TexasCHLforum.com

I find this a complete contradiction. We all profess to believe in the right to keep and bear arms, and if the government says they want private parties to go through FFL's, you claim to have an issue with it, but then we turn right around and further restrict our right to keep and bear arms when it is totally unnecessary. Unbelievable...no need to try and justify it. I understand all the fear based reasoning. It is the EXACT same reasoning for libtards wanting to restrict private party sales. If I were a libtard, I would say, what the heck? Why should you care? You already act as if there is some inherent danger in selling firearms. It is one thing to want to see a DL for evidence of residency, but to act as if the RKBA should be recorded and documented in writing, is a whole different issue. The law simply requires we use some common sense and not sell to someone who we know is a felon. I really don't get why anyone who believes in the RKBA would add rules that serve no legal purpose other than to admit guns should all be registered and recorded. You have ZERO liability when selling a firearm to a private party as long as it cannot be proven that you knew the buyer was a felon.

It isn't exactly an honor to be allowed to purchase your handgun. There are many more out there for sale that don't feel it necessary to insult the buyer by acting as if they think he has to earn the right to buy a gun.

EXACTLY, 03lightning... I have no beef with anyone who requires paperwork. I simply won't do business... but my point was one seller agreed to no paperwork and then produced a 4473 of some type. He then assumed I was a criminal for refusing his requests.

Bottom line, bills of sale are not required, and in my opinion, a liability on the RKBA. BUT... if you requre one, then make sure both parties are aware and agree to it. No need to waste one hour trip for nothing.

McKnife wrote:EXACTLY, 03lightning... I have no beef with anyone who requires paperwork. I simply won't do business... but my point was one seller agreed to no paperwork and then produced a 4473 of some type. He then assumed I was a criminal for refusing his requests.

Bottom line, bills of sale are not required, and in my opinion, a liability on the RKBA. BUT... if you requre one, then make sure both parties are aware and agree to it. No need to waste one hour trip for nothing.

Aman Brother!!!

03Lightningrocks wrote:I find this a complete contradiction. We all profess to believe in the right to keep and bear arms, and if the government says they want private parties to go through FFL's, you claim to have an issue with it, but then we turn right around and further restrict our right to keep and bear arms when it is totally unnecessary. Unbelievable...no need to try and justify it. I understand all the fear based reasoning. It is the EXACT same reasoning for libtards wanting to restrict private party sales. If I were a libtard, I would say, what the heck? Why should you care? You already act as if there is some inherent danger in selling firearms. It is one thing to want to see a DL for evidence of residency, but to act as if the RKBA should be recorded and documented in writing, is a whole different issue. The law simply requires we use some common sense and not sell to someone who we know is a felon. I really don't get why anyone who believes in the RKBA would add rules that serve no legal purpose other than to admit guns should all be registered and recorded. You have ZERO liability when selling a firearm to a private party as long as it cannot be proven that you knew the buyer was a felon.

It isn't exactly an honor to be allowed to purchase your handgun. There are many more out there for sale that don't feel it necessary to insult the buyer by acting as if they think he has to earn the right to buy a gun.

Stop with the "libtard" nonsense. Its just that, nonsense, you're getting politics confused with safe business practices.
Remember boys and girls under common law a transaction had to be in writing if it was over $500. There was a reason for that.
There is an inherent danger in selling firearms. Firearms can last for decades, even centuries. I don't want someone using that firearm in a crime and having that come back to me as the last recorded owner. Sure your "friend" may be fine, but what if he sells it to someone else. What if it is stolen from him and then used?

And for the record, if I were selling a car I'd do the exact same thing.

frazzled wrote:And for the record, if I were selling a car I'd do the exact same thing.

How about a refrigerator?

For the record, it is not non-sense. Requiring additional restrictions and rules beyond what the government requires is admitting that you feel the restrictions in place are not restrictive enough.

It IS absolutely a Libtard issue. I have yet to find a true conservative who believed guns should be outlawed.

03Lightningrocks wrote:

frazzled wrote:And for the record, if I were selling a car I'd do the exact same thing.

How about a refrigerator?

***If I were selling a refrigerator for a significant amount of money, yep. If I were selling a refrigerator that could be stolen, used by a criminal to shoot someone, and then the police come talk to me, especially yep.

For the record, it is not non-sense. Requiring additional restrictions and rules beyond what the government requires is admitting that you feel the restrictions in place are not restrictive enough.

***Nope, you're confusing the issue again. I like to follow common business practices.

It IS absolutely a Libtard issue. I have yet to find a true conservative who believed guns should be outlawed.

So, you're insulting anyone who disagrees with you? Please, spare me. This is Contracts 101, not Constitutional Law. If you don't want to have a written contract evidenced by a bill of sale then fine, no big deal. I've no problem with that. We all have freedom to contract including the methodology for doing so. Calling people who would prefer to do so "libtards" is as misguided as it is foolish.

OK guys keep it civil and stop any name calling or the thread will be locked!

McKnife wrote:EXACTLY, 03lightning... I have no beef with anyone who requires paperwork. I simply won't do business... but my point was one seller agreed to no paperwork and then produced a 4473 of some type. He then assumed I was a criminal for refusing his requests.

