them are a hobby/pastime for me. I don't consider them tools, as some do or absolutely necessary to leave the house. My guns are almost all fun guns with very occasional protection duty.

 

[gmerkt]

In private sale States there is a seemingly inexhaustible supply of private sale/ghost guns

The date of manufacture or importation of a firearm can be determined. Then there is the effective date of I-594, which required transfer of all firearms through an FFL dealer in Warshington state. Naturally enough, that effective date continues to recede farther into the past. Anything off paper that a Warshington resident acquires by hook or by crook has to be manufactured before that effective date to pass the legal smell test. Although it might not pass the perjury test. It seems to me. I don't know what lengths prosecutors will go to in order to getcha, but I'm saying it's a possibility. You'd probably have to be involved in some other, more serious crime for this issue to come up. Then they would use it as an add-on. But who knows, in a so-called domestic case, an aggravated spouse dropping the dime might be enough to do it.

 

[Bobbygun]

The date of manufacture or importation of a firearm can be determined. Then there is the effective date of I-594, which required transfer of all firearms through an FFL dealer in Warshington state. Naturally enough, that effective date continues to recede farther into the past. Anything off paper that a Warshington resident acquires by hook or by crook has to be manufactured before that effective date to pass the legal smell test. Although it might not pass the perjury test. It seems to me. I don't know what lengths prosecutors will go to in order to getcha, but I'm saying it's a possibility. You'd probably have to be involved in some other, more serious crime for this issue to come up. Then they would use it as an add-on. But who knows, in a so-called domestic case, an aggravated spouse dropping the dime might be enough to do it.

Is there any kind of "statute of limitations" that could come into play?

 

[raftman]

The date of manufacture or importation of a firearm can be determined. Then there is the effective date of I-594, which required transfer of all firearms through an FFL dealer in Warshington state. Naturally enough, that effective date continues to recede farther into the past. Anything off paper that a Warshington resident acquires by hook or by crook has to be manufactured before that effective date to pass the legal smell test…

In WA, is it the seller or buyer (or both) that would be committing the crime in a transfer without involving an FFL? If the seller, then would a buyer really be in any legal trouble at all?

Also, one has to wonder, how does this all play with the statute of limitations? For example, if someone, somehow acquires a firearm without going through an FFL, and it can be proven by the date of manufacture of the firearm… but they were not found in possession of said firearm for years past the statute of limitations, what happens then? Is the burden of proof on the state to establish it was purchased within the limitation? Or on the accused to establish that it occurred outside of that window? And if it occurred outside the limit (or it cannot be proven it was inside), would they really just let the accused walk away?

 

[gmerkt]

In WA, is it the seller or buyer (or both) that would be committing the crime in a transfer without involving an FFL? If the seller, then would a buyer really be in any legal trouble at all?

My non-legally guided guess is that since it would take two persons to constitute a transaction, both would be breaking the law.

Also, one has to wonder, how does this all play with the statute of limitations? For example, if someone, somehow acquires a firearm without going through an FFL, and it can be proven by the date of manufacture of the firearm… but they were not found in possession of said firearm for years past the statute of limitations, what happens then? Is the burden of proof on the state to establish it was purchased within the limitation? Or on the accused to establish that it occurred outside of that window? And if it occurred outside the limit (or it cannot be proven it was inside), would they really just let the accused walk away?

In Warsh. state, violation of the RCW that came about under I-594, first offense is a gross misdemeanor. The statute of limitations on that is 2 years.

Subsequent violations are punishable as C felonies, and a 5 year statute of limitations applies.

They might be able to stack these violations. Meaning, if you bought several off paper guns at one time from the same party. Gun #1 was a gross misdemeanor, but guns #2 through whatever were C felonies.

In the US, the burden of proof theoretically is always on the state. But it might be costly to defend a case. These days, the state has reduced resources to pursue a lot of lesser offenses. All the resources they need to pursue pet project cases, like those involving guns. Like the guy who was selling illegal magazines in Federal Way. But that was a more egregious violation.

 

[RVTECH]

For example, if someone, somehow acquires a firearm without going through an FFL, and it can be proven by the date of manufacture of the firearm…

I don't believe the date of mfg. will have anything to do with it.

In the case with Oregon, prior to SB 941 guns were changing hands routinely, and many probably were originally purchased prior to a 4473 being required.

However as I have mentioned before I believe ANY gun, regardless of date of mfg. IF sold/bought now legally through an FFL will start a 'paper trail' on the gun which can be used to track the gun on future selling/buying and IF it is sold/bought illegally at any point, and later sold/bought LEGALLY the last LEGAL BUYER of the gun could potentially be in Chits Creek if there is an inconsistency with the 'paper trail' of the gun he/she cannot explain.

