Transfer through FFL for private sale?

D

drummerchuckb1

New Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2023
Messages
13
Location
Middlesex NC
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I'm curious how folks prefer to handle private sales. I am aware you don't have to do any sort of transfer or use an FFL, but does anyone choose to? From a buyers perspective, how do you know the gun you are receiving isn't stolen? Is there any reason a seller would want a gun shop to facilitate the transfer?
 
Does anyone choose to do that? Sure, but I think it’s pretty silly for 98% of people.

I recently bought a pistol from someone who insisted doing it through an FFL due to a terrible past experience. I don’t blame him given his experience. However, there was no guarantee that the gun wasn’t stolen. The FFL simply logged it in and out of their books. Total process was like 10min.
 
I don't choose to, personally.

I have no way of definitively knowing that a firearm I'm buying is stolen. Personally, the onus is not on me to care. If I buy a hamburger at McDonalds, I do not know for certain that what I am eating is beef, and not endangered pangolin. But that doesn't mean I'm a felon breaking the Endangered Species Act. It means that someone else broke the law and didn't inform me. That's how I see it.

The only reason I could forsee this is if I was getting really bad vibes from someone, or if I wanted to buy a long gun from a different state. Other than that, I see no reason to assist the government in creating an illegal gun registry.
 
drummerchuckb1 said:
how do you know the gun you are receiving isn't stolen? Is there any reason a seller would want a gun shop to facilitate the transfer?
Click to expand...
Going through an FFL doesn't get your gun checked out. It's just makes your wallet lighter.
 
I believe there’s a consideration my fellow members have overlooked. They and you mentioned the buyer wanting to be assured the item isn’t stolen. A seller may have a related concern; whether the currency is counterfeit.

Using an FFL provides both parties with the same level of assurance. 😉
 
Jeppo said:
I believe there’s a consideration my fellow members have overlooked. They and you mentioned the buyer wanting to be assured the item isn’t stolen. A seller may have a related concern; whether the currency is counterfeit.

Using an FFL provides both parties with the same level of assurance. 😉
Click to expand...
That's it. You just dead panned me into shooting coffee out of my nose. Thank you, I'm sitting in a training class and appreciate the humor
 
Jerzsubbie said:
Does anyone choose to do that? Sure, but I think it’s pretty silly for 98% of people.

I recently bought a pistol from someone who insisted doing it through an FFL due to a terrible past experience. I don’t blame him given his experience. However, there was no guarantee that the gun wasn’t stolen. The FFL simply logged it in and out of their books. Total process was like 10min.
Click to expand...
I'm assuming since it was the seller's insistence, that they paid for the transaction...

If so, I'm never going to fault someone on how they choose to spend their hard-earned money.
 
Rune said:
I'm assuming since it was the seller's insistence, that they paid for the transaction...

If so, I'm never going to fault someone on how they choose to spend their hard-earned money.
Click to expand...
Correct and agreed. I had the option to decline/proceed due to the FFL requirement, it was a good enough deal to proceed.
 
pinkbunny said:
I see no reason to assist the government in creating an illegal gun registry
Click to expand...
Unless you live like the Unabomber they have a good idea of what you have.
In reality going to the FFL dealer with a ccw (no NICS check) and paying cash is probably the least traceable option.
Contacting a guy on the forum, then texting is all information that is stored and can be combed through by supercomputers.
 
If the Seller is also an FFL holder, as I am, I do not think it would be acceptable to the ATF if the Seller bypassed any of the transfer regulations (i.e. background check if required and logging out of the book). In any case, there is no way to know as a Seller if a firearm has been stolen, FFL holder or not. My local police department offered to run a list of serials through their database as a favor, but that is about the extent of the help that I have received. As an FFL holder, my radar would go up if a local Buyer asked me to bypass the FFL rules --- and I would stop the transaction.
 
keepcalmandcarryon said:
Unless you live like the Unabomber they have a good idea of what you have.
In reality going to the FFL dealer with a ccw (no NICS check) and paying cash is probably the least traceable option.
Contacting a guy on the forum, then texting is all information that is stored and can be combed through by supercomputers.
Click to expand...
No, it's not. Your assuming a level of competency that is not there.
Look at the Matthew Hoover auto key card case. Talked about widely in forums, on YouTube, has a website.
Atf only found out because a bank told them months later.
A tool you're talking about doesn't exist.

Much easier for this atf to track via scans of 4473's. On paper, not searchable by name, but every other field, date, location, model, etc is searchable. And I don't believe them when they say it's not searchable, because I don't think they're competent enough to exclude that.
 
Last edited:
The only benefit of using an FFL for a transfer (that I can think of ) would be for the seller if the buyer did not present a concealed carry permit.

Going through an FFL would require a NICS check on the buyer. If they were a prohibited person, the NICS check should catch it and relieve the seller from responsibility for selling to a prohibited person.

Personally I don't go through FFL's, but that is one potential benefit.
 
Union County Roger said:
my radar would go up if a local Buyer asked me to bypass the FFL rules --- and I would stop the transaction
Click to expand...
I'm not clear on this statement. Is there an FFL rule to bypass in that case? I mean if you privately buy a gun from a non-licensee is it legal for you to NOT log it into your book? How is it any of the sellers' business whether you do or not? Did I misread that entirely?
 
I usually just put my guns on consignment through my local FFL. Dealer gets a cut to stay in business and I don't have to deal with any hassle.

Sometimes I'll sell a friend a gun directly but that's rare.
 
I look at this from the point of the seller.

Some people like doing Facebook marketplace deals at police station parking lots.

Some want to sell thru an ffl. I don't thinks it's irrational for a seller to make sure the person he is selling to is legit.

I know I'd hate it if I sold a firearm to someone I later learned used it to commit a crime.

But I also see it the other way around.

2 ways.
 
Chriselalto said:
I look at this from the point of the seller.

Some people like doing Facebook marketplace deals at police station parking lots.

Some want to sell thru an ffl. I don't thinks it's irrational for a seller to make sure the person he is selling to is legit.

I know I'd hate it if I sold a firearm to someone I later learned used it to commit a crime.

But I also see it the other way around.

2 ways.
Click to expand...
Do you worry as much if you sold them a car and they might get into a wreck and kill someone?
 
Union County Roger said:
If the Seller is also an FFL holder, as I am, I do not think it would be acceptable to the ATF if the Seller bypassed any of the transfer regulations (i.e. background check if required and logging out of the book). In any case, there is no way to know as a Seller if a firearm has been stolen, FFL holder or not. My local police department offered to run a list of serials through their database as a favor, but that is about the extent of the help that I have received. As an FFL holder, my radar would go up if a local Buyer asked me to bypass the FFL rules --- and I would stop the transaction.
Click to expand...
As an FFL you possess two types of firearms, those owned by the business that is the FFL (or if you failed to create a business by the legal half of your person that is “in the business” ) and those owned by you individually. When you acquire a gun you decide which of these entities will buy it. You only need to put it in the book and follow all the FFL/business rules if the FFL is the acquirer. If you acquire it as an individual then those rules apply. So, if you want to sell a rifle that you previously acquired for personal use it would not be listed in your bound book and you sell it as an individual, so no paperwork. Of course you could transfer it to your FFL before selling if you want, but not doing so is in no way “bypassing“ atf rules. It is a little different in process for a C&R FFL, but no different in effect.

Scsmith42 said:
Going through an FFL would require a NICS check on the buyer. If they were a prohibited person, the NICS check should catch it and relieve the seller from responsibility for selling to a prohibited person.
Click to expand...

I know that you know, but for the benefit of other readers, there is no such legal responsibility. The law is that you can’t knowingly sell to a prohibited person, not that you can’t sell to a prohibited person.
 
Chriselalto said:
I look at this from the point of the seller.

Some people like doing Facebook marketplace deals at police station parking lots.

Some want to sell thru an ffl. I don't thinks it's irrational for a seller to make sure the person he is selling to is legit.

I know I'd hate it if I sold a firearm to someone I later learned used it to commit a crime.

But I also see it the other way around.

2 ways.
Click to expand...
Uh, if they commit a crime with it after then they were legal at the time of purchase so your "precaution" did nothing anyways.
 
Chriselalto said:
I look at this from the point of the seller.

Some people like doing Facebook marketplace deals at police station parking lots.

Some want to sell thru an ffl. I don't thinks it's irrational for a seller to make sure the person he is selling to is legit.

I know I'd hate it if I sold a firearm to someone I later learned used it to commit a crime.

But I also see it the other way around.

2 ways.
Click to expand...
Would you feel bad
If you sold a car to someone who used it to rob a bank?

People put too much emotion into the sale of one particular inanimate object over all others. And that emotion has been trained into them by the media.

It wasn’t this way 30 years ago.
 
Chdamn said:
Would you feel bad
If you sold a car to someone who used it to rob a bank?
Click to expand...
Assuming you are a nihilist then no.
The other important point is if you choose to use an FFL you are not legally transferring the firearm to the other person, the FFL dealer is. Why should you care? A FFL transfer costs in the ballpark of $25. A good lawyer costs $400/hr and this is not 30 years ago-today there are organizations and DA’s who will prosecute and sue to make a “statement “.
 
keepcalmandcarryon said:
Assuming you are a nihilist then no.
The other important point is if you choose to use an FFL you are not legally transferring the firearm to the other person, the FFL dealer is. Why should you care? A FFL transfer costs in the ballpark of $25. A good lawyer costs $400/hr and this is not 30 years ago-today there are organizations and DA’s who will prosecute and sue to make a “statement “.
Click to expand...
I guess then the question really comes down to how much is freedom worth.

