Firearm history ethics/legal question

apowell · Post by **apowell** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 11:57 am

I'll start this off with the fact that I am an FFL, but I don't know the legal answer to this question. I was asked by a friend, for which it is relevant so I'm seeking advice on their behalf.

If you have a firearm that was used in a shooting, what are the legal requirements for disclosing that fact during a sale. Does it matter if what type of shooting it was or if someone was killed or just injured?

I'll start with my thoughts, and ya'll can tear me apart if you want. Many mil-surp guns have killed people and no-one disclaims that, but it is implied that a milsurp gun may have killed. I don't really think that it should be necessary to disclose the information unless it is possible that the person might discover later through a serial number check or something that it had happened. If that is possible then they might have emotional problems regarding owning the firearm. I don't know if such information is out there, so that would be a factor in reaching a final decision in my mind.

What are your opinions on the ethics of selling firearms with a "history"?

For me personally, it wouldn't bother me to buy a gun that had a history, as long as it legally belonged to the seller (wasn't stolen, etc...). However, I asked my wife the same question and she said it wouldn't bother her if it had been used in self defense but that she wouldn't want to have a gun that had been involved in a accidental shooting where someone was killed or a suicide because it was "icky".

I appreciate your candid responses to this.

Also, for the lawyers

: Responses to this question will not be considered "LEGAL ADVICE", so please add your 2 cents worth.

I've put a poll on the thread, but would appreciate your expanding on your thoughts in a follow up post.

Thanks,

rspeir · Post by **rspeir** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:02 pm

I'm unaware of any legal requirement to disclose the history of a firearm. I do not know what the requirements are to get a FFL, but wouldn't this have been discussed when you were getting yours?

nitrogen · Post by **nitrogen** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:03 pm

Why exactly does it matter?

Voted no requirement at all.

stevie_d_64 · Post by **stevie_d_64** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:06 pm

I do not believe there are any ethical, moral or other inhibiting factors that you can apply to the transfer of a firearm that has been used in a crime or other incident...

Basically its not the guns fault...Its intended purposes are fairly clear and narrow...

So I do not believe it is necessary, unless you want to jack up the price on a firearm for whatever reason to disclose its history...

Like, who has the rifle Oswald used in Dallas???

How about the UT tower shooters rifles???

Doc Holiday's pistols...

Wyatt Earps' Peacemaker...

etc etc etc...

seamusTX · Post by **seamusTX** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:11 pm

I have never heard of such a requirement and I think it's generally irrelevant.

If the buyer wants to avoid "tainted" weapons, they can buy new ones.

There used to be a running joke in Chicago: "FOR SALE: Man's suit, 38L, black, 2 bullet holes in back. CHEAP."

- Jim

txinvestigator · Post by **txinvestigator** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:14 pm

When I read the thread title, I thought you were asking a question either about making it a future requirement or if morally should one disclose now.

After reading the actual post I realized you meant is there a legal requirement NOW to reveal.

The answer to the legal issue now is no.

apowell · Post by **apowell** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:43 pm

I couldn't find any thing in the FFL book, and they don't go over every scenario in the interview, so I doubted that there was a legal requirment to disclose, but I'm still curious what you think about any ethical need to disclose that type of info.

Can a LEO run a Serial Number check and see that type of info, or would that only show stolen guns?
Thanks,
Adon

Wildscar · Post by **Wildscar** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 1:11 pm

I would like to know the history of the gun but for different reasons. For instance what year was mine made and in what factory. Why do you need an allen wrench to remove the grips on my Beretta rather than a slot screw drive like I have seen on others of the same make and model. I believe knowing all you can about the gun you shoot would make you more comfortable in its use. As for the reasons you stated above I donâ€™t believe it should be given unless the seller deems it necessary or if the buyer thinks to ask. But like seamusTX mentioned already. If a buyer is that worried about the history of its use then they should only look at new ones.

txinvestigator · Post by **txinvestigator** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 2:04 pm

apowell wrote:I.

Can a LEO run a Serial Number check and see that type of info, or would that only show stolen guns?
Thanks,
Adon

LEO's will only know anything about a gun if the serial number was reported stolen. Thats it.

AFAIK, the is no repository of that sort of information.

Syntax360 · Post by **Syntax360** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 2:53 pm

txinvestigator wrote:When I read the thread title, I thought you were asking a question either about making it a future requirement or if morally should one disclose now.

After reading the actual post I realized you meant is there a legal requirement NOW to reveal.

The answer to the legal issue now is no.

+1. I made the same mistake.

CHL/LEO · Post by **CHL/LEO** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 3:26 pm

LEO's will only know anything about a gun if the serial number was reported stolen. Thats it.

I think the ATF and FBI keep a little more detailed information on specific guns that they might be looking for. You are right though in that most LEOs will only find out if it's been reported stolen. However, if the Feds are looking for that particular gun, when the LEO runs it on NCIC they might very well receive a call from an agent who could provide some more details.

In regards to the original question; I don't think there is any legal or moral value in providing that information even if you did know it. Remember, it was the shooter that took the action, not the gun.

Chris · Post by **Chris** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 4:22 pm

just think of all the stories i'd get if i had a disclosure on my surplus WWII rifles.

jimlongley · Post by **jimlongley** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 4:40 pm

Chris wrote:just think of all the stories i'd get if i had a disclosure on my surplus WWII rifles.

Yeah.

Provenance would be good in some cases - the engraved presentation broomhandle Mauser that was given to my great grandfather when he retired from the Cavalry in 1896 has a history that needs to be disclosed if it's sold, just because it would raise the price that much.

OTOH, like Chris said, there are ones in the family, like the 1873 trapdoor Springfield, that I would dearly love to know about.

Smokewagon · Post by **Smokewagon** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 4:49 pm

I don't think it matters and I really don't even want to know.

kw5kw · Post by **kw5kw** » Wed Apr 04, 2007 4:58 pm

Knowing the history of a firearm, especially a piece from the 19th century or older.

But, having a law to disclose the history on EVERY firearm is not necessary... Period.

Russ

TexasCHLforum.com

Firearm history ethics/legal question

Should a firearm's "history" be disclosed during a sale?

Firearm history ethics/legal question