doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com No FFL required ?

I recently offered to purchase a shotgun from a seller who resides in the same state as I, but he insisted it go to a Licensed dealer to be transferred. The unnecessary infringement and associated fee blocked the deal.

What do the rest of you living here in the U.S. think about going through with such a transaction?

If not required by state law, it's as negotiable as the price.

It would have to be a screaming deal or something I couldn't find elsewhere for me to put up with it.

I've done direct transfers regularly in South Carolina where it is unquestionably legal under US and SC law to directly transfer a firearm from one SC resident to another SC resident.

Some states have more restrictive laws and require an FFL to handle transfers.

If it was a firearm I wanted I might go through the FFL but would require the seller to pay all fees because it was his choice to use an FFL - otherwise no deal.

Most of the firearms I've purchased have been from out-of-state, including one several weeks ago, so they must be shipped to my FFL under US law.

Gosh, I think it depends on how much you want the gun. It would only be a show stopper for me if I was "on the fence" about it. Otherwise I can recite many cases of jumping thru much more difficult hurdles to purchase a special gun over the years. I remember driving for 10 hours one way on a rifle the seller wouldn't ship and wanted a face-to-face delivery. As the paperwork and cost are really inconsequential, I'm betting you weren't that much in love with it. Regardless, there's another one out there. Good luck...

Its legal in GA. I once did a face to face Parker/Lefever trade with a poster here from Alabama. We met at my farm and rounded up a local gunsmith who was watching a nascar race to bless the transaction...Geo

Some sellers don't know the law. Some think that by using a ffl the automatic background check will get them off the hook if you do something later which proves to get the LEO or BATF involved. Many FFL s will want a fee from you and the seller to run it through his books then you must pay state sales taxes if he runs it through his books because if he get audited for sales taxes he will be held liable for not collecting and remitting that sales tax to them. Had a ffl friend who owed a lot of money because he did not collect sales taxes on just these type transactions. State said the fact he made only the transfer fee did not mean he did not have to collect sales taxes. They pointed out if he sold a gun at a loss he would still have to collect taxes so the fact he made zero on the gun was irreverent.

So it comes down to more than one ffl fee. Be honest with yourself. Few guns are going to be worth this amount of hassle and extra expense. When in doubt just keep looking another gun will be along shortly. Private sales are fine unless they get more complex than they are worth.

Depends where you are. In CA, all transfers "must" go thru an FFL, even inheritances. Paperwork costs can easily go $200-$400, even for a POS parts gun.

I get this crap from some sellers even with verifiable pre-1899 antiques. In this case, my FFL gives me a copy of his FFL license, and I forward it to the obstinate seller who is too dumb to understand the law. I have the gun shipped to my FFL. When it arrives, I go there and open it to show him it doesn't require a transfer. He gives me the gun, and I give him $10 or $15 as a tip for accepting delivery. He does not enter it in his book because it isn't required.

There have been some instances where the requirement to do an unnecessary transfer intrastate has been a deal breaker for me. It isn't required by law for long guns in my state, so hard-headed sellers who insist upon it can just keep their gun unless it is a screaming deal.

The whole FFL xfer thing is a mess for sure. But as more and more transactions go thru more and more sellers are gonna have a gun that is already on the books. AFA the tax goes if you're telling the FFL what you really paid for the gun you deserve to pay the tax.
Hearing people talk about the FFL thing usually leaves the impression that they think no one knows they have a gun and that avoiding the FFL will ensure that. Certainly suggestive of a mental deprivation of some sort.
FFLs don't worry me and if I have a gun that's already on the books it is most certainly leaving thru one.

FWIW - - - KY Jon speaks the truth. You don't want the FFL then you outta luck on a buncha stuff.

I'm going on 64 and maybe it's that I'm turning into one of those grumpy old men. No Doubt! So I see it this way: since about 1963 we have been trying to keep and defend our second amendment rights and of late we have been making some progress. I just feel rolling over for some hand wringer to get a gun I want is selling out. The fee or tax or record be damned. I'll do without it and enjoy the continuing search.

What was it old Ben said? "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety (or expedience), deserve neither Liberty nor Safety".

Like most states its legal in PA to transfer long guns between individuals.

However its up to me to decide whether or not I sell the gun to you. In this case I highly doubt that would happen other than the guy was trying to be difficult or ignorant of the law.

I am so old I remember when any pistol or long gun which predated 1968 carried a higher off the books value. Like a 1911 .45 which might be worth $200 would bring $250 if the buyer knew it was not in the system and no serial number could be traced back to the owner. Those days lasted about a decade but was real while it lasted. I just wished I could have afforded to buy more of them back then. I wasted my money on Fox small bores for a few hundred dollars. My favorite were the 16's in mint condition for 250-350 because everyone knew ammo was not going to be made for them soon.

In NY under the safeact you have t go through a FFL but I don't know anyone that is complying with the law. Everyone does things the way they used to.

That sounds good . . . until you're the first one to run afoul of a law enforcement officer who goes by the book.

Or that gun gets stolen from the guy you sold it to and then they ask where he got it from and he says he bought it directly from you. Then you have to answer to law enforcement.
Though you may not agree with the law, it is always best to follow them and do what you are supposed to.

In states where person to person sales are legal, a seller requiring a background check either is ignorant of the law or just would like to know that the buyer will pass a background check. Not all that unreasonable if the buyer is completely unknown to the seller.

For a deal to be blown over a background check and transfer fee, you must not want the gun bad enough. Besides, if the seller is insisting on the FFL transfer, then they should be willing to absorb the dealer transfer fee.

In states where the sale is legal, I think the adding of unnecessary requirements is unreasonable.

If it truly is a sale, somehow or another, it will be the buyer that has to absorb any fees. If cost causes a buyer to not want something bad enough, then the goal of control is being attained. I don't think the original person expressed that the money caused the deal to fall through. Reasonable people may have differing, but just as valid points of view.

This statement would include the majority of private sales, and virtually all sales done at gun shows. I've watched at gun shows as gang-bangers directed a girl-friend or buddy (presumably without a record) to purchase a handgun. The background check is done, and the straw purchaser hands the gun to the gang-banger after the purchase is complete. This shows me that Background Checks do nothing to keep guns out of the wrong hands. They only create a data base of law abiding gun owners.

Same goes double for the scenario where a gun was stolen. It doesn't matter a bit whether the rightful owner of the gun went through a Background Check. The felon who stole the gun didn't, and the fact that the original sale complied with the law does nothing to keep it from being used in a crime by the person who now has it.

This line of logic could easily be extended to the act of selling a car or truck to someone who lived in Yemen or Syria just because they might use it to plow into a crowd of people.



This depends a lot on the total value of the gun in question. Some FFL's want a ridiculous $40 to $50 or more to do a ten minute transfer. This could easily amount to half the value of a cheap .22 rifle or single shot shotgun that you might want to buy to leave out in the barn or garage. But the transfer fee I paid for the double rifle I just bought was a negligible part of the entire cost. A few years ago, I bought a very disassembled Lefever shotgun action and parts. Enough of the gun was missing that it would never be restored. I told the seller to just send me the internal parts, and to keep the frame because the additional $25.00 for a transfer did not make economic sense. Remember, when the GCA of 1968 was passed, an Antique pre-1899 gun was 69 years or older. Now the same Antique must be 118 years old, or older.

Prevention of more of this stupidity is yet another reason to join the NRA, and to not vote for anti-2nd Amendment Democrats.