Gun leasing: Would you do it?


PDA






DMK
August 5, 2007, 04:22 PM
What if gun companies offered leasing like they have for cars. You go to your gunshop, pick out your gun, and take it home. You can carry it, shoot it, compete with it, hunt with it, keep it in your home for SD, or whatever. However, you can not modify it or do anything to it except clean it. (Accessories and optics available and included at time of lease)

If there is anything wrong with it (excluding abuse), they will fix it or replace it at no additional cost.

At the end of a period (let's say a one year or a certain number of rounds whichever comes first) you turn the gun back it and do it all over again with another.

Would you do it?

If you enjoyed reading about "Gun leasing: Would you do it?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
fletcher
August 5, 2007, 04:23 PM
I'd much rather own my gun (and anything else in my possession) outright. So, no, I wouldn't do that.

CajunBass
August 5, 2007, 04:27 PM
I'd say it would depend on how much they wanted for a lease. Let's face it most guns are relatively inexpensive. How much would you pay to use one for (example) a year, vs owning it for as long as you wanted?

JP from Phoenix
August 5, 2007, 04:30 PM
I think it would be a good idea short term for a couple of months to try things out but the way guns depreciate it would probably be a bad deal for everyone just like leasing pretty much anything

Blackbeard
August 5, 2007, 04:30 PM
Leasing doesn't get me grandfathered in against bans, so I'll own.

fastbolt
August 5, 2007, 04:37 PM
I know of one major manufacturer who was considering such a program, if not offering it, to LE agencies.

The basic idea was to lease the weapons for a specific number of years, and then the agencies would have the option of either exchanging them for new models, renewing the lease, or else buy them at a significantly depreciated rate.

Interesting idea for LE weapons procurement.

lee n. field
August 5, 2007, 04:44 PM
If there is anything wrong with it (excluding abuse), they will fix it or replace it at no additional cost.


That's what warranties are for.

A gun won't get clapped out under normal use withing a few years like a car would. I expect to keep my current guns for the rest of my life.

SG Merc
August 5, 2007, 05:02 PM
I'm kinda feeling the same way CajunBass does. Guns aren't that expensive and a leasing program would have to be pretty inexpensive for it to be a benefit to the borrower.

Plus you'd be opening yourself to the position of allowing a company to demand the return of all the guns they own at their (or the government's) leisure.

The way I see it: Guns that are in private hands should be personal property, and not owned by a company or the state.

jeepmor
August 5, 2007, 05:09 PM
oops, double tap.

jeepmor
August 5, 2007, 05:11 PM
If you could lease them for say, a month or so to hurl enough lead downrange to get a good feel for it, then yes, I'd consider it.

For a year, no. I won't even lease a car because ownership has it's privileges, leasing means you have to treat everything like an egg. I'm hard on eggs.

I do think it's a great idea for LE agencies. Having a manufacturer take care of the service is usually a good deal. Unless of course, it's a car, then no, dealerships notoriously have the worst mechanics. On that note, well, maybe I should rescind the manufacturer statement.:scrutiny:

tinygnat219
August 5, 2007, 05:19 PM
I hate throwing away money on something like a lease. At the end of the period, you don't own anything. Purchasing is MUCH better. I don't lease cars, places to live, or anything else.

Monthly payments to pay off a loan are a pain, but at the end of the loan, you have something.

Technosavant
August 5, 2007, 05:24 PM
Leasing is really only a good idea for those who prefer to swap cars pretty often, but it doesn't take much for that to be a bad financial decision (too many miles, one idiot with a slurpee in the backseat, etc.). You're pretty much just paying depreciation, maybe a touch more.

However, the situation you seem to be describing isn't a good leasing example- most guns won't depreciate significantly unless your round count gets to the point of wearing it out (sure used guns are worth less initially, but if the model range get significant changes, you can actually make money with them). The monthly fee would have to be incredibly low, lest you end up in a "rent to own" arrangement- where you end up renting it and slowly building up equity, but by the time you own it, you've paid 5x the actual original value.

There are other issues to work out- what if you have to use it for SD and the police keep it for extended periods as evidence? This would muddy the ownership waters.

