JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
2,386
Reactions
11,261
I ran into a killer deal on a Ruger Gunsight Scout in 556, something I have really been wanting for a while. I met the seller in the parking lot of my usual transfer FFL, checked out the rifle, and agreed on a price. When I told him to come inside with me to complete the transfer, he refused, saying that it was a bullsh## law and he refused to comply, "as any real American should" he said. He seemed legit, and the gun wasn't stolen, as he showed me the receipt from Cabela's from when he bought it. He then told me that I was not taking any chances because I was the buyer and only the seller is accountable. I walked away from the deal because of this, really bummed out because I have wanted this particular firearm for a LLLOOONNNNGGG time, and the price was incredible. Question is, was he right, and I was a dumba**, or could it have been a sting , and I would indeed be in trouble? He did mention the word sting, which raised a red flag in my head. o_O
 
I'm thinking you made the right decision, it sounds like a set up. As the selling party he would have nothing to lose in doing a background check. If and when he bought the weapon from Cabela's his info was already tied to it. It is very possible that the weapon in question was stolen even though he had a receipt. The owner might of had the paperwork stored with the gun and he simply took it when he stole it?. I smell a rat and I wasn't even there.
 
Last Edited:
If the guy never met you before and would rather have a firearm floating around the next 50 years in his name than have to have it transferred out at no cost to him? Sounds like a set up. Things are rarely too good to be true. Especially in this current environment. Pay a few extra dollars and keep it clean.
 
I would think that both parties would be in trouble. If not for actually violating the law but for conspiracy to violate that particular law. I know if I were investigating that particular crime I would charge it that way.
 
As much as I want to say FYOU to the idiotic BS941 law.. You just never know when dealing with strangers. Not saying leos would spend that kind of money on a sting operation.. But at the same time I wouldnt put it past them. You just never know.
 
Just tell the cop your only buying the rifle to give it to a friend who will then give it back to you so you can give it to another friend who will artistically destroy it. So its all good cause you Embezzled the money from your church.
 
[QUOTE="ZA_Survivalist, post: 1490366, Not saying leos would spend that kind of money on a sting operation.. But at the same time I wouldnt put it past them. You just never know.[/QUOTE]

Yes they would. They are not running a business that has to show "profit" in a bottom line sense.

Especially when speaking of a politically motivated law such as SB941. The objective of an undercover operation in such a case would be to show "statistics" of the number of individuals successfully prosecuted to be made the "Grand Example" of. Throw in a little "spin" for seasoning like, "the crime was committed 800 yards from a school" or "the firearm was an evil AR-15" for the news media to chew on and you come up with their recipe for "profit".
Especially when dealing with the likelihood that a multi-agency task force is involved with Federal funding assistance from the DOJ or the ATF. Run out of money ? Execute form 302 for more.

They don't throw back the small fish. They are all counted on a spread sheet somewhere and then turned in to potential bait for the next bigger fish.
 
Last Edited:
If this was after the "preacher" situation it was likely a police sting to offset the fallout from ignoring his lawlessness! . . . OR, perhaps it was one of his minions under his instructions.

Sheldon
 
I'll have to see some evidence that police are trying to enforce this law before I jump on the 'it was a set up bandwagon'.

Besides, you didn't intend to break any laws did you?:rolleyes:
 
The answer is this:

a) Nobody has been prosecuted under this law that I have heard of...not a single person, buyer or seller.

But, b) Laws like this are created to scare law-abiding subjects and to allow a capricious tyrannical-state machine to vindictively prosecute people they deem deserving of extra-special treatment.
 
My friend works in a pawn shop and the guy was trying to sell his gun to them, but what they offered was silly. He knew I was looking for this particular rifle, so he asked the guy if it was OK to give me his number. Upon thinking back, I was being paranoid and should have bought it. Tempted to call him back, but he's probably pissed at me.
 
My friend works in a pawn shop and the guy was trying to sell his gun to them, but what they offered was silly. He knew I was looking for this particular rifle, so he asked the guy if it was OK to give me his number. Upon thinking back, I was being paranoid and should have bought it. Tempted to call him back, but he's probably pissed at me.

After you've advertised your possible intent to go around a law on a public forum...probably best to let it go.
 
That description, stinks like Lutefisk, in the sun, on a hot summer day!
I think walking away was a smart move! It's what I would have done. The consequences are just too harsh, if you want to keep your firearms......and money!
 
The seller's story makes no sense. Something's fishy.

Nobody who wants a decent price for a gun they are selling goes to a pawn shop. If he had the receipt from Cabelas then the gun can be traced to him already, so why be paranoid? And then there's the really, really, really good price. No, it doesn't add up. Sounds like maybe he's already a felon and wanted to avoid a background check under SB941 as the seller. Be glad you walked away.
 
Sounds like most of you are saying something was fishy but for lots and lots of people, will not comply, isn't just Internet chest thumping and they mean it. I am pretty sure based on the numbers of transfers in OR and WA, that compliance rates are quite low. Thousands of people are going about their lives as free persons do.

In all likelihood though, the antis don't want prosecutions. Making an example of an honest, law abiding citizen who has all their gun rights is the quickest way to end public support for UBCs.

Pushing 2 years with zero enforcement in WA.
 

Upcoming Events

Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top