Question on a failed background check **update post 136**

[Artema]

If you are that ignorant of the law then educate yourself via google. It's not my job to do the search for you.

So no citation for your argument.

[The Gleam]

How is that? Citation needed.

It's a Private Party Transfer; was the Private Party Transfer completed?

No?

I had this same issue come up years ago; except my buyer never picked up the gun within the 30-days, as he was called to emergency assist in serving/assisting with Katrina, so it didn't transfer to him. The dealer could do nothing with it unless we did the DROS again, or it would be turned over to LEO as unclaimed/abandoned property ON MY PART.

Technically, the gun had not transferred to the new buyer for lack of pick-up. Yet the store could not give the gun back to me without proof from the buyer that I returned his money as they knew of the transaction involved money. So sit on it they did, as a favor to me because I had done a lot of business with them, but they weren't pleased about it; but considering his noble reasons, I and the dealer both, simply waited for him to get back to the CA nearly 7 months later, and we did the DROS again.

The citing of it was given to me by the dealer in my predicament at the time, concerning the above and how unclaimed property must be handled by a pawn-shop or a gun dealer procurring a sale in accordance with CA state laws. I am sure if you look hard enough on Google, you'll find it.

And this is no argument. It's rather common knowledge.

[Artema]

It's a Private Party Transfer; was the Private Party Transfer completed?

No?

I had this same issue come up years ago; except my buyer never picked up the gun within the 30-days, as he was called to emergency assist in serving/assisting with Katrina, so it didn't transfer to him. The dealer could do nothing with it unless we did the DROS again, or it would be turned over to LEO as unclaimed/abandoned property ON MY PART.

Technically, the gun had not transferred to the new buyer for lack of pick-up. Yet the store could not give the gun back to me without proof from the buyer that I returned his money as they knew of the transaction involved money. So sit on it they did, as a favor to me because I had done a lot of business with them, but they weren't pleased about it; but considering his noble reasons, I an the dealer simply waited for him to get back to the CA nearly 7 months later, and we did the DROS again.

The citing of it was given to me by the dealer in my predicament at the time, conerning the above and how unclaimed property must be handled by a pawn-shop or guns store procuring a sale ion accordnace with CA state laws. I am sure if you look hard enough on Google, you'll find it.

And this is no argument. It's rather common knowledge.

Depending on the distance I would have to travel I'd be willing to re-DROS like that after he got his felony cleared up.

[Steve_In_29]

Steve,
Yes, it is a craigslist rule and not an actual law and yes the OP does need to worry about LEOs showing up. The OP's knowledge of the CL rules regarding no posting of ammunition, etc. spawned at least one felon to respond to his ad. Since the OP was willing to post outside of the rules on CL, the felons then think that you are willing to work/sell outside the CL rules.

NONE of which has ANYTHING to do with the OPs (now supposedly fabricated) issue!

The OP and buyer conducted the transaction through an FFL in a perfectly legal manner and in fact broke no laws by meeting through CL.

The only reason CL has rules against gun sales is because they are as big a douche as Feinstein and her ilk. So anytime a weapon related transaction can be processed through CL despite their anti-2A stance I say good on you.

It's kind of like raping CL each time since you force them to do something against their will.

As far as rules go:
Have you ever spit on the sidewalk?
Walked on the grass?
Exceeded the speed limit by even 1mph?
Stopped for less then 4 sec at a stop sign before proceeding?
Sped up to get through a yellow instead of braking to a stop?
Texted or not used a hands-free device while driving?
Etc?
Etc?
Etc?

[Multra]

Travis is a known troll and internet tough guy, why are you believing this loser?

[Steve_In_29]

So no citation for your argument.

It's not an argument, it's a fact. That you are apparently too ill informed to know and despite your admitted "wondering", were too lazy to educate yourself about.

Did you need to be spoon fed the answers all through school as well?

[kemasa]

The buyer never took possession.

Gun goes back to the seller.

No transaction took place.

Seller now has money and gun. ( not equitable)

The seller turned it over the the FFL. That was the transaction. The gun may or may not go back to the seller. If the seller does not pick it up, then by law, it has to go to the police. If the seller does not pick it up, either by choice, not able or if the seller is prohibited, and it is turned over to the police, should the seller be required to return the money?

[kemasa]

Citation requested then.

Go look at the CA PC. I could find it and post it, but based on your responses it is best to let you look it up. The CA PC requires that the firearm go back to the seller, unless the seller is denied. If the seller does not pick it up, then it has to go to the police.

[Artema]

Go look at the CA PC. I could find it and post it, but based on your responses it is best to let you look it up. The CA PC requires that the firearm go back to the seller, unless the seller is denied. If the seller does not pick it up, then it has to go to the police.

And what is your point? In my situation, the hypothetical person who lied on his DROS form and failed to be able to pick up the firearm could not get money as it is gone. I would be willing to allow him to attempt a re-DROS, but I would have no money to return to him. I guess I could offer to have the store buy it at probably less than he paid.

[Cypriss32]

I dont really care about craigs list rules, and this and that. The guy made a honest mistake and messed up. He forgot he had a violation when he was younger. All you guys ***** about being NICE to libs but will **** over anyone you can. You make enemies out of your own gun owners and none gun owners doing that ****. Just give him the money back minus $75.00. He owes you for lunch, gas and your time @ 25.00 an hour. Public place, with lots of people and tell him to sorry good luck.

[kemasa]

And what is your point? In my situation, the hypothetical person who lied on his DROS form and failed to be able to pick up the firearm could not get money as it is gone. I would be willing to allow him to attempt a re-DROS, but I would have no money to return to him. I guess I could offer to have the store buy it at probably less than he paid.

You requested a citation.

Yes, it is an option to have the seller ask the FFL what they would pay for it and then go in, pick up the firearm, then sell it back to the FFL and have the FFL pay the buyer.

[Artema]

You requested a citation.

Yes, it is an option to have the seller ask the FFL what they would pay for it and then go in, pick up the firearm, then sell it back to the FFL and have the FFL pay the buyer.

That also depends on where it is. When I traded guns with someone I had to travel over two hours to meet half way. That's around $50 of gas each trip. To go back and rectify that problem I would need to budget for that in both time and money, neither of which I have in excess. If it were just in town I'd go see if the FFL would buy it and pay the guy, but things like that need to be discussed ahead of time if they expect you to make up for their mistakes.

[jonzer77]

So when they asked you if all of the info was current and correct you lied? So you commit purgery, and the other dude's a felon. Fun times indeed.

[jonzer77]

Perhaps you should look up the definition or perhaps you should quit before you make yourself look even worse.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/defrauding?s=t

See also:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fraud?s=t

So, please explain where and how the seller used "deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage" in this situation.

The seller sold the firearm in good faith, without knowledge that the buyer was prohibited or that the buyer would not be able to transfer the firearm. There is no fraud in that. The seller could agree to consign the firearm to the FFL, then the original buyer would not be due any refund until the firearm sells. it is not the fault or problem for the seller that the firearm can not be transferred. There is NO requirement that the seller just return the money, in part because the seller could lose money due to the buyer not being able to transfer it and will not know the complete loss until the firearm actually sells.

I noticed that you did not address the issues I raised as well.

The law is silent on the issue of a refund. The seller could not pick up the firearm and then the firearm would have to go to the police. In that case, would you say that the seller should still refund the money?

The fact that you are going out of your way to justify theft is disturbing.

[infamous1979]

I'd give him his cash back bro. Plus you can track anyone down on the web these days. Tell him your keeping $100 for wasting your time etc and give him the rest. Guys obviously shady and I'd say F him but unfortunately he knows your name and last address. Plus no need for an unsuspecting resident at old address to get their car trashed or worse.