If someone has a Conceal Carry license, they've already shown they have gone thru the checks by the State, they have shown they are legal to own a gun, and they obviously have shown they aren't breaking the laws. Good enough for me. Their photo is there to verify they are who they say they are. ATF recognizes our CCL and does not require a NICS check when buying a gun within the state even from a dealer. I may keep track of their name for my purposes, but that's it.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Private party selling?
- Thread starter heck333
- Start date
There is always in a FTF transfer the question as to whether the firearm is stolen or not -- or has been reported as stolen. What you need to do, of course, is to have some way of proving that you didn't steal it or receive it illegally.
There was a case a couple of years ago reported on one of the forums about a man whose house was broken into and a semi-auto rifle was stolen. He reported that his rifle was stolen -- with serial number and all. Turns out that the police came after him for possession of a stolen weapon, because the gun had previously been reported stolen. His only way out of being charged with a felony was to have a bill of sale from the dealer.
Unfortunately, there seems to be no way to verify in a FTF transfer that a firearm has not been stolen. The lists of stolen arms which used to be available on the internet aren't any longer.
willr
There was a case a couple of years ago reported on one of the forums about a man whose house was broken into and a semi-auto rifle was stolen. He reported that his rifle was stolen -- with serial number and all. Turns out that the police came after him for possession of a stolen weapon, because the gun had previously been reported stolen. His only way out of being charged with a felony was to have a bill of sale from the dealer.
Unfortunately, there seems to be no way to verify in a FTF transfer that a firearm has not been stolen. The lists of stolen arms which used to be available on the internet aren't any longer.
willr
I would have to ask why would anyone care if the weapon is stolen or if the buyer is a criminal.
Oh I know many good reasons, but if you know you are breaking a law, It is illegal but if you do not, no law is broken. There is no law requiring I ask. There is no law requiring I provide serial numbers of any gun I own, ever (unless I was a criminal and caught) So I repeat, who gives a %^&$? And why?
Oh I know many good reasons, but if you know you are breaking a law, It is illegal but if you do not, no law is broken. There is no law requiring I ask. There is no law requiring I provide serial numbers of any gun I own, ever (unless I was a criminal and caught) So I repeat, who gives a %^&$? And why?
38superhero
New member
lol zombie thread...
I am selling a handgun today. FTF.
I am not going to ask anything of him except pay this amount and here is your gun sir.
The confusion of actual laws and willingness to add action to the reality of LEGAL, bothers the heck out of me.
In fact it awakens the rebel within me. Is it dangerous to sell a weapon without being cautious of who is buying it? I seriously doubt it.
Talking to an FFL friend, proved to me interstate sales are completely legal if the person buys and receives the weapon FTF in my home state. He then assumes all of the responsibility for the weapon and transport of it.
Is he right?
Devils advocate; He robs a store a hour after I sell it to him. How guilty or guiltless am I then? The court might summon me into court, however if I had no legal responsibility to confirm his past or future with the weapon, the prosecutor would be unable to charge me with anything. NO?
If it is legal to sell a car, without asking the person buying it if he is licensed, why would I raise the level of my curiosity for a weapon? Cars kill many, many, many more people than guns, but don't require that I do squat to sell it. I don't even have to prove it belongs to me by law in FTF sales. The buyer assumes all of the responsibility in licensing in FTF sales.
I am not going to ask anything of him except pay this amount and here is your gun sir.
The confusion of actual laws and willingness to add action to the reality of LEGAL, bothers the heck out of me.
In fact it awakens the rebel within me. Is it dangerous to sell a weapon without being cautious of who is buying it? I seriously doubt it.
Talking to an FFL friend, proved to me interstate sales are completely legal if the person buys and receives the weapon FTF in my home state. He then assumes all of the responsibility for the weapon and transport of it.
Is he right?
Devils advocate; He robs a store a hour after I sell it to him. How guilty or guiltless am I then? The court might summon me into court, however if I had no legal responsibility to confirm his past or future with the weapon, the prosecutor would be unable to charge me with anything. NO?
If it is legal to sell a car, without asking the person buying it if he is licensed, why would I raise the level of my curiosity for a weapon? Cars kill many, many, many more people than guns, but don't require that I do squat to sell it. I don't even have to prove it belongs to me by law in FTF sales. The buyer assumes all of the responsibility in licensing in FTF sales.
Sorry to beat a dead horse. But my reading of the situations is that if you are in possession of a firearm that has been reported stolen, you are automatically guilty of a felony. Your only way out is to prove in some way that you did not know the firearm was stolen, and that you came into possession of it legally -- i.e. a sales receipt, perhaps. Suppose you sell one FTF, the recipient is accused of having a stolen gun, says he got it from you, even with a sales receipt from you. Aren't you now stuck?
As I said before, all the web-sites at which you used to be able to check on stolen guns have gone away.
willr
As I said before, all the web-sites at which you used to be able to check on stolen guns have gone away.
willr
I don't know gun laws well enough to speak to how the law is written, but to know it was stolen before buying the gun, would make you guilty of buying stolen goods. However, the stolen gun may be confiscated (if you were caught) but you would be innocent of any crime, unless you had been the thief.
The same would be for the other guy. If you never told him the gun you were selling to him was stolen, he has no guilt, even if he asked and was told no.
In other words you would have to know it was stolen and still bought it, to be guilty.
The same would be for the other guy. If you never told him the gun you were selling to him was stolen, he has no guilt, even if he asked and was told no.
In other words you would have to know it was stolen and still bought it, to be guilty.
Spats McGee
Administrator
Not exactly, at least not in Arkansas. Under state law (which is usually where something like "theft by receiving" (the Arkansas statute) is prosecuted), the State only has to prove that the property was stolen, and that the possessor "had good reason to believe" that the property was stolen.Gus-gus said:In other words you would have to know it was stolen and still bought it, to be guilty.
On the federal level:
(j) It shall be unlawful for any person to receive, possess, conceal, store, barter, sell, or dispose of any stolen firearm or stolen ammunition, or pledge or accept as security for a loan any stolen firearm or stolen ammunition, which is moving as, which is a part of, which constitutes, or which has been shipped or transported in, interstate or foreign commerce, either before or after it was stolen, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that the firearm or ammunition was stolen.
18 U.S.C.A. § 922 (West)(emphasis supplied)
In other words, buying that Springfield Arms Custom Shop 1911 (valued at over $3K) for $500 may be a crime.
Last edited:
One of the pluses in going through a dealer is the buyer knows the gun is not stolen.
Not a guarantee in many places.
Spats McGee said:It shall be unlawful for any person to receive, possess, conceal, store, barter, sell, or dispose of any stolen firearm or stolen ammunition, or pledge or accept as security for a loan any stolen firearm or stolen ammunition, which is moving as, which is a part of, which constitutes, or which has been shipped or transported in, interstate or foreign commerce, either before or after it was stolen, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that the firearm or ammunition was stolen.
18 U.S.C.A. § 922 (West)(emphasis supplied)
So you saying all deals are a crime, as the law can subjectively call any person a criminal for actually finding and claiming a deal? That may all be leagal but let me be clear here. That is absolute BS.
The wrong here is that an intellectually limited person with a missing ability to apply average reasoning buys a handgun which is stolen, without any knowledge is guilty of possessing stolen goods?
In other words the law assumes that they have the right to prosecute anyone who has made a mistake in any legal ownership, prior to any exchange, but only for guns? I think that would be easy to beat in court.
Brickeyee is exactly correct. In the case I mentioned before, the gun that was stolen from the man's house WAS purchased from a dealer. It was only because he had the DEALER's receipt that he was exonerated when the police came after him.
I wish that I could find that old report so that you all could see it, but it was vivid enough for me to remember the details. Perhaps someone else has a reference to it.
It seems that even a dealer cannot discover whether a firearm is or is not stolen.
willr
I wish that I could find that old report so that you all could see it, but it was vivid enough for me to remember the details. Perhaps someone else has a reference to it.
It seems that even a dealer cannot discover whether a firearm is or is not stolen.
willr
Been buying and selling and trading guns for nearly forty years. I’ve only bought two new guns in my life and everything else has been private sales, ie, no paperwork. I just don’t worry about the provenance of guns. If you buy a used car from an individual do you check if it was used in an armed robbery? Ever bought an antique and researched if it’s on a hot sheet? How about power tools? A TV at a garage sale? The whole stolen gun concern is really much ado about not much.
Spats McGee
Administrator
Nope, that's not what I'm saying. Perhaps I wasn't clear earlier, so I'll try to be clearer now. Let me underline a few things:Gus-gus said:So you saying all deals are a crime, as the law can subjectively call any person a criminal for actually finding and claiming a deal?
Spats McGee said:It shall be unlawful for any person to receive, possess, conceal, store, barter, sell, or dispose of any stolen firearm or stolen ammunition, or pledge or accept as security for a loan any stolen firearm or stolen ammunition, which is moving as, which is a part of, which constitutes, or which has been shipped or transported in, interstate or foreign commerce, either before or after it was stolen, knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that the firearm or ammunition was stolen.
18 U.S.C.A. § 922 (West)(emphasis supplied)
Not all deals are crimes. Claiming deals is not a crime. Claiming a deal on a stolen gun is a crime, if the buyer knows or has reasonable cause to know that the gun was stolen.
Here are the elements of this crime, in broad strokes:
1) A stolen gun
2) The gun was transported in interstate or foreign commerce
3) A transaction involving the gun
4) A buyer or seller who knew, or had reasonable cause to know, that the gun was stolen.
The reason that I brought up the $3K SACS is in no way intended to say that all deals are crimes. What I was getting at is that if someone offers you a gun far, far below its obvious value, that could be a factor to consider in determining whether the buyer had reasonable cause to know that the gun was stolen. If the gun was not actually stolen, it doesn't matter.
Spats McGee said:having reasonable cause to believe that the firearm or ammunition was stolen.
This is the entire issue. An anal cop decides you should have been "more aware" or "aware" in general, whether it was even possible doesn't preclude charges. This is the trouble with legal and illegal. It isn't a line in the sand, it is a variable line, which can be used as a profiling tool.
I call BS on any such wording in any such law. The word "reasonable" written into a law is not reasonable.