I love "bill of sale" requirements.....

zuerjoha said:
Then I've got a BOS showing I've put a good faith effort into determining they were not a prohibited person.
Click to expand...

But then if the one who you sold to is the gangbanger who committed a crime, then all you have is written proof that YOU are the one who sold it to him.

And how does a BOS show good faith anything? It is just a record of who you sold it to, not a record of a background check.
 
Last edited:
Can anyone link an article or a story where someone sold a firearm, in a private transaction, and then were held liable for what was done with that firearm after the fact? Ive done a quick Google search and can find nothing.

Honestly this type of discussion reminds me of those arguments about putting punisher logos on your guns. "ThE DA GUNNA GIT U!"...yet...it never actually has. People are filled with anecdotal evidence from a story they heard once from a guy they knew who had a friend who did something. But I can find zero cases where a law aiding citizen sold a firearm, and was then held liable for the actions that the new owner took.

And keep this in context, even if you find 1 lone case where a BOS came riding to the rescue: Each year there are probably hundreds of thousands of firearms in the US that change hands through private sales. So if not having a BOS was >really< that big a deal, it would have been shoved down our throats by anti-gunners who want to punish anyone and everyone involved in a crime.
 
B00ger said:
Can anyone link an article or a story where someone sold a firearm, in a private transaction, and then were held liable for what was done with that firearm after the fact? Ive done a quick Google search and can find nothing.
Click to expand...

This has been asked several times during this thread, but the only answers you're going to get are the same things repeated over and over...., "I'm protecting myself", or, "I'm making sure the next seller doesn't sell it to a bad person". But they never say how a magical BOS accomplishes any of those things.

For all of the reasons I've seen given so far for a seller wanting a BOS, not a single one of them is legally, factually, applicable. I've asked several times during this thread how a BOS accomplishes any of the things some here are claiming, but haven't gotten an answer yet.
 
Railsplitter said:
This has been asked several times during this thread, but the only answers you're going to get are the same things repeated over and over...., "I'm protecting myself", or, "I'm making sure the next seller doesn't sell it to a bad person". But they never say how a magical BOS accomplishes any of those things.

For all of the reasons I've seen given so far for a seller wanting a BOS, not a single one of them is legally, factually, applicable. I've asked several times during this thread how a BOS accomplishes any of the things some here are claiming, but haven't gotten an answer yet.
Click to expand...

Yup...I understand that people want to protect themselves. But be afraid of real boogey men, not made up boogey men in their minds. The vast majority of crimes committed with firearms come from stolen guns, not legally purchased. Because >shocker< if you can afford a $500 Glock, then you probably don't need to knock over the corner market for a pack of smokes. And a BOS for a long arm? Ive seen people want one for deer rifles...because we all know how gang bangers prefer the 30-06 over the 9mm Jimenez and working that bolt during the drive by makes them look so gangsta.
 
zuerjoha said:
Don't like it then don't buy it. I've got an arse to cover and fa amily to feed; last thing I need is to be caught up in some gangbanger's drama.
Click to expand...
Yah. Keep telling yourself that. No one in here will argue you don't have the absolute right to do this, nor the right to believe that, nor any other idiotic nonsense that has no basis in reality. Throw salt over your shoulder to avoid an IRS audit, walk backwards to the refrigerator to keep the police from pulling you over for speeding, or recite the Constitution backwards to ensure the Republic survives. You have the right to deliberate self deception and the right to be obdurately stubborn in believing it.

This is a GUN forum, though, and most of the residents in here are extremely concerned about the freedom the second amendment is trying to uphold. It is an established fact that paper trails for location of guns is a historical milestone for those who want to take them. Therefore, we are agin' it, and some of us are a bit obnoxious in saying so. Nice to meet ya.
 
tanstaafl72555 said:
Yah. Keep telling yourself that. No one in here will argue you don't have the absolute right to do this, nor the right to believe that, nor any other idiotic nonsense that has no basis in reality. Throw salt over your shoulder to avoid an IRS audit, walk backwards to the refrigerator to keep the police from pulling you over for speeding, or recite the Constitution backwards to ensure the Republic survives. You have the right to deliberate self deception and the right to be obdurately stubborn in believing it.

