Not shipping to a C&R license holder

[Symbolic]

Why do some people refuse to ship a C&R firearm to someone with a valid C&R license? That's one of the reasons I got the thing in the first place.

[Guest cardcutter]

A little more information please.
WHo did this?
What were you buying?
Thanks
Jim

[Motasyco]

I've never been denied shipment on a C&R purchase. As cardcutter asked...who...what?

[DMark]

There are alot of Dealers who just don't understand the 03FFL Curio & Relic license.

They often are the type of dealers who ask if its on the "C&R List" without knowing that the list is the Curio part of the C&R license. A new production firearm can be on the "C" list.

They refuse to read the first page of the ATF C&R regulations where is states [color=#FF0000][b]In Red [/b][/color]that any firearm over 50 years old (unless controlled by the GCA-1968) is a Relic and can be sold to a 03FFL.

But.....,

Some dealers also run into the issue of local laws that restrict sales to C&R license holders (California is known for that).

When I see "No Shipping to C&R FFL" I take my business elsewhere.

[Symbolic]

There were two WWII items I was interested in on Gunbroker, a 1911 and a K98, all original from the description. I didn't see anything about C&R being OK, so I sent a message asking. Both sellers said they will not ship to a C&R, only to an FFL. These are private individuals, not businesses. The first time I was told no, I thought it was wierd. Then the second time I was told no, it really bugged me. I have only A+ feedback on Gunbroker, so they can't be going off that. I'm thinking it's just personal preference.

[DaveTN]

[quote name='Symbolic' timestamp='1353435324' post='848790']
There were two WWII items I was interested in on Gunbroker, a 1911 and a K98, all original from the description. I didn't see anything about C&R being OK, so I sent a message asking. Both sellers said they will not ship to a C&R, only to an FFL. These are private individuals, not businesses. The first time I was told no, I thought it was wierd. Then the second time I was told no, it really bugged me. I have only A+ feedback on Gunbroker, so they can't be going off that. I'm thinking it's just personal preference.
[/quote]
For the same reason some FFL's won't sell to out of state residents when they are allowed to; because they have to know both states laws and in this case the C&R rules.

They may also not want to risk selling to you because being 50 years old does not make it C&R; being 50 and in original condition does. They may just not want to take the risk; deal with someone that will.

[DMark]

[quote name='DaveTN' timestamp='1353436061' post='848795'].... They may also not want to risk selling to you because being 50 years old does not make it C&R; being 50 and in original condition does..... [/quote]

50 years old is a Curio & Relic as found in statute 27 CFR § 478.11. That is the Law.

Original condition applies to the importation of military C&R firearms and Curios [u]which are less [/u]than 50 years old.

The "original condition" confusion comes from an old ATF Firearms Technology Branch (FTB) memo that concluded that firearms on the curio list had to be in original configuration to be a C&R. Think about it, Winchester pre-64s, Ishapore Enfield, CZ82, Yugo SKS etc., etc. are on the C&R list but may not be 50 years old. The FTB's interpretation was that the collector value of these under 50 year old firearms was only if they were in original condition and that fact would make them a Curio.

By the way, Samco, Rguns, SOG all sell 50 year old barreled actions as C&R, and you can get C&R gunsmith specials from JG and Century as well. They get audited by ATF pretty regularly. They can do this since the Federal definition of a "firearm" is the serial numbered part, the receiver. As long as the receiver is 50 years old or older its a C&R regardless of modifications. When Gibbs began to sell their 1903A4 sniper replicas built from original Remington-made World War II M1903A3 actions and turned-down bolts, which Gibbs obtained when it purchase Parker-Hale in the 1990's some dealers, AIM being one of them, wouldn't sell them to C&R holders because they were not in original condition. These dealers based this action on their mistaken interpretation of the FTB memo. Gibbs got the ATF to state to these dealers the plain meaning of the text of the actual statute, which is "firearms over 50 years old" is a class of C&R and that any modification can be done to a firearm 50 years or older and it is still a C&R. The FTB's interpretation Did Not apply to these 50 year old firearms.

That is why you can now buy a Gibbs 1903A4 "clone" sniper rifle from AIM with your C&R FFL.

So - - - Keep it simple and go with what the statute actually says, which is firearms over fifty years old are by definition C&R.

But - - - 49 years and 364 days - - - Well it had better be as it was on its Born-On-Date.

Comments?

[DaveTN]

[quote name='DMark' timestamp='1353469397' post='849013']
50 years old is a Curio & Relic as found in statute 27 CFR § 478.11. That is the Law.

Original condition applies to the importation of military C&R firearms and Curios [u]which are less [/u]than 50 years old.

[/quote]
This discussion makes my point. As a holder of a C&R license I can only go by what is published and the interpretations the ATF posts. I guess I could make an argument about what the law says, but I could very well be making that argument in a courtroom; not worth the risk to me.

The point is that having a C&R and selling a gun 50 years old doesn’t blanketly make it legal. You have C&R rules and you have state and local laws that you must know and abide by. Some dealers don’t want to mess with that.

[quote]Q: What modifications can be made on C&R firearms without changing their C&R classification?

The definition for curio or relic (“C & R”) firearms found in 27 CFR § 478.11 does not specifically state that a firearm must be in its original condition to be classified as a C&R firearm. However, ATF Ruling 85-10, which discusses the importation of military C&R firearms, notes that they must be in original configuration and adds that a receiver is not a C&R item. [u][i][b]Combining this ruling and the definition of C&R firearms, the Firearms Technology Branch (FTB) has concluded that a firearm must be in its original condition to be considered a C&R weapon.[/b][/i][/u]

It is also the opinion of FTB, however, that a minor change such as the addition of scope mounts, non-original sights, or sling swivels would not remove a firearm from its original condition. Moreover, we have determined that replacing particular firearms parts with new parts that are made to the original design would also be acceptable-for example, replacing a cracked M1 Grand stock with a new wooden stock of the same design, but replacing the original firearm stock with a plastic stock would change its classification as a C&R item.

Q: Does the Federal firearms law require licensed collectors to comply with State laws and local published ordinances which are relevant to the enforcement of the GCA?

Yes. It is unlawful for any licensed collector to sell or deliver any firearm or ammunition to any person if the person’s purchase or possession [u][i][b]would be in violation of any State law or local published ordinance [/b][/i][/u]applicable at the place of sale or delivery.
[/quote]

[DMark]

DaveTN,

You're spot-on with you post and it points out why there are problems. Sometimes I think the ATF wants the confusion.

- The first "Q&A" on the ATF website that you have quoted is the comment that has caused all of the confusion about the 50 year rule . That was the answer which AIM incorrectly used to not sell the Gibbs rifles at first. It was that post that Gibbs had to get the ATF to tell the dealers didn't apply to the 50 year old rule. The ATF has also never published a clarification of this online interpretation. To this day nobody in the FTB of the ATF will say who posted that answer and after [u]several[/u] years its still on the ATF website. Reckon its the, "It must be true, its on the internet" deal.

- But the second Q&A is correct and that is why many dealers won't sell to a C&R since they would have to know every local code written by every left-wing wacko local council. You are correct to point out that those local rules would keep the sale of a 50 year old firearm from happening - - - But yet the firearm would still be a C&R by statute 27 CFR § 478.11.

I tell everybody if they love obamacare to just take a look at the ATF's [b][i]make it up as we go rulings, we'll write that reg later and we reserve to comment on that law when and how we want to [/i][/b]for examples of what their healthcare will be........

[LCPfraTN]

[quote name='DMark' timestamp='1353433745' post='848779']When I see "No Shipping to C&R FFL" I take my business elsewhere.[/quote]
+1 on that. Sometimes it might be cheaper for me to actually send it to one of my local FFL dealers due to the different shipping method costs required, but if a dealer isn't going to even be rational about the C&R classification and be willing to work with a C&R holder, I'm not going to do business with that dealer. I see this quite a bit on GB, and I think it ultimately reduces the sales prices that these dealers could otherwise get just because it annoys C&R holders like me that aren't going to do business with them. Another type of dealer that I won't do business with are the ones that insist on receiving by snail mail, an originally signed copy of my C&R license or my FFL dealers license. I mean, come on, if your selling on the internet, you need to join the 21st century and learn that FAX and PDF file copies are acceptable forms of FFL license transmission.

[Guest marysfrend]

I too have had this problem,I usually attribute it to ignorance and move on ,if they are not smart enough to know the law I dont want to deal with them anyway,

I thought all Mosin Nagants were over 50 years old, how hard is that to figure out when the date of manufacture is PRINTED ON THE GUN.