Who are these folks that want to buy my guns?

[andreys21]

Be careful, folks. Anyone can register and post on here, I've been thinking for a while that some might get in here for other purposes given the state of the nation at the moment.

 

[Neostratos]

I was asked on this site by a member to sell a firearm without bgc. I was new here and didn't know if this was common practice. It is for Armslist.

Told him if I sold illegally for a few extra bucks I could lose my right to own one. - not to mention the issue of him committing a crime with a gun registered to me.

 

[revjen45]

1) Don't talk to the cops, especially the feds.
Regardless of what the questions or answers are.
2) The Law doesn't apply to the cops, especially the Feds.
There's a good reason the Fibbies don't record interrogations. Then the 302 can say whatever they think would serve their purpose. What you say doesn't matter near as much as what they say you said. To avoid having them literally put words in your mouth invoke right to silence and counsel* then STFU.**


*Right to silence must be specifically invoked, otherwise anything you do or don't say will be used against you.
** I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV. This is just common sense.

 

[draza]

As someone who has "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" engraved into their brain, I fail to see the issue with background checks. The only exception would be if we had "Universal Background Checks" You know, those ones..

 

[2506]

I was asked on this site by a member to sell a firearm without bgc. I was new here and didn't know if this was common practice. It is for Armslist.

Told him if I sold illegally for a few extra bucks I could lose my right to own one. - not to mention the issue of him committing a crime with a gun registered to me.

Armslist is the worst. Any search I do comes back about 50% scams. 4", pre-lock S&W 625 for $400?

 

[Neostratos]

Great and fast review.
STFU

 

[MaxwellEdison]

I don't really buy the "it was probably a set-up" line-of-reasoning. While that isn't completely beyond the realm of possibility, it sounds a little too conspiratorial for my taste. I mean, when was the last time you read a news article about a member of law enforcement specifically trolling firearms forums in hopes of catching someone illegally selling a gun? One would think that if this was a common thing, most of us would have heard about it. And frankly, when it comes to firearms-related crimes, I have to think that most law enforcement agencies are looking for bigger fish to fry. Catching some random person on an obscure Internet forum offering to sell a gun off the books probably isn't a fantastic use of law enforcement's time. As soon as I start to see regular and credible reports of this happening, then I'll start believing such things might be a set-up.

IMO, what's far more likely is that either (i) a "prohibited person" was attempting to buy from the OP, and that person knew he wouldn't pass a background check; or (ii) a "regular Joe " was trying to buy without creating a governmental record of the transaction. I'd bet money it was one of those two things.

I have experienced both, myself. Two years ago a guy wanted to buy an AK I was selling, and he insisted that we do a FTF transaction in McMinnville without going through an FFL. And just as the OP described, when I refused to do so the guy started cussing me out over the phone. He called me a "pussy" and a "cowardly mother bubblegumer". LOL! I googled the guy's phone number and - with a little more research - was able to ascertain his name. And sure as bubblegum back in 2013 he had been a 3-year "guest" of the State of Oregon for multiple drug-related charges. For several days I seriously debated whether I should report the attempted purchase. I ultimately chose not to because I feared that either him or his acquaintances might retaliate, putting me and my family in danger. I just didn't want to invite that kind of trouble into my life. To this day I'm still not sure if I did the right thing. I fully understand that perhaps I didn't.

As for people wanting to buy without a record, about seven years ago I listed a new "Bumpski" AK bumpstock on Gunbroker. I had purchased it for $199 and simply never used it. I listed it on GB with a starting bid of $199 and no reserve. I just wanted to get my money back was all, and I wasn't even sure if it would sell. To my surprise and shock, within the week it got bid up to $550! Being a bit naive I was like, "Why on Earth would anyone pay that much?!? They could just buy it from the manufacturer for almost the same price I paid!" It took me a couple weeks to comprehend what had happened. The bidders specifically did not want any company/manufacturer records that they had bought the item. (And in retrospect, those bidders knew what they were doing!) My only regret was that I didn't buy and then resell 20 of those things!

 

[po18guy]

Some president said buying a gun was easier than getting a book from a library or something like that...

You mean he was...WRONG?

I think that president may have hung out on street corners for too long.

 

[po18guy]

Great and fast review.
STFU

View attachment 726438

Slightly lunatic fringe, ain't it? I know. I've been there.

 

[CLT65]

I was an FFL in Arizona for years--the ATF used to come into my shop once a year and they would take all my 4473 forms out of my shop and back to their lair for perusal and I will assume careful entering into their computers. This was 100% illegal but they came by and did it every year anyhow. I'm under no misconceptions as to what took place, at least in my shop

I understand, and I don't disagree. It is a form of de-facto registration. I mostly just posted for those folks out there that don't understand the technical difference. So many people think we already have (or should have) full-on registration, and don't see the problem with that.