This is a GUN forum, though, and most of the residents in here are extremely concerned about the freedom the second amendment is trying to uphold. It is an established fact that paper trails for location of guns is a historical milestone for those who want to take them. Therefore, we are agin' it, and some of us are a bit obnoxious in saying so. Nice to meet ya.
Click to expand...

They aren't going to waste time tracing bills of sale for confiscation...how silly.

They have your online browsing/posting history, your credit card purchase history, all of your 4473s, and your text/phone/email available to determine whether they need to come bust down your door(s). They also have record of all of the property you own (individually, through businesses, and through trusts) and the names/addresses of all of your friends and family members. Now your "smart" phones (and cars in some cases...just wait until they are driver-less) are keeping a detailed history of where you have been. You are not off the radar just because you don't do bills of sale and your non bill of sale purchases aren't going to be invisible when they tear your house/yard/storage unit apart...they will get them all.

Do whatever lets you sleep at night but if confiscation is your irrational boogeyman then your posts here are more dangerous to you than any bill of sale. There are far more productive ways to be "extremely concerned" about freedom and the second amendment than hassling some guy that wants a bill of sale.
 
As far as covering your rear end, consider the story of the FFL dealer who sold the guns that Adam Lanza used at the Sandy Hook shooting.

He sold those guns LEGALLY to Lanza's mother. He had all the paperwork needed to prove he sold them legally. Once shown that, however, ATF continued to dig until they could find something with which to charge him. The owner plead guilty to two charges and had to give up his FFL. He later had to declare bankruptcy.

Point being, if they decide to go after you because of a gun you sold to someone who later uses it in a crime, selling that gun legally to that person won't matter, nor will have having a bill of sale as some sort of proof. If they decide to put you under that kind of scrutiny, they won't give up until they find something with which to nail you.
 
cubrock said:
As far as covering your rear end, consider the story of the FFL dealer who sold the guns that Adam Lanza used at the Sandy Hook shooting.

He sold those guns LEGALLY to Lanza's mother. He had all the paperwork needed to prove he sold them legally. Once shown that, however, ATF continued to dig until they could find something with which to charge him. The owner plead guilty to two charges and had to give up his FFL. He later had to declare bankruptcy.

Point being, if they decide to go after you because of a gun you sold to someone who later uses it in a crime, selling that gun legally to that person won't matter, nor will have having a bill of sale as some sort of proof. If they decide to put you under that kind of scrutiny, they won't give up until they find something with which to nail you.
Click to expand...


Kind of like everyone who has ever said hello to Donald Trump. They will get you if they want you.
 
SC380 said:
They aren't going to waste time tracing bills of sale for confiscation...how silly.

They have your online browsing/posting history, your credit card purchase history, all of your 4473s, and your text/phone/email available to determine whether they need to come bust down your door(s). They also have record of all of the property you own (individually, through businesses, and through trusts) and the names/addresses of all of your friends and family members. Now your "smart" phones (and cars in some cases...just wait until they are driver-less) are keeping a detailed history of where you have been. You are not off the radar just because you don't do bills of sale and your non bill of sale purchases aren't going to be invisible when they tear your house/yard/storage unit apart...they will get them all.

Do whatever lets you sleep at night but if confiscation is your irrational boogeyman then your posts here are more dangerous to you than any bill of sale. There are far more productive ways to be "extremely concerned" about freedom and the second amendment than hassling some guy that wants a bill of sale.
Click to expand...
Sure. And I assume at the top of that list of more productive things to do is responding to someone that has such an irrational confiscation fear correct?
 
SC380 said:
They aren't going to waste time tracing bills of sale for confiscation...how silly.

They have your online browsing/posting history, your credit card purchase history, all of your 4473s, and your text/phone/email available to determine whether they need to come bust down your door(s). They also have record of all of the property you own (individually, through businesses, and through trusts) and the names/addresses of all of your friends and family members. Now your "smart" phones (and cars in some cases...just wait until they are driver-less) are keeping a detailed history of where you have been. You are not off the radar just because you don't do bills of sale and your non bill of sale purchases aren't going to be invisible when they tear your house/yard/storage unit apart...they will get them all.

