A fellow that lives nearby in an adjacent state (IL) wants to buy a used 50 year-old shotgun from me. If he drives to my house in Missouri, can I LEGALLY sell it to him directly, withour using an FFL dealer?

I would copy his drivers license and his Illinois Firearms Card.

The other option is that we both go to a local gun shop, and pay $35 for them to record the sale. They will also charge him 7.5% sales tax.

Jerry

You'll have to go to the gun shop and let an FFL document the transfer...Geo

Mail it to his local ffl (you'll need a copy of the ffle) and then it's an out-of-state sale and no sales tax due.

Illinois has some very stringent gun laws, I believe they have a 24 hour wait no matter what. Might deserve some further investigation.

Not legally, Jerry--although it certainly happens quite frequently. But with people from IL, given that state's gun laws, they're the ones I'd be really concerned about selling to. And any sales tax should only be on the transfer fee, although I've heard a couple guys say it has to be applied to the price of the gun itself.

Call the NRA, they have lawyers who can answer your question for free.
bill

Jerry,

I was at my FFL today and asked him about this. All you need to do is provide proof of sale for the buyer, provided he drives to Missouri and picks up the shotgun. Illinois law allows what they call a "Contiguous State" provision. As long as the state physically borders Illinois and only a long gun is involved, a direct person to person transfer is ok. The buyer should keep a copy of the proof of sale. If he wants it delivered, he has to provide you with a copy of an FFL and that is the only address that the gun can be delivered to. (Providing he does not have a C&R.)

If a handgun is involved, it must go through an FFL in Illinois and the buyer is subject to the 3 day wait rule.

Clear as mud...


Pete

I wonder if that clears the federal hurdle? The Federal Firearms Regulations Guide that I have is dated, so maybe there's been a change. But according to the guide, you can only sell to a resident of your own state, or to someone with an FFL out of state. And it also states that you can only buy within your own state, or from someone with an FFL in any state.

LArry is correct, as an individual you can not sell or deliver a firearm to an out of state resident

John Boyd

Larry,

You got me. Since I live in Illinois, I was curious and asked.
The advice to call the NRA is very wise.

Pete

I don't think Larry's point is inconsistant with the idea of an Illinois resident coming over to an adjacent state and buying from an individual there by using a dealer with an FFL as the 'transfer agent'. What's wrong with that?...Geo

From the BATF site,he,the buyer would have to go to a dealer,it cannot be done by unlicensed individuals;

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/unlicensed-persons.html#gca-unlicensed-transfer
Q: To whom may an unlicensed person transfer firearms under the GCA?

A person may sell a firearm to an unlicensed resident of his State, if he does not know or have reasonable cause to believe the person is prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms under Federal law. A person may loan or rent a firearm to a resident of any State for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes, if he does not know or have reasonable cause to believe the person is prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms under Federal law. A person may sell or transfer a firearm to a licensee in any State. However, a firearm other than a curio or relic may not be transferred interstate to a licensed collector.

[18 U.S.C. 922(a)(3) and (5), 922(d), 27 CFR 478.29 and 478.30]



Q: From whom may an unlicensed person acquire a firearm under the GCA?

A person may only acquire a firearm within the person’s own State, except that he or she may purchase or otherwise acquire a rifle or shotgun, in person, at a licensee’s premises in any State, provided the sale complies with State laws applicable in the State of sale and the State where the purchaser resides. A person may borrow or rent a firearm in any State for temporary use for lawful sporting purposes.

[18 U.S.C. 922(a)(3) and (5), 922(b)(3), 27 CFR 478.29 and 478.30]

The buyer has two options.
A) Come to your state and you go through a dealer there
B) Ship it to a FFL in his state and let him do the 4473 (and NICS call) there

Remember they are here to help you!
http://www.youtube.com/user/ATFHQ

What Dave posted is what my Firearms Regs says, almost verbatim.

George, the question had to do with selling the gun to a nonresident without using a licensed dealer.

IME, there is absolutely zero paper record of any person-to-person long gun exchange.....regardless of what planet in the universe they reside on. I don't have, and am not required to have , a single shred of evidence of where, how or from whom I acquired any of my long guns.

Agonizing over selling a shotgun to an individual, unless you're being framed by your federal government as Randy Weaver was, is akin to worrying about the mattress tag you removed.

A gentleman in Texas was railroaded because he sold a gun to an Illegal Alien, that had a (provided as part of the Sting ?) Texas Drivers Liecense.

The BATFE is general in lower than a pregnant cockroach, so is the Judge in question, the Federal Procescutors, and the Jurors,IMO.

liecense.Peaceable Texans for Firearms Rights
website: http://www.io.com/~velte/pt.htm

In Federal District Court on July 20, 2010, the ATF won a conviction from an Austin jury that defies logic and reason. In a trial before Federal Judge Sam Sparks, government lawyers conceded Texas resident Paul Copeland did not know his buyer was an illegal alien, but the jury they should convict him anyway because he "had reasonable cause to believe" he was selling to an illegal alien because the two men and a boy who were present at his table at the time of the sale: 1) were Hispanic, 2) spoke Spanish, and 3) wore cowboy clothing. And the jury did as asked. Assistant U.S. Attorney Jennifer Freel acted as lead prosecutor in the case.

The firearm transaction at issue occurred on January 16, 2010, at a gunshow at the North Austin Events Center, at 10601 N. Lamar Blvd., in Austin, Texas. Undercover ATF agents followed Mr. Huerta, his son, and another Hispanic male, Hipolito Aviles, around the "Texas Gunshow" that day, and claimed to observe Huerta’s transaction. Austin P.D. used Copeland’s case as the reason to close down the gunshow, leading to a protest by Austin residents in front of APD headquarters on January 25.

Mr. Copeland is a 56 year old Cedar Creek resident and Vietnam veteran who liked to buy, sell, and trade firearms as a hobby. On January 16, however, he had the misfortune to sell a handgun to Leonel Huerta Sr., who spoke both English and Spanish. Huerta Sr. negotiated his purchase from Copeland in English, showing Copeland his Texas Driver’s License. At Copeland’s trial Huerta admitted on the witness stand, that he is in the country illegally, (Huerta Sr. had previously admitted this fact to Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) Special Agent Leo Buentello). ATF Agent Shawn Kang claimed he saw Huerta later hand off the gun to Aviles. Despite these admissions, Huerta Sr. was never arrested, charged, or deported. Instead, his presence at the gunshow was used to entrap an American citizen into an unwitting violation of a federal gun control law. Huerta Sr., who is a resident of the City of Austin, appeared as a witness at the trial, admitted he was in the country illegally before federal prosecutors and a federal judge, yet he was allowed to leave the courtroom under his own power. To date Huerta Sr. has not been prosecuted for his purchase, possession, or disposition of the handgun he bought from Copeland, while Copeland is now a convicted felon.

"Instead of busting the illegal alien for buying, they bust the citizen for selling," commented Paul Velte, attorney and founder of Peaceable Texans for Firearms Rights, a gun-owners rights advocacy group from Austin. Velte asked, "who was in a better position to know the buyer’s immigration status, the buyer or the seller?" He also said, "What happened to Paul Copeland should enrage all Americans. The Federal Government is using illegal aliens to entrap citizens lawfully exercising their right to sell firearms. The illegal alien walks free, but the citizen gets convicted. The same government charged with controlling immigration is the one using illegal immigrants to attack its own citizens. Does this make any sense? It makes no sense unless the purpose is to discourage attendance at gunshows and frighten citizens from selling their firearms to other citizens."

Velte pointed out that "There is no way for a citizen to know who is here legally or not. In fact, under Austin’s ‘sanctuary city’ policy, not even the police officer at the door of the gunshow was allowed to ask a person’s immigration status, yet the average Texan inside the show is expected to assume that a person standing before them with a Texas driver’s license is in the country illegally just because they look Mexican and speak Spanish." Velte noted that the federal government’s lawsuit against Arizona was based on that very type of conduct: Concluding someone could be here illegally based on their looks or their language. Velte said gun owners in his group are outraged, and they want to know:

1. Why is the illegal alien who purchased the gun, Leonel Huerta Sr., still living in Austin?

2. Why does he still have a Texas Driver’s license?

3. Why is ATF using illegal aliens to set up and convict American citizens?

4. What has he been promised for his cooperation?

5. Why has he not been prosecuted? He committed three distinct crimes: he purchased a firearm knowing he was an illegal alien, he possessed the firearm, and he transferred the handgun to another illegal alien (Hippolito Aviles, who was convicted and given time served on June 30, 2010).

6. Why has Huerta Sr. not been deported?

Judge Sparks sentenced Copeland on August 27 to six months confinement and 24 months of probation, and called Copeland "a liar" for not admitting guilt. ATF confiscated Copeland’s entire gun collection and initiated forfeiture proceedings. Copeland was also fired from his job due to the indictment, and he would have lost his home to foreclosure, if not for his family stepping in to pay his mortgage while he serves his sentence.
__________________

That was a good one

Mike, my tendency would be to agree with you . . . except for the fact that the potential buyer is from IL, where they have some very "different" firearms laws. If, for whatever reason, the buyer should run afoul of the law, it might rebound on the seller.

Can't speak for myself as there is a paperwork trail for anything over 50 yrs old (bound book)and I wouldn't dare risk it.Kinda like my freedom,nice wine and sex with women,my understanding is none of that available in a federal prison.

For a unlicensed individual the risk/reward is different,but from Jerry's-the sellers side he get the funds one way or the other.The buyer has to pay $35 (should be no tax on the gun value) and he might be able to find some dealer who would do it cheaper.

This is Ill, but NJ has the same restrictive gun laws.

False Imprisonment
New Jersey’s gun laws aren’t merely restrictive, they are gratuitously punitive


http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/258108/false-imprisonment-robert-verbruggen?page=1

Guess he could check his Missouri visa card.....

I absolutely agree with Mike, this is like worrying over a mattress tag. Why even bring it up.

Mike, my tendency would be to agree with you . . . except for the fact that the potential buyer is from IL, where they have some very "different" firearms laws. If, for whatever reason, the buyer should run afoul of the law, it might rebound on the seller. [/quote]

First, do we know if Jerry has filled out a 4473 on this gun?
A backwards trace would lead back to him.
Second,assuming its not federal plant,or "un documneted democrat(illegal alien) with a d/l,what happens if the gun gets stolen from that buyer?Again the black suburbans are in Jerry's driveway.

Jerry has all the risk,whatever it is, and none of the reward (the buyers saves shipping and $35)

I hadn't considered using the NRA for a question like this. Great advice Bill. Thanks

Who breaks the law; the transferor or the transferee? Both?...Geo

Both

OK, I'll agree with that, but what if somebody from Alabama meets me in my home State of GA and we swap some guns. My gun is pre-1898, so there is no problem and I just hand it over to him. His gun is modern and subject to Gun Control.

How about if we enter into a written agreement to the effect that I have his power of attorney to transfer the gun to myself through an FFL and that I am accepting his gun ON LOAN till I can do that. Can I then take the gun to my local dealer who maybe I can talk into doing the transfer from me as atty-in-fact for the guy in Alabama through the FFL and to me, individually, just as if the other guy had mailed the gun to the FFL? If not, why not?...Geo

Ok,
first your pre 1898 is not a gun per BATF so your fine there.
the second part is "dicey",he can loan it to you yes but this POA (I would guess a Specific POA-so you don't clean out his bank account) is an lot of work (I have had POA,it involved several lawyers,signatures and time)why not just do the transfer with your dealer friend ?Cheaper ,faster and legal.

To expand on your good who broke the law question.How about who has the most risk and end up in front of a judge?
I say seller (if its a set-up,if not gun gets stolen form this buyer or some other one down the line)

And who had the most to gain?
I would say Neither
Buyer get his fund either way
Seller saves $35 (minus gas)

Don't get me wrong,I am no angel,tell me about you son in-laws company getting a take over bid next week and I am all ears (the risk reward is much better)

Well......there goes the Tulsa gun show for me........

My questions were not just hypothetical, another guy and I are actually considering meeting at a mutually agreeable place between our hometowns so we can 'eye-ball' the guns we're considering swapping. Naturally it would be nice to finish the deal when we meet, instead of him having to go home and ship or both of us having to go find an unfamiliar FFL. I can draw a proper POA to fit the situation with no trouble. No necessity for a notary public or other witnesses to sign. Trouble might be getting my local scaredy-cat FFL to do the transfer under these circumstances.

Unless there is some regulation I'm not aware of preventing the Power of Attorney/ Loan agreement, I can't see right off why it couldn't be done that way...IF the FFL will buy into it. I'd have to work that out in advance.

Expanding the idea, it could be utilized in any inter-state gun sale transaction. Risk might be that the buyer may fail to ever go document the transfer through an FFL since he has possession of the gun anyhow. In that case, the seller ought to be protected by the Loan status of the gun pending the FFL transfer. If the buyer got caught somehow without ever having documented the transfer, the trouble should just be on him...Geo

Your correct,the problem,besides getting a seller to sign a POA,is going to be at the dealer.
They have to book the gun,acquisition through you has a POA for seller,the book it out to you after you do the 4473 and NICS check.
If you like most of us who buy older guns,and the gun over 50 years old,you might consider a C&R license George.You can buy a gun (C&R) anywhere then.

C&R might be the answer, but I hate the idea of the hassle and of getting put on THE LIST. Besides, lots of good guns aren't C&R qualified...Geo

THE LIST of paranoids? The BATF didn't kick my door in the first three yrs. I re-upped and it's still standing. Documented as 50 yrs. old covers a lot of the guns we're interested in here. "On the list" appears to be a lot of milsurp and some special "chestnuts" which we're maybe not so much (interested in here). For the thirty bucks, why not take a chance? Your govmint may not think you're really all that consequential except as a revenue cow.

If I was driving one of those Suburbans and I found out you were creating documents justifying the temporary possession of firearms and looking for FFLs to "buy in" after the fact of the (physical) transfer, I might think you were trying to raise the red flag on yourself.

jack

If you're talking about setting up to sell there, you can do that. You just can't deliver there. Has to go from you to an FFL of the buyer's choice. And you can buy there as well, but you can't walk out the door with the gun unless it's an Oklahoma dealer who's selling to you. Otherwise, has to go from a non-Oklahoma dealer at the show, or a private party selling at the show, to your local FFL.

Think I got that right . . .

I have had mine for over 12 yrs and so far its been great.
Like Jack said lots of stuff we buy is available,like any gun made before 1961 (lots of the best Superposed for instance).Discounts at Brownells and other places more then make up for the 30 bucks.

I figured with all the guns I bought before I was already on "The List",so much easier to bid on and buy guns from out of state and they ship them right to your door.Just a simple bound book to fill in,takes three minutes.

Larry, I think Bob could work a deal at the show with a Oklahoma FFL to do transfers through that dealer at the show.I have seen that done at other shows for out of state dealers.

Actually, at Tulsa I was thinking more of floor trades. But once, before I had a CC&R, I worked out a deal where an Oklahoma dealer walked my new gun over to a Missouri dealer after I paid. We did the NICS thing and I brought my gun home. No names but these guys were both well known and reputable dealers. The dealers both seemed to think that was OK and they are still both very much in business.

That is common practice at gun shows and as far as I can tell perfectly legal.

Oh my Gawd, and I thought our Canadian regulations are a
problem at times but at least it all comes under one Federal Law so we don't have to worry about inter provincial regs like you guys do with crossing State lines.
Mike

FWIW, I went to my favorite local gun shop/FFL today to see about doing a transfer on a gun I'm thinking about buying from out of state. For years, this has been the cheapest place around for transfers and they have raised their price for the transfer to $135. For a shotgun!

Gee whiz, Rabbit! I figure you aren't much taken with my latest 'bright idea'. Well, it might be that being LOANED a shotgun for the real purpose of beating the intent of the Gun Control Act on inter-state transfers might just fail to qualify a a "valid sporting purpose", but it seems to meet the BATF's advice in the FAQs Dave quoted a page back...Geo

True, Mikey . . . but I've heard horror stories about your Canadian health insurance if you happen to be in a province other than your own.

I am always amazed that how some folks take simple problems and make them complicated.

John Boyd

May be I overreacted, George. It's too bad that some 01 licencees gouge for the bucks. It's too bad there isn't a ceiling on the cost of the check and transfer. It's not so bad that there are a lot of smalltimers around who still have good enuf nerves to do the transfer for 25$. Regarding the 03 Curio & Relic license, I agree with the poster who admonished that it won't get you on any "list" that you couldn't make simply by filling out a 4473. You certainly have a right to air your idea and seek advice on the legality of same.

jack

Thanks Jack! It was probably just a dumb idea anyway, but I'll be durned if I can see the valid public purpose served by a Federal law preventing two old guys from adjacent states from swapping old fashioned sxs shotguns. Just like the tax code; no harm looking for honest 'loopholes'...Geo

If you own firearms, and intended to keep them, you are on the "List" already.

Sounds like you two need to loan each other those guns George. I sure hope they don't go the way of some of my fly fishing books I've loaned.

FWIW...We ended up arranging the sale through a Missouri FFL dealer.

Neither of us wanted to take the risks of a possible legal violation.

Thanks for everone's input.

JERRY

Thanks for letting us know how it worked out.I think you did the right thing.

You said a mouthful there, Bob! As much as I love the quest for new old guns, it seems that as soon as they go in my safe, I'm 'over'em' and begin plotting a swap for something else. By the way, I no longer "loan" books; I gift them to people I believe will enjoy them, and If I happen to get them back I am truly uplifted...Geo