Layaway makes more sense, especially when you can get a quality used gun for a couple hundred bucks. No point in leasing something that inexpensive.

fastbolt
August 5, 2007, 05:24 PM
I also can't see any relative benefit in ordinary folks leasing firearms.

First, they're still owned by someone else. That raises some interesting potential issues.

Second, there would likely be some manufacturers' provisions regarding prohibited/unapproved modifications, as well as potential monetary costs for 'excessive' wear, or perhaps the use of ammunition other than approved new/factory ammunition in the leased firearm.

I expect many individual, private owners wouldn't desire to be restricted to only using their firearms in the 'box-stock' condition ... much in the way many LE agencies impose such things upon their folks using issued weapons. ;)

Maybe it might be different if we were talking about a really high-end, big game hunting rifle, or shotgun ... or perhaps specially produced and modified competition pistols. Factory Custom Shop/Performance Center support and attention might be attactive for some competition-minded folks. Dunno.

Doesn't interest me, though. Aside from having issued weapons to withstand the daily rigors of work/duty activities, I also prefer to own my firearms.

alucard0822
August 5, 2007, 05:41 PM
For LE, or security forces, it would probably be a good idea, they basically would pay a monthly fee for weapons to use, and basically send broken ones in to be exchanged for refurbished ones. This high volume lease is similar to how companies would lease cars and sevice contracts for travelling sales men and women. Leasing a pistol or two to many individuals, like vehicle leases of this type has fairly high liability, and the leasee would pay for it as "insurance" against abuse, and defaults to the contract, as the leasing party has actual "ownership"of the firearm. To make it profitable, the entire cost of the gun would probably have to be paid thrugh lease payments in a fairly short ammount of time (1-2 years), with a down payment or security deposit to cover the loss in value between a NIB and "average condition used" gun, and reaquisition costs. To top it off you would probably be required to shoot only new manufactured ammo, and would be charged for any "neglect, excessive wear or abuse". For the average joe, renting a gun at the range for $5-$10 that you may be interested in is probably a better way of going about it, if you don't have the money right then and there, then perhaps buying with a credit card, and paying the bank back is a better way.

The Deer Hunter
August 5, 2007, 05:46 PM
The "thing" behind leases are the fact that cars break down. My guns don't, and you can sure as heck bet I wouldn't ever decide to use one that does.

iamkris
August 5, 2007, 05:47 PM
I see this as a viable program for those that don't become "attached" to their weapons.

LE, Security, etc. fall into that category.

A few shooters do too...potentially competitors that are high use, low sentimental value to their choices. This is a small segment, however.

A very few shooters may be high turn kinda folks...I'll bet that is a relatively small percentage.

If you are wanting to focus on non-LE type customers, the most viable biz models/use cases I see are

1) Try-before-you-buy type people -- for the person that is not sure they'll like the gun but want to get more time with it than range rentals can provide -- an "option to buy" may be viable here

2) New shooter programs - not sure if they'll like shooting and guns at all...low commitment for them -- an "option to buy" may be viable here

3) Don't have the money to buy lots of guns but want to play with a lot -- not crazy about this group

That's how I see it...and I voted "NO" to the poll

fastbolt
August 5, 2007, 06:01 PM
... the fact that cars break down. My guns don't, and you can sure as heck bet I wouldn't ever decide to use one that does.

Dunno about that.

I can certainly appreciate your sentiment, however.

Without trying to contradict your opinion and observation, I'd offer that when you're considering a fair number of similar make/model firearms, especially handguns, being in use by a cross section of different users, then it's not exactly unknown for mechanical issues to occasionally develop. Especially when you're talking about 100, 500, 2,500, 10,000 or more of them ... and especially when you're considering the wide range of owners/users which may be using them.

While a knowledgeable and experienced individual owner (or user), taking proper care of a firearm, may never experience such an issue, such issues may still sometimes occur ... and may more likely occur when less knowledgeable, experienced or prudent folks start using such firearms, which are just mechanical devices, after all.

Pick a brand/model/caliber of pistol in common service use by LE agencies and you can find examples of parts breakage, wear, etc., .etc. Things happen. That's one of the reasons most major manufacturers who do a lot of LE/Gov business have developed armorer training/certification programs and support. ;)

goings_51
August 5, 2007, 06:05 PM
I could see a market for say a 6 month lease program with tiers. You could trade within tiers as often as you want. For example: Tier 1 - $500 or less, Tier 2 - $501-$750, and so on.

You pay a fee, say 10% of the purchase price, for the top end of your tier. You take 1 gun to try out, take it home, clean it, carry it, etc. If you don't like it, try another. At the end of six months, hopefully, you know what you really want. It would be a lot cheaper than having to buy something to find out if you like it or not. Also, with renting you don't get to clean t or carry it. It may also work out to be cheaper for those that like to shoot a lot of different types of guns as well.

In any case, I can't see anyone actually doing this because of liability concearns.

VARifleman
August 5, 2007, 06:41 PM
No, for the same reason I won't lease a car...modification restrictions. I like the gun/car to work for me, not for who the designer thinks I am. I just chopped a bit off my shotgun stock and threw on a new buttpad. I like magwells on 1911s. I like my rifle stock that's been molded with pocket knives, files, and sandpaper. I like my MGW shifter. I like my big brakes. I don't believe in "well enough", it either works for you or it doesn't.

FuzzyBunny
August 5, 2007, 06:43 PM
I would like to rent a full auto for a month or so.

A corporation could do that with out much problem.

FuzzyBunny

arcticap
August 5, 2007, 07:02 PM
The only problem that I have with the idea is the name of the "transfer" being called a lease.
To me, it would be less of a lease and more like a "subsidized sale and guaranteed buy back program".
The ownership of the gun should actually be transferred in the event that the owner wants to keep the gun, with the user only paying for as long of a period of time as he decides to keep the gun.
Then, if he tires of it and decides to hand it in, the rest of the purchase price wouldn't need to be paid as long as the wear & tear was acceptable.
This would be part of the buy-back terms and conditions.
Some nice guns are very expensive, and this would make them more affordable to try them out and increase sales.
But to characterize a program like this as a lease doesn't sound right to me. I just can't see a potential criminal committing a crime with a "leased" gun. He would need to own it outright IMO, even if the purchase was subsidized by the manufacturer or seller.
Otherwise, I think that it's a good idea, particularly for expensive target pistols, target rifles, and expensive competition shotguns for trap, etc...

sacp81170a
August 5, 2007, 07:05 PM
VARifleman has it right. I'd no more lease a gun than I'd lease my clothes. I want it to fit me, not what someone else thinks is the best fit for the "average" person.

Scanr
August 5, 2007, 07:14 PM
I voted yes, but my thoughts were on renting. In Nevada we have to qualify with each type of gun on our ccw, I would want to shoot a type before I bought it.

Neo-Luddite
August 5, 2007, 07:32 PM
No--I wouldn't lease a vehicle either. I must admit though, it's an odd concept that hasn't been explored before. Now, I've heard that criminals rent guns--I've heard this repeated often as gospel--but I've always thought that a bit hard to swallow.

Even high-end guns are not out of reach of those of modest means in the way that a Corvette or Porche might be.

Feanaro
August 5, 2007, 07:36 PM
Pay money and then not own it? No thanks. Wouldn't do it with a car, wouldn't do it with a firearm. It is MUCH cheaper to buy, in the long run, and I don't have to deal with a list of "approved" modifications. Now, I might consider renting/leasing a double rifle if I were going on an African Safari... but I'd probably rather own it.

kd7nqb
August 5, 2007, 08:23 PM
I would do if for a few guns that I dont want to shell out big bucks for. For example I would gladly lease an FN 5.7 or a AR-15. Once I get out of school and have more cash I may prefer to buy. I also tend to like the newest coolest shiniest object so a lease would be a cool idea.

Glockman17366
August 5, 2007, 09:36 PM
This is a pretty dumb poll...

DMK
August 5, 2007, 09:49 PM
A few shooters do too...potentially competitors that are high use, low sentimental value to their choices. This is a small segment, however.
Actually, one of the first things that came to mind was the weekend IPSC competitor, CASS or High Power shooter. Lots of companies cater to the competition crowds with factory guns ready to hit the match out of the box.

Another thing I thought of was the guy or gal with the CCL. This would be a gun that's carried much, usually shot less (right or wrong, that's the majority). I see a lot of folks post that they want something bone stock because they are afraid of liability issues. You could get a brand new CCW every year, or lease one for a year to see how it works for you. The confiscation issue is a wrinkle though.

41magsnub
August 5, 2007, 09:54 PM
I don't own a gun that is less that 15 years old, most are older. In my experience guns are lifetime purchases to be used, abused, and handed down to my kids. A lease does not support that very well.

Ragnar Danneskjold
August 5, 2007, 10:21 PM
Yeah, I think leasing with cars is stupid. I'm not paying almost full price for something that I don't get to keep. Same with a gun. Count me out. Like tinygnat said, at the end of the period you don't own anything, but you're still out all that cash. That's retarded.

GRIZ22
August 5, 2007, 10:28 PM
When I was a LE firearms instructor there were always the few who I referred to as the "gun of the month" club. They had the idea that they could always shoot better with a new gun and by qualifying with it would justify their tax deduction.

Leasing guns would work for these folks as they usually sold their guns at a loss.

Geno
August 5, 2007, 10:33 PM
Don't even think about it. That is step one to no more personal gun ownership. I own all of mine, and that it the way it will remain. "From my cold, dead hands."

Bezoar
August 5, 2007, 10:46 PM
I dont see how it could work out. In order to actually get the gun, you have to have it registered to me. And well if the gun is registered to you, how can the lending gun company be able basically sieze the gun back every year?
As it stands they really couldnt it, registration stays in your name till you sell it, so 1 of 2 htings would have to happen.

1, all gun laws be changed so that the firearms maker can legally seieze any gun they want at any time.
2. the loaning gun company would be quilty of straw purchasing if the gun stays registered to them...

Theory says that if a new model/mandated government add on like say mandatory electric gunlocks is passed by the government, any of the loaner guns could be siezed by the factory adn replaced with the new requirements putting lives at risk.
And what about a loaner car when the car is at the shop? Id hate to be loaning a SW Performance center 44 magnum and get stuck with a lorcin or jennings in 22lr for 8 months as a loaner gun.

Feanaro
August 5, 2007, 10:51 PM
Don't even think about it. That is step one to no more personal gun ownership.

Alright, come on now. Might as well say rented guns are going to destroy our rights.

busy_squirrel
August 6, 2007, 02:04 AM
I would for handguns.

1 or 2 months, 3 max

<$50, that's about the margin of depreciation on a cheap gun bought new and sold used. So as long as it's cheaper than purchasing from a dealer with tax minus selling private party.

I dunno if I would if they had max rds. allowed though. It's nothing at all to put 500 rds. through a new gun in two weeks. So maybe if the limit was over 1500 rds, then I'd be ok.

Bunkerbuster
August 6, 2007, 02:59 AM
It all depends on how they SET residual and depreciation and Interest/MoneyFactor.

I know the firearm usually have a low depreciation, so I think it might be a better idea to just purchase it. However, I will lease some firearm, if it is one of those firearms that I wanna "see" how good it functions and etc.

chris in va
August 6, 2007, 05:25 AM
I'd LOVE to try out different guns for a week. See how they fit, shoot, carry, conceal. It would certainly cut down on all these impulse buys and wasted money resales.

HippieCrusher
August 6, 2007, 02:32 PM
Leasing anything is a horrible idea.

MT GUNNY
August 6, 2007, 03:22 PM
If I were thinking about buying a very pricey firearm, I might rent it to try it out first.

MattB000
August 6, 2007, 04:08 PM
A lot of the responses assume it would end up costing more overall to lease. With a car, when the lease term is up, you usually have the option of either turning in the car or buying it outright. What a lot of people don't know is, when you buy it at the end of the lease, it doesn't actually end up costing more. Sometimes it is actually less expensive to do that way! (That is known as a lease incentive). Assuming the "gun lease" would work the same, then yes, I would consider leasing a gun.

If you enjoyed reading about "Gun leasing: Would you do it?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!