Do whatever lets you sleep at night but if confiscation is your irrational boogeyman then your posts here are more dangerous to you than any bill of sale. There are far more productive ways to be "extremely concerned" about freedom and the second amendment than hassling some guy that wants a bill of sale.
Click to expand...
Yup
 
I had no idea that there were so many personal time coaches here on this forum. Let me just add that there is such a thing as TOR and there are aliases and that people use them. Once you guys want to brush up on that and then get back to me and explain again how there's a record of everything I'll be happy to listen
 
I think this thread boils down to:
  • No one is going to change anyone else's mind.
  • If you don't want a BOS then don't make one. If you do want a BOS then do make one.
</Thread>

No hard feeling towards anyone here. I do not mind BOSs, but I do not require them.
 
tanstaafl72555 said:
Yah. Keep telling yourself that. No one in here will argue you don't have the absolute right to do this, nor the right to believe that, nor any other idiotic nonsense that has no basis in reality. Throw salt over your shoulder to avoid an IRS audit, walk backwards to the refrigerator to keep the police from pulling you over for speeding, or recite the Constitution backwards to ensure the Republic survives. You have the right to deliberate self deception and the right to be obdurately stubborn in believing it.

This is a GUN forum, though, and most of the residents in here are extremely concerned about the freedom the second amendment is trying to uphold. It is an established fact that paper trails for location of guns is a historical milestone for those who want to take them. Therefore, we are agin' it, and some of us are a bit obnoxious in saying so. Nice to meet ya.
Click to expand...

Criticizing people who prefer a BOS for being fearful is a hoot when all you have to peddle is fear - by the shovel-full.

And the 'free men defending freedom' schtick is boring; free men don't badger, belittle, and bully people trying to make everyone conform to their views.
 
HMP said:
Ok, question for all the gun law gurus in here (or those that want to be):
What are the actual legal requirements to buy/sell a rifle in NC?
Maybe I am confused and was thinking of something like someone posted earlier here about SC about making sure it's a NC resident and not a felon. Am I wrong on that?
Click to expand...
I searched CFF BOS threads for the law, found this thread, middle of page 3 HMP asks for the facts instead of personal emotional opinions. Page 4 @gc70 Links federal rifle law, I thank both of you. I get through page 6 and still no NC or SC pistol law. I was hoping for data to use as a future reference with the influx of new folks here at CFF.
I know I could search myself, I've done a poor job in the past and was hoping to rely on one of yall that's familiar with law.
 
Having read these debates on CFF and its preceding sites repeatedly (ad nauseam) since 2012 I can say fairly confidently that we will not find a requirement by the law dictating a requirement for a BOS anywhere.

It is simply a part of the terms of a buy/sell/trade agreement between buyer and seller, and really no different than establishing in advance the price, condition and quantity of the item/s being bought, traded, or sold. Adhering to state, local, and federal laws should be a given, and everything else is negotiable.

Meaning, if one party to the deal decides to change or add terms to the deal after a deal has been struck in advance of a meeting, and doesn’t inform the other party prior to an established meeting, then said party seeking to add or change terms (i.e. requirement for a BOS) of the deal should not be surprised when (and in fact should very well expect) the other party refuse to complete the deal (and be none to happy about it).
 
Last edited:
I too was once on the BOS wagon. (Quite a few years ago I might add) That is until I realized they aren’t legally worth the ink to print them. They are like a concealed badge. Pointless and of no legal authority. Maybe the people that require BOS actually carry those badges? You do you and I’ll do me. If you require one excellent for you, just know there are people that will not purchase your item for sale. There are people that don’t mind adding extra non lawful steps to the sale/purchase of a firearm. We have enough hoops to jump though without adding things not legally required. That is all.
 
fieldgrade said:
Having read these debates on CFF and its preceding sites repeatedly (ad nauseam) since 2012 I can say fairly confidently that we will not find a requirement by the law dictating a requirement for a BOS anywhere.

It is simply a part of the terms of a buy/sell/trade agreement between buyer and seller, and really no different than establishing in advance the price, condition and quantity of the item/s being bought, traded, or sold. Adhering to state, local, and federal laws should be a given, and everything else is negotiable.