To highlight the difference between full registration (like the left has been salivating over for decades), and the 4473 "soft registration" that we have now: If a registered class-3 weapon like an SBR or machine-gun is found at a crime scene, the authorities will check the registry and go see the person who is on the books as the owner of that gun, and he'd better have a darn good reason as to why it's not in his possession.

If a regular handgun is found at a crime scene, they can go back and see who the last transfer of record was made to. That's where the work starts. Let's say it was transferred to Joe Blo 15 years ago, and he sold it FTF (legally) to his co-worker, who moved out of state and sold it to a neighbor there, who (if they can track him down) thinks maybe he gave it to his brother-in-law, who might have sold it at a gun show... all legal off-the-books transactions. There's no legal requirement for these subsequent owners to register their ownership of it with the authorities.

 

[billdeserthills]

I was convicted of a minor felony about 2011, about 2016 I had my rights restored and after the feds refused to recognize my newly restored rights, I got another AZ ccw card & after that the feds sent me a certificate (suitable for framing) that approved my purchase of a gun from almost a year prior that I tried to buy right after my rights had been restored that I was denied for.

In those 5-6 years not once did the ATF bother contacting me to see where my class 3 AOW Saiga was at.

 

[biggie24420]

I'd tell them to go buy 80% lowers and Glock uppers from eBay, and not to contact me again, ever!
I'd play the ATF games lol.

 

[revjen45]

"Don't most men trying to solicit underage sex through interactions on line get caught by LE posing as youngsters"

There are so many cops trolling for chimos that the cops are entrapping each other!

 

[raftman]

I understand, and I don't disagree. It is a form of de-facto registration. I mostly just posted for those folks out there that don't understand the technical difference. So many people think we already have (or should have) full-on registration, and don't see the problem with that.

To highlight the difference between full registration (like the left has been salivating over for decades), and the 4473 "soft registration" that we have now: If a registered class-3 weapon like an SBR or machine-gun is found at a crime scene, the authorities will check the registry and go see the person who is on the books as the owner of that gun, and he'd better have a darn good reason as to why it's not in his possession.

If a regular handgun is found at a crime scene, they can go back and see who the last transfer of record was made to. That's where the work starts. Let's say it was transferred to Joe Blo 15 years ago, and he sold it FTF (legally) to his co-worker, who moved out of state and sold it to a neighbor there, who (if they can track him down) thinks maybe he gave it to his brother-in-law, who might have sold it at a gun show... all legal off-the-books transactions. There's no legal requirement for these subsequent owners to register their ownership of it with the authorities.

In many states (including ours) the difference has been erased by "universal" background checks. If it's a gun purchased after these laws went into effect, then the last documented buyer on record should still generally be the current owner. You'll still have explaining to do if your gun turns up at a crime scene as there's not a legal way for you to have transferred it to a random someone else without that person then becoming the last buyer on record.

There are of course such scenarios as you ending up moving out of state and selling FTF in your new state of residence (that presumably allows it) or something.

This is a key reason I'd not play ball with someone insisting on skipping the BGC. Could end up doing time for someone else's crime.

 

[CLT65]

In many states (including ours) the difference has been erased by "universal" background checks.

I wouldn't say the difference is completely erased, but you do have a point. I believe registration is what they wanted the whole time. The background check is secondary to the registration aspect. There were compromises offered to the universal background check law here that would have exempted CHL holders, and others that lessened the registration aspect without compromising the supposed efficacy of the BGC. Absolutely not, they would have none of it. Registration is what they want.

You have to know that eventually they will go after the "family loophole". Right now firearms can be passed around quite a bit among family, as well as moving into and out of state without documentation. That's too loose of a system for statists, and still not quite real registration.

 

[trevi]

Be careful with a guy named Eric Stevens from Florida. This mate replied to a specific gun on Armslist and appeared to be a real deal, but where it gets really strange was when I told him to have his FFL send me an email and copy of his FFL, well, this Eric replied with a copy of a valid FFL, not in his name. I checked the FFL on the ATF site; real. He told me a store where he wanted it to go to but would not provide me his phone number, and the store that he wanted to use was questionable though real. He went silent after I asked again for his number.

People these days.

 

[titsonritz]

If you can't find drugs, guns or pussy out there, you're not looking hard enough.

 

[trevi]

If you can't find drugs, guns or pussy out there, you're not looking hard enough.

You can say, "pussy" on here?

 

[MarshalChillN]

You can say, "pussy" on here?

of course... Have you never seen a furry one.... with a tail and long ears???

 

[MarshalChillN]

If you can't find drugs, guns or pussy out there, you're not looking hard enough.

Or in the wrong places !!!