 

[billdeserthills]

The date of manufacture or importation of a firearm can be determined. Then there is the effective date of I-594, which required transfer of all firearms through an FFL dealer in Warshington state. Naturally enough, that effective date continues to recede farther into the past. Anything off paper that a Warshington resident acquires by hook or by crook has to be manufactured before that effective date to pass the legal smell test. Although it might not pass the perjury test. It seems to me. I don't know what lengths prosecutors will go to in order to getcha, but I'm saying it's a possibility. You'd probably have to be involved in some other, more serious crime for this issue to come up. Then they would use it as an add-on. But who knows, in a so-called domestic case, an aggravated spouse dropping the dime might be enough to do it.

That 'domestic case' stuff has influenced my decision to stay female free

 

[arakboss]

In WA, is it the seller or buyer (or both) that would be committing the crime in a transfer without involving an FFL? If the seller, then would a buyer really be in any legal trouble at all?

Also, one has to wonder, how does this all play with the statute of limitations? For example, if someone, somehow acquires a firearm without going through an FFL, and it can be proven by the date of manufacture of the firearm… but they were not found in possession of said firearm for years past the statute of limitations, what happens then? Is the burden of proof on the state to establish it was purchased within the limitation? Or on the accused to establish that it occurred outside of that window? And if it occurred outside the limit (or it cannot be proven it was inside), would they really just let the accused walk away?

I don't know about WA but in Oregon the penalty is only enforced against the seller (transferor).

(5)

(a)

A transferor who fails to comply with the requirements of this section commits a Class A misdemeanor.

(b)

Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this subsection, a transferor who fails to comply with the requirements of this section commits a Class B felony if the transferor has a previous conviction under this section at the time of the offense. [2015 c.50 §2]

ORS 166.435 – Firearm transfers by unlicensed persons

As used in this section, (a) “Transfer” means the delivery of a firearm from a transferor to a transferee, including, but not…

oregon.public.law

 

[bcp]

In WA, is it the seller or buyer (or both) that would be committing the crime in a transfer without involving an FFL? If the seller, then would a buyer really be in any legal trouble at all?

Both

https://www.northwestfirearms.com/t...-the-seller-buyer-or-both.476128/post-3813450

Bruce

 

[gmerkt]

However as I have mentioned before I believe ANY gun, regardless of date of mfg. IF sold/bought now legally through an FFL will start a 'paper trail' on the gun which can be used to track the gun on future selling/buying and IF it is sold/bought illegally at any point, and later sold/bought LEGALLY the last LEGAL BUYER of the gun could potentially be in Chits Creek if there is an inconsistency with the 'paper trail' of the gun he/she cannot explain.

Yes, once the paper trail starts they can track it. My point earlier was that all guns made after the effective date legally should've gone through an FFL dealer, it wouldn't be plausible for a person to claim they were owned prior to the effective date of the new law. As I understand it, as of the new WSP background checks in Wash., ALL transfers link a buyer with a serially numbered gun. Not just handguns and semi-auto rifles, but including all other long guns. So it isn't just a matter of a 4474 filed away that isn't in a chain of evidence. FFL dealers correct me if I'm wrong on this.

A former coworker of mine has a bunch of handguns stored away in brown Kraft paper sacks. All bought decades ago. Some came from gun shows, a few were purchased from dealers. In theory, any of these might be sold under the table and a buyer could claim they were purchased well before the effective date of I-594. There is really no way to disprove when these were last sold. I think over time, as these guns change hands in the future, more and more of them will wind up on the books. I've been aware in the past that there were places where off-paper guns bring a price premium. Not just among crooks, but involving otherwise law-abiding citizens that preferred such qualities in a firearm. For future's sake.

 

[raftman]

I don't believe the date of mfg. will have anything to do with it.


…

What I mean is, for instance, if the law went into effect in 2014, and you're somehow found in the possession of a gun manufactured in 2017 for which there is no record of you having gone through an FFL to get it… it would immediately appear that a law has been broken. However if there's no way to know whether you bought it in 2018 or just last week, what happens then?

Of course I don't know how likely that scenario is in the first place.

 

[RVTECH]

if the law went into effect in 2014, and you're somehow found in the possession of a gun manufactured in 2017 for which there is no record of you having gone through an FFL to get it…

Ah, good point. I never considered this but it makes sense.

I suspect there could be a large market of pre 2016 made guns changing hands in Oregon given the 2016 SB 941 date that could potentially never get a 'paper trail' - assuming people were thinking this far ahead and had given it any thought.

However if there's no way to know whether you bought it in 2018 or just last week, what happens then?

Well, It probably wouldn't matter when the gun was purchased IF it were made after the law passed - especially since there would no doubt be a 'paper trail' on it - and this is where one could have a problem if it were bought/sold non FFL and then later bought/sold via FFL.

 

[KrautBurner]

I sold a Compact Red Dot pistol optic on here fairly quickly