Meaning, if one party to the deal decides to change or add terms to the deal after a deal has been struck in advance of a meeting, and doesn’t inform the other party prior to an established meeting, then said party seeking to add or change terms (i.e. requirement for a BOS) of the deal should not be surprised when (and in fact should very well expect) the other party refuse to complete the deal (and be none to happy about it).
Click to expand...
Agreed, I was hoping for a legal reference to point to. There was a pistol for sale by a new member that I would have jumped on. I couldn’t find actual requirements that i could send their way to hopefully sway them.
I thought I remembered a state statute referenced in one of these threads.
 
Last edited:
Pink_Vapor said:
Agreed, I was hoping for a legal reference to point to. There was a pistol for sale by a new member that I would have jumped on. I couldn’t find actual requirements that i could send their way to hopefully sway them.
I thought I remembered a state statute referenced in one of these threads.
Click to expand...
I have read the state laws before but it's been a while. You will rarely be successful talking someone out of a BOS when they have made up their mind.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk
 
GoWolfpack said:
I have read the state laws before but it's been a while. You will rarely be successful talking someone out of a BOS when they have made up their mind.

Sent from my moto g power using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Understood. I like many here used to require BOS, after the many discussions and someone posting the actual NC requirements I’m good seeing a CCP and matching NC DL.
 
Pink_Vapor said:
Agreed, I was hoping for a legal reference to point to. There was a pistol for sale by a new member that I would have jumped on. I couldn’t find actual requirements that i could send their way to hopefully sway them.
I thought I remembered a state statute referenced in one of these threads.
Click to expand...
All you can really reference is to what is said in the statute. The statute is not exhaustive, and clear as mud in some cases. The statutes typically won’t always say what you don’t have to do. Like an individual keeping a PPP. Nowhere does it say an individual has to keep one. Cooper once said that it was his DOJs *interpretation* that you *should* keep it, but that doesn’t say you *must* keep it, and that was just *his* interpretation, even though you will never find those words in the statute saying you must keep it.

Likewise with BOS. I’m pretty sure it’s just not in there. At least no one has been able to point it out here, and previous forums, in the past eight years of arguments on the topic.
 
Last edited:
Pink_Vapor said:
For me it was more of a CYA in fear of .gov.
Click to expand...
The trouble is I think we are "damned if we do, and damned if we don’t".

I would like to be able to do likewise honestly, but I think there is much less likelihood of me procuring a hot gun or selling one to a criminal considering where I will or won’t buy or sell one, than there is of .gov one day using paper trails against legal gun owners towards further infringements.

And as is often cited here, if the law doesn’t require it, then neither do I. If someone else wants to, that is their prerogative. Folks just need to be sure it is set forth in the terms of the deal in advance, and not sprung on buyer/or seller after the fact.

*There may be some older BSTs of mine were I posted a requirement for a CHP when a PPP was all that was required. That was because for the longest time I didn’t know what a PPP looked like. All my guns had either been inherited twenty-five years ago, or bought with a CHP in the past decade.
 
Last edited:
Since I received a ping re: this, and in looking thru, I see @Pink_Vapor and @HMP had both requested statutes, I went ahead and posted below:

14-402. Sale of certain weapons without permit forbidden.

(a) It is unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation in this State to sell, give away, or transfer, or to purchase or receive, at any place within this State from any other place within or without the State any pistol unless: (i) a license or permit is first obtained under this Article by the purchaser or receiver from the sheriff of the county in which the purchaser or receiver resides; or (ii) a valid North Carolina concealed handgun permit is held under Article 54B of this Chapter by the purchaser or receiver who must be a resident of the State at the time of the purchase.

It is unlawful for any person or persons to receive from any postmaster, postal clerk, employee in the parcel post department, rural mail carrier, express agent or employee, railroad agent or employee within the State of North Carolina any pistol without having in his or their possession and without exhibiting at the time of the delivery of the same and to the person delivering the same the permit from the sheriff as provided in G.S. 14-403. Any person violating the provisions of this section is guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor.

(b) This section does not apply to an antique firearm or an historic edged weapon.

(c) The following definitions apply in this Article:

(1) Antique firearm. - Defined in G.S. 14-409.11.

(2), (3) Repealed by Session Laws 2011-56, s. 1, effective April 28, 2011.

(4) Historic edged weapon. - Defined in G.S. 14-409.12.

(5) through (7) Repealed by Session Laws 2011-56, s. 1, effective April 28, 2011. (1919, c. 197, s. 1; C.S., s. 5106; 1923, c. 106; 1947, c. 781; 1959, c. 1073, s. 2; 1971, c. 133, s. 2; 1979, c. 895, ss. 1, 2; 1993, c. 287, s. 1; c. 539, s. 284; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c); 2004-183, s. 1; 2004-203, s. 1; 2009-6, s. 2; 2011-56, s. 1.)

Can someone show me in this statute where it is even hinted at that a private purchaser/seller must maintain documentation?

This should answer @HMP and @Pink_Vapor about citing law, if it had not been addressed already.

If there is no requirement that the purchaser maintain this document, then there simply IS NO SUCH REQUIREMENT.

Further. since the doctrine in common law of presumption of innocence is BY DEFINITION a part of our corpus of law, cf Nelson v Colorado (USSC), where the justices ruled 7-1 based on this principle, arguing that "this might not apply today" is asking us to ignore legal precedent which has been universally affirmed by our courts going back thru US law to English common law, thru Middle Age statutes back to the Deuteronomic code. There is hardly a more settled legal principle than this one.

There simply is no legal risk here, and that is the END OF THE STORY. "I sold it to a guy who had a permit." is all the legal defense you need, and it is impregnable, unless they have PROOF TO THE CONTRARY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. FBI or DEA or BATFE or NCBI or sheriff "suspicions" here are useless, worthless, and without any basis for fear.

Civil courts are somewhat different. The standards for finding guilt are different. In that case, it is not the state which is seeking to prosecute, but a private individual who is claiming that s/he suffered harm due to your negligence. There is no possibility of jail time, but the penalties are civil (financial). The burden of proof IS STILL ON THE CLAIMANT (you still have presumption of innocence), but the burden of proof is less. You can be convicted ON THE WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE, rather than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. HOWEVER, it still must be established that YOU BROKE SOME LAW. The most lunatic left wing nutcases can't just find you guilty of negligence because they don't like it that a gun you owned was used in a crime. They have to have evidence you broke some law, even if it is not "beyond a reasonable doubt" but simply good and weighty evidence. " I met a guy who I met (at a gun store, online, at a gun show, at a quick stop, at church, at a PTA meeting, etc etc etc) and we got along well. He told me he was looking for an x caliber handgun, and I happened to have one I was looking to sell. I saw his (cc permit/ purchase permit), confirmed his NCDL, and no, I am sorry but I did not make copies nor confiscate his permit. I took it when proffered but as the law does not demand a private citizen maintain copies nor the original, I did not do so" Again, although they do not need to find you guilty BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, they DO have to have some weight of evidence you broke the law.

Failing to maintain some paper record of the sale is not that evidence in any rational universe.

Folks wanted the statutes.

There they are.
 
Last edited:
tanstaafl72555 said:
Since I received a ping re: this, and in looking thru, I see @Pink_Vapor and @HMP had both requested statutes, I went ahead and posted below:

14-402. Sale of certain weapons without permit forbidden.

(a) It is unlawful for any person, firm, or corporation in this State to sell, give away, or transfer, or to purchase or receive, at any place within this State from any other place within or without the State any pistol unless: (i) a license or permit is first obtained under this Article by the purchaser or receiver from the sheriff of the county in which the purchaser or receiver resides; or (ii) a valid North Carolina concealed handgun permit is held under Article 54B of this Chapter by the purchaser or receiver who must be a resident of the State at the time of the purchase.

It is unlawful for any person or persons to receive from any postmaster, postal clerk, employee in the parcel post department, rural mail carrier, express agent or employee, railroad agent or employee within the State of North Carolina any pistol without having in his or their possession and without exhibiting at the time of the delivery of the same and to the person delivering the same the permit from the sheriff as provided in G.S. 14-403. Any person violating the provisions of this section is guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor.

(b) This section does not apply to an antique firearm or an historic edged weapon.

(c) The following definitions apply in this Article:

(1) Antique firearm. - Defined in G.S. 14-409.11.

(2), (3) Repealed by Session Laws 2011-56, s. 1, effective April 28, 2011.

(4) Historic edged weapon. - Defined in G.S. 14-409.12.

(5) through (7) Repealed by Session Laws 2011-56, s. 1, effective April 28, 2011. (1919, c. 197, s. 1; C.S., s. 5106; 1923, c. 106; 1947, c. 781; 1959, c. 1073, s. 2; 1971, c. 133, s. 2; 1979, c. 895, ss. 1, 2; 1993, c. 287, s. 1; c. 539, s. 284; 1994, Ex. Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c); 2004-183, s. 1; 2004-203, s. 1; 2009-6, s. 2; 2011-56, s. 1.)

Can someone show me in this statute where it is even hinted at that a private purchaser/seller must maintain documentation?

This should answer @HMP and @Pink_Vapor about citing law, if it had not been addressed already.

If there is no requirement that the purchaser maintain this document, then there simply IS NO SUCH REQUIREMENT.

Further. since the doctrine in common law of presumption of innocence is BY DEFINITION a part of our corpus of law, cf Nelson v Colorado (USSC), where the justices ruled 7-1 based on this principle, arguing that "this might not apply today" is asking us to ignore legal precedent which has been universally affirmed by our courts going back thru US law to English common law, thru Middle Age statutes back to the Deuteronomic code. There is hardly a more settled legal principle than this one.

There simply is no legal risk here, and that is the END OF THE STORY. "I sold it to a guy who had a permit." is all the legal defense you need, and it is impregnable, unless they have PROOF TO THE CONTRARY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. FBI or DEA or BATFE or NCBI or sheriff "suspicions" here are useless, worthless, and without any basis for fear.

Civil courts are somewhat different. The standards for finding guilt are different. In that case, it is not the state which is seeking to prosecute, but a private individual who is claiming that s/he suffered harm due to your negligence. There is no possibility of jail time, but the penalties are civil (financial). The burden of proof IS STILL ON THE CLAIMANT (you still have presumption of innocence), but the burden of proof is less. You can be convicted ON THE WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE, rather than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. HOWEVER, it still must be established that YOU BROKE SOME LAW. The most lunatic left wing nutcases can't just find you guilty of negligence because they don't like it that a gun you owned was used in a crime. They have to have evidence you broke some law, even if it is not "beyond a reasonable doubt" but simply good and weighty evidence. " I met a guy who I met (at a gun store, online, at a gun show, at a quick stop, at church, at a PTA meeting, etc etc etc) and we got along well. He told me he was looking for an x caliber handgun, and I happened to have one I was looking to sell. I saw his (cc permit/ purchase permit), confirmed his NCDL, and no, I am sorry but I did not make copies nor confiscate his permit. I took it when proffered but as the law does not demand a private citizen maintain copies nor the original, I did not do so" Again, although they do not need to find you guilty BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, they DO have to have some weight of evidence you broke the law.

Failing to maintain some paper record of the sale is not that evidence in any rational universe.

Folks wanted the statutes.

There they are.
Click to expand...
Wait, I need a permit to buy an edged weapon too?
 
I have never asked for a bill of sale.I have completed one for a seller in the past as I didn't care either way.I doubt I would buy from someone today that requires one.When I see an ad with a bos requirement now I say to myself "what a shame" and keep scrolling.
 
What i find even more onerous is, "transaction will be completed through my FFL." Why put it on here or another forum? Just put it on consignment. Twice that has blown a deal for me.
 
B00ger said:
Can anyone link an article or a story where someone sold a firearm, in a private transaction, and then were held liable for what was done with that firearm after the fact? Ive done a quick Google search and can find nothing.

Honestly this type of discussion reminds me of those arguments about putting punisher logos on your guns. "ThE DA GUNNA GIT U!"...yet...it never actually has. People are filled with anecdotal evidence from a story they heard once from a guy they knew who had a friend who did something. But I can find zero cases where a law aiding citizen sold a firearm, and was then held liable for the actions that the new owner took.

And keep this in context, even if you find 1 lone case where a BOS came riding to the rescue: Each year there are probably hundreds of thousands of firearms in the US that change hands through private sales. So if not having a BOS was >really< that big a deal, it would have been shoved down our throats by anti-gunners who want to punish anyone and everyone involved in a crime.
Click to expand...

about a year ago, my dad sent me an article (which I can’t find anymore) about a guy who was charged with a stolen gun despite having the BOS filled out when he bought it privately. Didn’t seem to protect him at the time. Unsure what happened later...charge may have been thrown out if he got a lawyer and helped ID the guy he bought it from
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom