Gunshop Mis Information

[Mike Irwin]

"I never lie and I expect the whole truth from others."

If the woman wanted the full, notarized, annotated answer, complete with malpractice assurance, she should have gone to an attorney and paid for his services.

I'll remind everyone that businesses are in business to make money; they're NOT "The Answer Lady" service.

As long as the answer isn't outright illegal, it's a good answer, even if it covers only 1 of multiple permutations.

If anyone is truly at fault, it's the lady, who apparently failed to take advantage of technology to search for her own answer.

This is the information age. Information on virtually everything is available quickly and easily, online, and pretty much all of it for free.


What's that old saying? God helps those who help themselves?

 

[baddarryl]

Very good points from all perspectives everyone. Really helped me to see the employer/employee perspective on this particular issue. I guess what irked me is I have had previous negative experiences with them and interpreted their answer as such.

To answer why I still go there? They are around the corner and the only range that is not an hour away. The owner has the attitude like they are the only game in town and they know it. That will change soon though.

 

[SocialAnarchist]

To me the gun shop employee should have said you can handle the sale yourself if you wish, BUT, a safer way would be to run the sale through the shop where we can run a background check on the buyer for you.

Two options, both the truth, and both legally correct.

 

[oldcabin]

The LGS employee may have had no choice. I'm sure it's not the first time the question had come up. The employee may have been told to say just that and nothing more. The boss may have said this is how I want it handled.

 

[Red Dot Arms]

I'd like to know the entire conversation before giving my 2 cents. So many times the story gets changed with a slight interpretation.

 

[JohnKSa]

AND if it is a long gun they can transfer across states lines, providing the state in which they sell the gun allows that type of transfer.

That is incorrect. A private firearm transaction (one that does not involve an FFL) may NOT legally cross state boundaries. That is true regardless of the type of firearm.

The only exception I am aware of is a bequest. A gun can legally be left to a person in another state without an FFL being involved.

A transaction/sale/trade/gift that results in a firearm's ownership being changed from a person residing in one state to a different person residing in a different state MUST go through an FFL.

 

[candr44]

I'd like to know the entire conversation before giving my 2 cents. So many times the story gets changed with a slight interpretation.

This is the only thing said in this thread that is worth a damn. Almost every thing else is opinion based on here say and some is opinion based on guess work and bias.

 

[CajunBass]

This is the only thing said in this thread that is worth a damn. Almost every thing else is opinion based on here say and some is opinion based on guess work and bias.

No, it's not. Those of us who commented, commented on the information we were given. Could additional information have changed our opinion. Of course it could, but our responses are based on what we have, not what might have been.

 

[Tom Servo]

Hey, maybe the shop owner belongs to a secret gun-control cabal, and he's encouraging his employees to misinform people in order to line his pockets with the lucre of deception. Or maybe the employee hadn't encountered the question before and simply didn't know better.

What we have is a situation that could be read a couple of ways, and for which nobody has proposed a solution. What does that leave us with? Our seemingly bi-weekly gun shop gripe thread.

This one's run its course.