Questions on selling a handgun

[kingofwylietx]

For FTF transactions, what if the buyer is not from the same State as the seller? For example, a buyer from OK wants a FTF transaction here in TX? I heard BATF requires a transfer to an FFL. Can someone confirm this one? thanks.

You can't do a FTF with an out-of-stater. They can look at the gun and give you money. You must then ship it to an FFL in their state.

It is my understanding that you can buy a handgun, for example, while visiting another state. You can not bring it home with you. You must have it shipped to an FFL here.

FTF sales are only allowed between two people living in the same state. Otherwise, it must be shipped to an FFL for transfer.

[Renegade]

Example of what I am talking about above:

Slain Houston Officer's Widow Sues Gun Store

Better to be completely anonymous IMO.

[nine3six]

That would be a straw sale and the FFL holder that did the transfer knew better than that and if the story is as it is read, then yes, he can and should be sued. If you purchase a gun from a reputable FFL, then sell it, the FFL holder has documentation pointing to you as the purchaser. If you re sell the gun and it is used in the commission of a crime, why would you ever advise anyone to not have a BOS produced that would point the finger in another direction? Sure, the law is the law and there is nothing technically they can do about the sale, but why not just CYA?

If the purchase was done FTF and no paperwork, then yes, I can see where it would be better to keep it anonymous, but only if there were no paper trail leading back to the seller.

Example of what I am talking about above:

Slain Houston Officer's Widow Sues Gun Store

Better to be completely anonymous IMO.

[Renegade]

That would be a straw sale and the FFL holder that did the transfer knew better than that and if the story is as it is read, then yes, he can and should be sued. If you purchase a gun from a reputable FFL, then sell it, the FFL holder has documentation pointing to you as the purchaser. If you re sell the gun and it is used in the commission of a crime, why would you ever advise anyone to not have a BOS produced that would point the finger in another direction? Sure, the law is the law and there is nothing technically they can do about the sale, but why not just CYA?

If the purchase was done FTF and no paperwork, then yes, I can see where it would be better to keep it anonymous, but only if there were no paper trail leading back to the seller.

I do not know if it it is true or not, and I certainly do not believe anything the plaintiff says unrebutted, but the point is they are looking for someone to sue in the food chain other than the perpetrator. They could have easily gone after the previous owner if it was FTF and there was a BOS. No BOS. Nobody to sue.

[Shorts]

Example of what I am talking about above:

Slain Houston Officer's Widow Sues Gun Store

Better to be completely anonymous IMO.

The burden falls on the law to find the purchaser guilty of knowingly and intentionally purchasing the weapon for his felon buddy.



The shopkeeper who sold the gun did everything legal if he ran the 4473 on the purchaser & who came out clean.


This is wrong to be suing the shop if they did everything right.

As said, the widow just wants to sue someone and lay blame

[texascop2]

That would be a straw sale and the FFL holder that did the transfer knew better than that and if the story is as it is read, then yes, he can and should be sued. If you purchase a gun from a reputable FFL, then sell it, the FFL holder has documentation pointing to you as the purchaser. If you re sell the gun and it is used in the commission of a crime, why would you ever advise anyone to not have a BOS produced that would point the finger in another direction? Sure, the law is the law and there is nothing technically they can do about the sale, but why not just CYA?

If the purchase was done FTF and no paperwork, then yes, I can see where it would be better to keep it anonymous, but only if there were no paper trail leading back to the seller.

The fact that it was used in a crime is EXACTLY why you dont want a BOS!!! I dont want my name brought into litigation...

[Old Arn]

Wow, I've been gone a couple days and this thread is now 3 pages long! Thanks for the replies, guys. Now I'm just checking on what exactly my residency status is since I moved here from VA in June, but haven't bothered to get a TX DL yet. I guess technically I'm a resident by the ATF's standards, right?

[texascop2]

Wow, I've been gone a couple days and this thread is now 3 pages long! Thanks for the replies, guys. Now I'm just checking on what exactly my residency status is since I moved here from VA in June, but haven't bothered to get a TX DL yet. I guess technically I'm a resident by the ATF's standards, right?

Depending on what statutes you look at...you are.

You are technically breaking the law now if you have established residency (i.e. taken permanent employment in Texas, established a permanent residence, put Texas license plates on your vehicle) and you have not changed your DL.

Once you move here to stay, you should have got a Texas DL, as you cant even buy a gun here without one at most places. Once you have that Texas DL, you can go crazy and buy all you want.

[Old Arn]

Breaking the law? I wasn't aware of that. Where can I find info on that? I wasn't sure about getting a TX DL here since the job I moved for was a short contract. Since I'm just breaking into the industry (3D), my intent was to finish the job, then see where it would take me. I wanted to move to Austin since that's where a lot of game companies are, but a recent bunch of layoffs over there changes things.

[txinvestigator]

Breaking the law? I wasn't aware of that. Where can I find info on that? I wasn't sure about getting a TX DL here since the job I moved for was a short contract. Since I'm just breaking into the industry (3D), my intent was to finish the job, then see where it would take me. I wanted to move to Austin since that's where a lot of game companies are, but a recent bunch of layoffs over there changes things.

You are required to have a Texas DL within 30 days of moving here, if you drive.

Texas Transportation Code
Sec. 521.001. DEFINITIONS. (a) In this chapter:(1) "Department" means the Department of Public Safety.(2) "Director" means the public safety director.(3) "Driver's license" means an authorization issued by the department for the operation of a motor vehicle. The term includes:(A) a temporary license or instruction permit; and(B) an occupational license.

Sec. 521.021. LICENSE REQUIRED. A person, other than a person expressly exempted under this chapter, may not operate a motor vehicle on a highway in this state unless the person holds a driver's license issued under this chapter.


Sec. 521.027. PERSONS EXEMPT FROM LICENSE REQUIREMENT. The following persons are exempt from the license requirement imposed under this chapter
1) a person in the service of the state military forces or the United States while the person is operating an official motor vehicle in the scope of that service;(
2) a person while the person is operating a road machine, farm tractor, or implement of husbandry on a highway, unless the vehicle is a commercial motor vehicle under Section 522.003
;(3) a nonresident on active duty in the armed forces of the United States who holds a license issued by the person's state or Canadian province of residence; and
(4) a person who is the spouse or dependent child of a nonresident exempt under Subdivision (3) and who holds a license issued by the person's state or Canadian province of residence.


Sec. 521.029. OPERATION OF MOTOR VEHICLE BY NEW STATE RESIDENTS. (a) A person who enters this state as a new resident may operate a motor vehicle in this state for no more than 30 days after the date on which the person enters this state if the person:(1) is 16 years of age or older; and(2) has in the person's possession a driver's license issued to the person by the person's state or country of previous residence.(b) If a person subject to this section is prosecuted for operating a motor vehicle without a driver's license, the prosecution alleges that the person has resided in this state for more than 30 days, and the person claims to have been covered by Subsection (a), the person must prove by the preponderance of the evidence that the person has not resided in this state for more than 30 days.