Store bought vs private party purchase

[augustino]

Okay someone please help me understand something. I'm hearing from several people that when one purchases a firearm they are better off buying it from a personal party, an individual INSTEAD of buying from a store or dealer. I ask why. They say, should the government or anyone in power for that matter, decide to confiscate weapons they'll know where to go and who has them IF you bought from a store or dealer.

BUT if bought from a private party there is no papertrail. It kind of sounds like paranoia and bunk.
I mean if you buy from a private party who bought that firearm from a dealer, a papertrail already exists. So should anyone go to that private party and ask for their firearm, they would say they sold it.
Can't anyone say they sold it just as the person you purchased from?
I do NOT think it will ever come to that but I've been wrong too many times prior to swear to much.

 

[Balrog]

No one knows the answer to your question.

I guess if you say you sold your gun when the jack booted thugs come knocking, it will boil down to whether or not they believe you.

If they don't believe you, they will probably burn your house down, rape your dog, and slap your wife while they look for it.

 

[mljdeckard]

I've done it both ways. I've sold high-scrutiny firearms face-to-face, no names exchanged, cash at a gun show.

It is actually against the law for the federal government to compile data from background checks to form a database of gun purchases. However, there is some history of the federal government cheating on those rules, and some loopholes too.

Ask yourself this: Which situation is more likely? You need a gun to defend yourself, or The Man coming around to collect your guns?

 

[wilkersk]

...It is actually against the law for the federal government to compile data from background checks to form a database of gun purchases. However, there is some history of the federal government cheating on those rules, and some loopholes too....

Yep! BATFE is actually doing "gun traces" for Mexico (and about 12 other central and south American countries that claim straw buyers here are providing their criminal populations with firearms), based on data that arguably should not legally exist as a compiled database, but does.

I've bought from dealers and bought and sold through private sale. The handguns that I've bought through private sale have new barrels. 1 because I wanted a 5" target barrel for my newly acquired P22, and the other (a Kimber) becuase I wanted a match grade barrel custom fitted to it for SS competition. It doesn't hurt that I've gotten rid of 2 barrels that have someone else's history attached to them.

I'm not a tinfoil hat type. But, I can easily see a day when the city of XX requires me to register my handguns.

 

[kanook]

You changed the barrels, but you can't change the serial #.

If the firearm was recorded as being used in a crime, you're still busted.

 

[beatcop]

I think we are all prone to thinking the worst at times, but wholesale confiscation is unlikely:

Number of firearms in the US: 223 Million
(Source: US Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Guns Used in Crime, 7/95, from ATF data)

Could there be some kind of localized problem? Possible, but not probable. Based on the recent scotus rulings it looks like the right has been re-established. If it makes you feel better go for it.

 

[X-Rap]

I don't see it happening as a mass confiscation plan but more of a stratified surrender of firearms. Or maybe a tax that becomes unbearable.

 

[buck1032]

Mostly I prefer private sales over "store bought" mainly due to price. A used gun, more often than not can be bought cheaper than a new one. As far as paper trails, I think the Gooberment already knows I am a firearm owner. LOL

 

[StarDust1]

I think we are all prone to thinking the worst at times, but wholesale confiscation is unlikely:

Number of firearms in the US: 223 Million
(Source: US Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Guns Used in Crime, 7/95, from ATF data)

Could there be some kind of localized problem? Possible, but not probable. Based on the recent scotus rulings it looks like the right has been re-established. If it makes you feel better go for it.

I'm no tinfoil-capster myself, however I'm also old enough and wise enough to never say never, no matter how unlikely it may appear a possibility.
About 100-miles south of where I live the BATFE stung a car salesman for running an ongoing strawman gun operation(Hudson WI), his attorney mounted the defense that they had violated the 2nd Amendment and compiled an illegal database of his purchases over a period of approximately two-years!
I can see them going back a few months, say six, on strong evidence of ongoing criminal activity, but two-years?

 

[smince]

Since the .gov does such an outstanding job keeping up with:

A. Terrorists on the watch list
B. Sex Offenders
C. Illegal Immigrants
D. Criminals in genreal

I'm not really sure that several million gun owners need to worry over it very much

 

[Prion]

I think smince is right, we're giving our gooberment (thanks Buck) too much credit. They can't keep terrorists off planes with bombs in hand. Since when did we start believing our government was competent enough to pull off something as big as collecting 223 million firearms?

 

[huntsman]

Store bought vs private party purchase

I see no reason to support the beast (.gov) that now is trying to undermine our constitutional rights, unless it’s the only way to get the gun of your choice. My choice would be private sales as often as possible.

 

[X-Rap]

I think smince is right, we're giving our gooberment (thanks Buck) too much credit. They can't keep terrorists off planes with bombs in hand. Since when did we start believing our government was competent enough to pull off something as big as collecting 223 million firearms?

Some how the cumulative effect of our local, state, and federal government manages to separate most of us from 50% of what we earn so I would guess a similar system would be effective in rounding up a couple hundred million guns.

 

[44Dave]

BUT if bought from a private party there is no papertrail. It kind of sounds like paranoia and bunk.
I mean if you buy from a private party who bought that firearm from a dealer, a papertrail already exists. So should anyone go to that private party and ask for their firearm, they would say they sold it.
Can't anyone say they sold it just as the person you purchased from?
I do NOT think it will ever come to that but I've been wrong too many times prior to swear to much.

If you were doing this to avoid a paper trail, you would, ideally, not give out your true identity.

 

[rundm]

People need to get their heads out of the sand. Alot of people in other countries did not think that they would ever have to give up their guns either. They also had rights as you do now. There is nothing that says the gov can not vote on some type of law that would make it cost prohibitive for people to keep guns. I had a hard time believing that they would be able to pass such a pos bill as the health care plan. How much money do you think is involved in that? Finding out who has/have guns legally would not be all that big a challenge to them. Yes, they would not get all of them but they would surely get alot of them and from alot of different people. They still do have a very solid majority in both chambers of congress. There is no reason whatsoever, if you can find what you are looking for, not to buy something from an individual as long as it is clean and doesnt have an illegal history behind it. That is the problem with alot of private transactions. You need to be able to make sure what you are getting is clean. That is why I buy from friends and people that have long histories on certain boards that come with recommendations from others.

 

[hk boy]

this is a non-issue
the gov. has other ways of spying on you....


cliff
www.texasgunowner.com

 

[X-Rap]

rundm, you bring up an interesting point about origins/history of a gun. I have on more than one occasion had the numbers run or recorded on a gun or guns in my possession and am glad they were not on some list of stolen guns.
Even when buying from friends and relatives if the gun hasn't had a check run on it and the history is not totally known and it shows to be stolen you could be held up to a good deal of suspicion at the very least and it would give ample cause for a warrant if the law wanted to see what you had.
The times mine were checked or recorded were traffic stops and checks by Fish and Game on a Reservation. No great criminal acts just routine stops where I had a gun in the same place as my registration and felt it best to notify the trooper.
Just a thought.

 

[Gatorbait]

Someone above comented: "BATFE is actually doing "gun traces" for Mexico (and about 12 other central and south American countries that claim straw buyers here are providing their criminal populations with firearms), based on data that arguably should not legally exist as a compiled database, but does." BATFE is able only to find out to whom the distributor sold the guns--presumably to an FFL. Nothing wronf with that.

I've begun to learn that paranoia makes the hours pass too slowly. I also value a manfacturer's warranty more than I fear a trace. I suppose if I want to do a private buy to avoid tracking, but still get the warranty, I'll buy someone's Hi-Point.

You all know about throw-down guns, I trust. Buy one from the dealer. When the boys in black come on a confiscation mission, give 'em that one.

 

[Stophel]

They already know who I am, I'm already on the Lone Wolf Extremist, Bible-clinging, gun-packing, right wing radical watch list, so what difference would it make if they knew about one more gun that I had?

 

[rocky branch]

In Illinois, each private must have a firearms owners ID and keep a personal record of each transaction 10 years.
If a gun ends up in a trace and comes back to you with no records of you transferring it, you in trouble.

 

[CoRoMo]

If private individuals would stock the guns that I am interested in, keep them NIB and at a good price, I'd buy.

 

[Ohio Gun Guy]

......the bullets first......

 

[frontgate1]

paranoia and bunk

 

[X-Rap]

Nothing matters after the boating accident.

 

[Dokkalfar]

Actually, most of those traces are, I believe, BATFE going to the manufacturer: What distributor did this go to? Distributor: what dealer did this go to? Dealer:you're legally required to keep 4473s for forever. We need to see them. Ah, so this is the last known person to own this SN!

Theoretically, anyway

Anyways, all boat hull fails aside (and forgetting the conspiracies for a moment), buying private vs new has both pros and cons for each.

New:
+ Manufacturer's warranty.
+ NIB: no rust, firing mechanism damage, dirt, missing parts, etc.
+ Shiny!
+ Dealers can special-order that odd firearm you like from the manufacturer.
- Your name is on the FFL's books, so if you sell and crimes occur, BATFE will talk to you.
- More expensive.
- You bought it, well, you bought it.
- Waiting periods/NICS*

Used:
+ Cash exchanged for firearm. No NICS: no wait.
+ Cheaper.
+ Depending on how well you know the seller, 'test-drive' before purchase.
- Not new. Hence, barrel wear, nicks, scratches, potential for catastrophic cylinder failure.



Overall, If you're looking at a firearm you plan on using alot, or depending on for your personal safety, a new firearm is a good choice. More dependable, with a warranty. If its something you're picking up to play around with at the range, a used one should be fine.
Unless, of course, you have no clue about checking it for any signs of wear or rust, in which case only buy used if you know the guy and trust him.


*I'm not saying NICS is necessarily bad (background check is nice) but the waiting time sucks, and if you get a false flag you're in for a painful ride fixing it. Hence, on a purchaser's personal level, its a (-).