Bottom line, bills of sale are not required, and in my opinion, a liability on the RKBA. BUT... if you requre one, then make sure both parties are aware and agree to it. No need to waste one hour trip for nothing.

And thats perfectly your right. I have no problem with anyone who wouldn't want a bill of sale. As noted there are plenty of buyers and plenty of sellers. It helps to make the market efficient. If only the 'bullet bubble' were as efficient...

frazzled wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:

frazzled wrote:And for the record, if I were selling a car I'd do the exact same thing.

How about a refrigerator?

***If I were selling a refrigerator for a significant amount of money, yep. If I were selling a refrigerator that could be stolen, used by a criminal to shoot someone, and then the police come talk to me, especially yep.

For the record, it is not non-sense. Requiring additional restrictions and rules beyond what the government requires is admitting that you feel the restrictions in place are not restrictive enough.

***Nope, you're confusing the issue again. I like to follow common business practices.

It IS absolutely a Libtard issue. I have yet to find a true conservative who believed guns should be outlawed.

So, you're insulting anyone who disagrees with you? Please, spare me. This is Contracts 101, not Constitutional Law. If you don't want to have a written contract evidenced by a bill of sale then fine, no big deal. I've no problem with that. We all have freedom to contract including the methodology for doing so. Calling people who would prefer to do so "libtards" is as misguided as it is foolish.

All I really needed to see was your answer to the refrigerator. Thanks for proving my point. Refrigerators can be very dangerous. They are quite heavy and I assure you would squash a person like a bug if dropped from a second story window. Sounds pretty ridiculous, doesn't it? That is what your argument sounds like to me.

You may want to read my post over again Frazzled. I never said requiring a bill of sale makes one a liberal. I said requiring a bill of sale is playing into the liberals argument for more restrictive gun laws.

Reading meaning into a post that is not there is not only misguided but pretty foolish.

03Lightningrocks wrote:

frazzled wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:

frazzled wrote:And for the record, if I were selling a car I'd do the exact same thing.

How about a refrigerator?

***If I were selling a refrigerator for a significant amount of money, yep. If I were selling a refrigerator that could be stolen, used by a criminal to shoot someone, and then the police come talk to me, especially yep.

For the record, it is not non-sense. Requiring additional restrictions and rules beyond what the government requires is admitting that you feel the restrictions in place are not restrictive enough.

***Nope, you're confusing the issue again. I like to follow common business practices.

It IS absolutely a Libtard issue. I have yet to find a true conservative who believed guns should be outlawed.

So, you're insulting anyone who disagrees with you? Please, spare me. This is Contracts 101, not Constitutional Law. If you don't want to have a written contract evidenced by a bill of sale then fine, no big deal. I've no problem with that. We all have freedom to contract including the methodology for doing so. Calling people who would prefer to do so "libtards" is as misguided as it is foolish.

All I really needed to see was your answer to the refrigerator. Thanks for proving my point. Refrigerators can be very dangerous. They are quite heavy and I assure you would squash a person like a bug if dropped from a second story window. Sounds pretty ridiculous, doesn't it? That is what your argument sounds like to me.

You may want to read my post over again Frazzled. I never said requiring a bill of sale makes one a libtard. I said requiring a bill of sale is playing into the libtards argument for more restrictive gun laws.

Safety is only one item. As noted I would require a writing, albeit short for any item of major value being sold. Call me a traditionalist. But I would require same for the sale of a sword or other weapon (ok I wouldn't sell a sword except for maybe an original 1860 revolver but thats another matter ).

As there hase been a public Moderator notice I think the libtard issue is put to bed.

bizarrenormality wrote:If the deal is cash for a gun then that's the deal. If someone wants paperwork, or a holster, or a back rub, those should be stated in the ad or during negotiations. Not after the deal is struck. It's rude to change the deal at the last minute, especially if someone had to drive a long way or leave work early.

I just read the comment about the back rub and about split a gut laughing.

03Lightningrocks wrote:

bizarrenormality wrote:If the deal is cash for a gun then that's the deal. If someone wants paperwork, or a holster, or a back rub, those should be stated in the ad or during negotiations. Not after the deal is struck. It's rude to change the deal at the last minute, especially if someone had to drive a long way or leave work early.

I just read the comment about the back rub and about split a gut laughing.

That would clinch the deal for me.

frazzled wrote:As there hase been a public Moderator notice I think the libtard issue is put to bed.

Actually, this is what puts the issue you made of of Liberals to bed.

03Lightningrocks wrote:You may want to read my post over again Frazzled. I never said requiring a bill of sale makes one a liberal. I said requiring a bill of sale is playing into the liberals argument for more restrictive gun laws.

USA1 wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:

bizarrenormality wrote:If the deal is cash for a gun then that's the deal. If someone wants paperwork, or a holster, or a back rub, those should be stated in the ad or during negotiations. Not after the deal is struck. It's rude to change the deal at the last minute, especially if someone had to drive a long way or leave work early.

I just read the comment about the back rub and about split a gut laughing.

That would clinch the deal for me.

It depends on who is giving the back rub.

03Lightningrocks and frazzled,

I don't care who started it BUT there will not be any more last words or comments referring to your posts to each other on this thread or as Keith has already said the thread will be locked.