For you it’s $25.
 
keepcalmandcarryon said:
[...] A FFL transfer costs in the ballpark of $25. A good lawyer costs $400/hr and this is not 30 years ago-today there are organizations and DA’s who will prosecute and sue to make a “statement “.
Click to expand...
I know other's will disagree (based on my few days here) but I think this is an interesting point. Examples of this come up all the time. Remington got sued (and lost) by sandyhook families because a bushmaster was used. Alec baldwin shoots a camera woman and her family sues everyone all the way back to the ammo supplier. The list goes on. It's not right, but it's the way things are. My question is - what's the likeliness an average Joe gets caught up in something because he legally participated in a private sale? Seems very, very low. But $25 for some extra buffer also seems pretty cheap.
 
keepcalmandcarryon said:
Assuming you are a nihilist then no.
The other important point is if you choose to use an FFL you are not legally transferring the firearm to the other person, the FFL dealer is. Why should you care? A FFL transfer costs in the ballpark of $25. A good lawyer costs $400/hr and this is not 30 years ago-today there are organizations and DA’s who will prosecute and sue to make a “statement “.
Click to expand...
The nihilist jab is really just a failure to recognize that you’ve been conditioned to accept guilt for things that you should not. This leads you to be fearful to the point of paranoia. Can you name even 10 examples of a prior individual owner of a gun being charged with a crime or even sued in civil court for the actions of a subsequent individual owner of that gun when the transfer of the gun was legal? There have literally been hundreds of millions of legal private transfers, but you can’t name 10 examples of “DA’s who will prosecute and sue just to make a “statement.”” Can you name two?

drummerchuckb1 said:
I know other's will disagree (based on my few days here) but I think this is an interesting point. Examples of this come up all the time. Remington got sued (and lost) by sandyhook families because a bushmaster was used. Alec baldwin shoots a camera woman and her family sues everyone all the way back to the ammo supplier. The list goes on. It's not right, but it's the way things are. My question is - what's the likeliness an average Joe gets caught up in something because he legally participated in a private sale? Seems very, very low. But $25 for some extra buffer also seems pretty cheap.
Click to expand...
You are correct, the risk is very, very low. But let me ask, do you expect that a victim suing everyone will stop at an FFL rather than include the prior owner? You’ve already said that they are suing everyone, so why assume they stop at an FFL?

It seems to me that a legal undocumented private sale creates even less risk than using an FFL. It forces the victim to have to work to prove that you were the private owner that transfered the gun to the person whose action started their litigation. With no bill of sale and no business paperwork it will take many hours to conclusively identify the seller. In many cases ATF is unable to do it with virtually unlimited resources. Of course if you use an FFL or give everyone that buys a gun from you privately a bill of sale you’ve made it pretty simple and inexpensive to find you.
 
drummerchuckb1 said:
I know other's will disagree (based on my few days here) but I think this is an interesting point. Examples of this come up all the time. Remington got sued (and lost) by sandyhook families because a bushmaster was used. Alec baldwin shoots a camera woman and her family sues everyone all the way back to the ammo supplier. The list goes on. It's not right, but it's the way things are. My question is - what's the likeliness an average Joe gets caught up in something because he legally participated in a private sale? Seems very, very low. But $25 for some extra buffer also seems pretty cheap.
Click to expand...

take back your Freedom , Son.
I know you didn’t want to give it up, you were brainwashed by the liberals (thru schools and media). here’s your chance to drop the chains.

what do you think about “shall not be infringed“ ?
 
It’s amazing(not really), that every time there’s a discussion about this, that the same few folks show up, and proceed to publicly lick boots.

In the name of “what if”

We banned a guy not too long ago for claiming “what if” after meeting someone from this site, to BUY a gun, and then asking the person SELLING THE GUN, for a carry permit without making that known that he wanted one before they met, to make him feel better.

That’s not really the reason he did it. But he doubled down and stuck to it after publicly coming here and telling us all about him having his time wasted.


He would’ve fit good in this thread.
 
Jeppo said:
I believe there’s a consideration my fellow members have overlooked. They and you mentioned the buyer wanting to be assured the item isn’t stolen. A seller may have a related concern; whether the currency is counterfeit.

Using an FFL provides both parties with the same level of assurance. 😉
Click to expand...
I don't think the FFL handles any money other than perhaps the NICS fee?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom