Cable lock scam

[HKMadness]

I am so sick of gun stores who spread FUD to try and nickel and dime their customers. My friend just bought a gun from Discount Gun Mart in San Diego and they wouldn't let him walk out without either:

1) A "CA DOJ approved" lock purchased within the last 30 days AND with a receipt to prove it.

or

2) Buy a cable lock from them.

This is for a gun WITH an integral locking system by the way. A reputable shop like Parallax Tactical will just use the ILS, but I guess some gun shops just go the extra mile to suck.

Your friend should've gone and bought a $5 lock from Wally land and returned it after getting his gun, if he already had a lock. If not, he should have one. Was this a ppt? I did a ppt at turdners last week and I outsmarted them I took one of my DOJ cable locks and key, gave it to the seller to include with the sale, and confirmed I had in writing that an approved lock was included, thus I didn't have to buy one.

[kmca]

Thanks Librarian

[Steve1968LS2]

that assertion.

But without BATF actually doing its job and providing regulations, it's safer for a selling FFL to act as if BATF's interpretation is correct.

But almost no FFLs (none that I deal with) will accept the safe affidavit in lieu of a new cable lock..

Given that the practical result is that you are forced to buy a lock, even if you have a safe.

Right?

[HKMadness]

Turners told me a safe affidavit is unacceptable for a handgun, lock still required. Should I just refer them next time to that post?

[ke6guj]

Turners told me a safe affidavit is unacceptable for a handgun, lock still required. Should I just refer them next time to that post?

to what post? Did you actually read the thread where it was stated that the federal handgun lock law does not recognize the safe affidavit?

[Librarian]

But almost no FFLs (none that I deal with) will accept the safe affidavit in lieu of a new cable lock..

Given that the practical result is that you are forced to buy a lock, even if you have a safe.

Right?

That's the practical effect of my last line:

But without BATF actually doing its job and providing regulations, it's safer for a selling FFL to act as if BATF's interpretation is correct.

There's no good business reason for an individual FFL to challenge the BATF on this. Life is expensive and complicated enough.

OTOH, if there were some organization of FFLs, it might be worthwhile to sue BATF to write regs and get them into the comment phase...

[r8dr rider]

Go to the local PD station pick up a few free gun locks and don't open them. Everytime you buy a gun take the unopened gun lock. Works everytime!

[Hipster Mike]

there was a charge for a cable lock on my receipt even though the xd9 essentials package came with one.

[EBR Works]

there was a charge for a cable lock on my receipt even though the xd9 essentials package came with one.

..because the lock that was included with the firearm is not on California's approved list of firearms safety devices.

[Steve1968LS2]

Go to the local PD station pick up a few free gun locks and don't open them. Everytime you buy a gun take the unopened gun lock. Works everytime!

Every FFL I've dealt with also wants a reciept to show it was obtained in the last 30 days. So fire up the printer

[Steve1968LS2]

..because the lock that was included with the firearm is not on California's approved list of firearms safety devices.

True.. The lock that came with my new XDm isn't on the list.. most likely because the gun isn't on the roster..

Here's a way to look up to see if your lock has been blessed by the idiots in Sacramento...

http://oag.ca.gov/firearms/fsdcertlist

Too bad the wierd BATF Federal deal that negates the use of a "safe affidavit" with handguns..

[halifax]

..because the lock that was included with the firearm is not on California's approved list of firearms safety devices.

Or very difficult to find on the FSD Roster because the lock doesn't come with instructions that lists the manufacturer, model, and a "CA DOJ Approved" notice. The XD9 currently in my safe was the same way. Some sleuthing revealed that it is a

Device Make: Keng's Firearms Specialties
Device Model: GE5024

which is on the roster.

I have also found an XD9c without instructions. That one included a hard to identify lock also. Turns out it was a

Device Make: Regal Industrial Sales
Device Model: R15LC1

The FSD Roster is difficult enough without Springfield Armory leaving out the instruction sheets.

[allenst65]

That's the practical effect of my last line:

There's no good business reason for an individual FFL to challenge the BATF on this. Life is expensive and complicated enough.

OTOH, if there were some organization of FFLs, it might be worthwhile to sue BATF to write regs and get them into the comment phase...

And what would the motivation be for individual FFLs to create some organization when they are the very ones profitting off of this lock nonsense. From collecting taxes on out of state sales to this gunlock scam, it would seem the .gov has a friend in FFLs.

[ke6guj]

And what would the motivation be for individual FFLs to create some organization when they are the very ones profitting off of this lock nonsense. From collecting taxes on out of state sales to this gunlock scam, it would seem the .gov has a friend in FFLs.

maybe some of those FFLs don't want to have to deal with this lock nonsense. Some of those FFLs just sell locks for $1, or even just give them away as part of a purchase. Just because some FFLs profft off of lock sales doesn't mean that all do.

[C.Bronson]

Locks silly? YES!

Locks the law? YES!

My shop charges me 1 cent....for a lock.
This seems much to do about nothing.