but why?
Have we discussed this before?
Despite most of the sentiment here legally speaking a BOS with photo IDs of both parties is not a bad idea. It protects the seller if the buyer does something nefarious with the gun and it is traced back to the seller. It protects the buyer if the seller after the transfer reports the gun as stolen. The second case actually happened to me once. One more thing...those of you criticizing the person selling this for requiring BOS certainly have the right to not buy the gun, just as the person selling it certainly has the right to require the BOS. Ain't the USA great?
Agreed the notarizing or the FFL route is more safe, but my personal experience having a BOS with photo IDs, and I took a picture of it which established a date saved me a lot of headaches.Actually from a legal viewpoint, unless the BOS has been officially notarized, legally it's essentially worthless.
How would anyone prove when the BOS was written? And exactly by whom?
I would suggest that, if this is of such a concern about it coming back to haunt you, a person could insist on going through an FFL dealer for the transfer. No surprises then.
Personally, if I were to sell any firearms, I put them on consignment at my gun dealer. Two reasons why. One, they can do the paperwork, and two, people go to a gun store to look at guns to buy.
I agree, it's the seller's option to require a BOS if that is their preference, but it should be stipulated upfront that the seller requires one.
Actually from a legal viewpoint, unless the BOS has been officially notarized, legally it's essentially worthless.
....
How would anyone prove when the BOS was written? And exactly by whom?
I remember when I stopped shopping at Radio Shack. Could not buy a battery without the time consuming task of giving my name, address, etc, while clerk tried to type it in one finger at a time...
"NEVER?" Let me be the first then. In 2015 I bought a Colt Python from in individual for $1750.00. I bought it because I knew I could sell it for far more. I had a BOS. In fact it was I the buyer who insisted on it. Some months later I consigned the gun to my trusted FFL to sell. In the meantime the POS who sold it to me reported it as stolen. So when it sold I got a call from the FFL. Because I was able to easily prove I had legally purchased it the matter was quickly resolved...at least for me. The POS was charged with falsely reporting a crime, and insurance fraud.
WhatWouldSgtYorkDo?1903 Springfield or 1917 U.S. Enfield?
But peep sights are superior to tangent sights. WWI-era 1903 Springfield rifles ALL had tangent sights.Honestly? I think it's a much nicer looking rifle. IMO.
WhatWouldSgtYorkDo?