Please close.

[AMMOMAN702]

There was a time when..
NFA's late owner Guido aka David Famiglietti would address your complaint personally.
Those days are over.
I'm in the same situation, except I am the Seller. My buyer has a CCW showed it to me, but he didn't have a driver's license just a state ID card and came back as unresolved.
It is what it is. I'll pick my gun up at Ventura along with one that I ordered last week and the refund him his money.

Really! Ventura always gives me my gun when it comes back unresolved. That’s interesting. It’s sad these companies have this much leverage on us

 

[GlenBaker]

Really! Ventura always gives me my gun when it comes back unresolved. That’s interesting. It’s sad these companies have this much leverage on us

What do you mean by 'That's interesting'?
Where did I say they weren't giving it back to me??? They aren't going to deliver it to my door I have to go pick it up. As I stated in the last sentence.

 

[AMMOMAN702]

Where did I say they weren't giving it back to me??? They aren't going to deliver it to my door I have to go pick it up. As I stated in the last sentence.

I am stating as the buyer of the gun they did not except the unresolved, and denied him. you stated you were the seller and that they denied his claim. I said when I go they always proceed even if it’s a unresolved I as in I being the buyer…

 

[tbirdsc]

Then you wonder why a lot of FFL-s 1) don't want to hassle doing private party transfers or 2) charge what they do to make it worth their while.
As I mentioned in a previous thread along the same line - it is easier to do private party transfer for a firearm that is in Bangor, Maine than to do a ppt for a firearm across the street.

 

[MAC702]

Really! Ventura always gives me my gun when it comes back unresolved.

How often is this bull(crap) happening? And you're still complying?

 

[MAC702]

My buyer has a CCW showed it to me ... and came back as unresolved. ...
I'll pick my gun up at Ventura ... and the refund him his money.

So you'll still refuse to sell it to him because the state won't do its job. Nice.

 

[AMMOMAN702]

How often is this bull(crap) happening? And you're still complying?

It’s like every other or something down thoughts lines, it sucks but I have tried to contact them and they are a nightmare to deal with. I also don’t provide my SSN so maybe that is why it comes back unresolved? I don’t know but it is what is it is. Long story short is these companies are losing there personal touch and don’t care about us customers and since that’s the case all just take my business online and transfer to small shop in town so At least they can get something but not going to spend my money at stores that basically are telling me even thought I have a CCW I may be a criminal

 

[jfrey123]

I don’t think they’re assuming you’re a criminal, but you’re expecting them to perform a criminal act under the guise of good customer service.

I have similar feeling for the way buyers complain about sellers who won’t break the law. Considering it’s only the seller who faces penalties for non-compliance, which quickly escalate to felonies, I can’t blame a seller for wanting to cover their ass.

I’ll reiterate that I hate the law and think it’s bull(crap), and I acknowledge Sheriffs are on record unwilling to enforce. That doesn’t preclude the State Police, nor municipal police departments, from enforcing it. And you can bet the majority of DA’s will be happy to pursue charges brought to them. The likelihood of being caught up in it is relatively low, but consequences severe.

 

[tbirdsc]

I don’t think they’re assuming you’re a criminal, but you’re expecting them to perform a criminal act under the guise of good customer service.

I have similar feeling for the way buyers complain about sellers who won’t break the law. Considering it’s only the seller who faces penalties for non-compliance, which quickly escalate to felonies, I can’t blame a seller for wanting to cover their ass.

I’ll reiterate that I hate the law and think it’s bull(crap), and I acknowledge Sheriffs are on record unwilling to enforce. That doesn’t preclude the State Police, nor municipal police departments, from enforcing it. And you can bet the majority of DA’s will be happy to pursue charges brought to them. The likelihood of being caught up in it is relatively low, but consequences severe.

As of now, the ATF is looking for FFL-s to place their head on the chopping block so you can't blame them for not wanting to skirt the law.
As for FFL-s not wanting to transfer on a "unresolved", the shooter in the SC church shooting was legally transferred the firearm as an "unresolved" and even thought the FFL did nothing wrong - I am pretty sure the legal ramifications (and I reiterate - the FFL did not do anything wrong) put them out of business so that is making a lot of FFL-s think twice about it.

 

[JTW_Jr]

so you can't blame them for not wanting to skirt the law.

Are they skirting the law though ? If it comes back as unresolved after 3 days, isn't the FFL legally allowed to release the firearm to the owner ?

 

[tbirdsc]

Are they skirting the law though ? If it comes back as unresolved after 3 days, isn't the FFL legally allowed to release the firearm to the owner ?

You are correct - I wasn't very clear but I was speaking more about the FFL keeping the firearm and then returning it to the seller if the buyer cannot take possession without going through the proper procedures.

 

[jfrey123]

Are they skirting the law though ? If it comes back as unresolved after 3 days, isn't the FFL legally allowed to release the firearm to the owner ?

The answer becomes clear as mud:
1. Under state law, yes, the owner can take the firearm back immediately if the sale is delayed and both buyer and seller can return upon completion.
2. Under Federal law, no, as the FFL must log the weapon into their own inventory to perform the background check. Releasing the weapon to the original owner for a delayed background requires a 4473 be completed by the original owner (with either CCW exempting the phone call or an actual background check needing to be conducted).

 

[tbirdsc]

The answer becomes clear as mud:
1. Under state law, yes, the owner can take the firearm back immediately if the sale is delayed and both buyer and seller can return upon completion.
2. Under Federal law, no, as the FFL must log the weapon into their own inventory to perform the background check. Releasing the weapon to the original owner for a delayed background requires a 4473 be completed by the original owner (with either CCW exempting the phone call or an actual background check needing to be conducted).

So you are saying in essence - the buyer cannot use his CCW to purchase the firearm but the seller can use his CCW to get his firearm returned if need be.

 

[tbirdsc]

The answer becomes clear as mud:
1. Under state law, yes, the owner can take the firearm back immediately if the sale is delayed and both buyer and seller can return upon completion.
2. Under Federal law, no, as the FFL must log the weapon into their own inventory to perform the background check. Releasing the weapon to the original owner for a delayed background requires a 4473 be completed by the original owner (with either CCW exempting the phone call or an actual background check needing to be conducted).

From the view of the FFL - probably following federal law over state law would be the prudent thing to do

 

[MJW89519]

Are there any reports, arrests, convictions, etc., in Nevada for anyone selling a firearm without doing the private party background check?

 

[GlenBaker]

So you'll still refuse to sell it to him because the state won't do its job. Nice.

To be honest with you, until I read your comment, it didn't cross my mind. Demareea didn't ask and I didn't think of it to offer.
But thanks for the judgment anyway.

 

[QuazDawg]

Is it not possible for an FFL to buy from the seller and then sell to the buyer, skirting the whole background waste of time? Given the buyer has a current ccw of course. Or is that too simple?

 

[Brian2A]

Is it not possible for an FFL to buy from the seller and then sell to the buyer, skirting the whole background waste of time? Given the buyer has a current ccw of course. Or is that too simple?

If the FFL sold you the gun they'd have to collect sales tax.

 

[tbirdsc]

If the FFL sold you the gun they'd have to collect sales tax.

Plus they would probably want to mark it up 20-30%

 

[GlenBaker]

Is it not possible for an FFL to buy from the seller and then sell to the buyer, skirting the whole background waste of time? Given the buyer has a current ccw of course. Or is that too simple?

If the FFL sold you the gun they'd have to collect sales tax.

Plus they would probably want to mark it up 20-30%

Not their business model.
Ffls are in the business of selling New guns or sometimes used on consignment.
They're being forced to be a go-between by the state.