is it illegal to sell a gun with a non functioning safety?

[JoeJ615]

i have a Mossberg 590, and when i first got the gun i had to take it apart to fully clean it and when putting it back together i couldnt get the safety to work, so i just treat it like a Glock or any gun with no external safety and rely on the one between my ears ... i posted it online for "trade only" with a trade value and a few trade interests ... well a guy i dont know messaged me and offered me over $100 less than my trade value and "informed" me that is is in fact ILLEGAL to sell a gun with a safety that doesnt work ... i replied that i found that hard to swallow since many guns are made with no external safety whatsoever, and it wasnt like i wasnt being up front about the fact that the safety doesnt currently function ... he said he agreed that it didnt make sense but that he had his FFL and knew it to be the law... my question is does anyone know if this is true or is it just a line of BS to try and get a gun on the cheap? ... and if it is a law would it only be for FFL's or also private sales? ... i've seen people sell pistols with the magazine safety removed .. and i know certain gun manufacturers sell "kits" to change their safety/decocker models to decocker only  .. so i dont know im just confused at this point lol 

 

thanks in advance for any help

[JoeJ615]

and also if that is in fact the law ... would the fact that i have it listed for trade only and not for sale make a difference?

[Randall53]

It might just be me, but I'd not sell or trade until it was fixed regardless of the law.

[JoeJ615]

It might just be me, but I'd not sell or trade until it was fixed regardless of the law.

i just dont see any moral issue as long as the other party is informed of the "problem" ... personally i have zero issues with no safety on a gun as i dont rely on them anyway and always assume in my mind that they will fail ... i dont really feel like fiddling with the thing myself .. and honestly the gun is a shooter and FAR from a safe queen so not really looking to invest in any gunsmithing work on it only to have people lowball me anyway lol

[bud]

. Edited December 7, 2015 by bud

[JoeJ615]

i understand some people would have an issue with it, that's why i make sure it is clearly posted and remind them again when they offer a trade just in case they skipped past reading that part  .. some people are going to have issues with the fact that it's a gun to begin with so i can get over that lol ... what im looking for is if anyone can verify that there is a law stating that selling or trading it in private circles would be illegal ... as far as the switch "marked" safe/fire .. there are no markings just a switch on the tang of the shotgun .... and how would it be any different than the "kits" i mentioned in my original post that change certain model handguns from safety/decocker to decock only ... isnt that intentionally removing a factory installed external safety? and wouldnt it put you in the same or worse position because it was intentional? and those are sold by the gun makers 

Edited October 14, 2015 by JoeJ615

[TrickyNicky]

Dude is full of horse shoes from what I can see in my FFL regulations guide. I'll do a more through search and hopefully one or some of our vetted dealers here can clarify, but the whole thing seems super fishy to me. He's advising you that the sale is a crime, yet encouraging you to commit said crime by... selling it to him. Only for $100 less than advertised.  

 

Riiiiiiiggggghhhhht. That makes perfect sense in crazy land.*

 

 

Now I will say I would personally spend the couple of bucks fixing the safety before I sold it, but then again thats in part because I too would low ball the hell out someone selling a broken  gun. I wouldn't try to piss down their neck and tell them it was raining, but I wouldn't buy one like that for anything less than a serious discount, existence of kits for pistols and all.

 

 

 

 

 

*Crazy Land. 

Population: That guy.

[JoeJ615]

yeah i might just end up tearing it back down and trying to fix it again .. but last time i spent a solid couple of hours taking the gun apart and putting it back together a good 10 times  .. testing the safety to see if it worked this time and starting over .. that's the real headache is that you have to take it ALL the way apart to get at the safety mechanism ... and there's only one real way to put it back together ... then put it ALL the way back together to dry fire the weapon and see if it functions (the switch clicks in place like it works even though it doesnt) ... that's why i ended up just leaving it, because i couldnt for the life of me figure out what i was doing wrong, even after watching several disassembly/reassembly videos on youtube and google searching the issue

Edited October 14, 2015 by JoeJ615

[FUJIMO]

My opinion from both sides.

 

As the seller or trader- I would make sure to inform the potential buyer that the safety did not function properly and with all the recent lawsuit buzz I would probably draw up a document stating such and make sure to have it signed and dated by both parties to have something in writing just in case. It might be butt wipe with ink on it in a court of law but I'd at least feel better about selling a "broken" gun.

 

As the buyer- I would expose it as a flaw in the gun and try to haggle you down with it :)  But I wouldn't preach law to you, however true or not. That approach never flies with me when I'm selling something.

 

Personally I would wait for another rainy day and attempt another fix of that safety. Or find someone who will :))

[runco]

Would you sell someone a car with no brakes, when it had brakes when it was sold to you?  Even if you informed the buyer your car had no brakes, I would get a written signed release document of some sort if you did want to repair it yourself.  Just makes very common sense.

 

This has liability written all over it, even if full disclosure.  Even this original posting is a forever a written record that could be subpoenaed as evidence of what you did. 

 

Pay to have it fixed, problem solved. 

[Sweetmadness]

Every time I've been told "That's illegal," I've asked for a law or court case cite. Every time they've been full of it they walked away in a huff, and every time they've been correct, or even in the ballpark of correct, they've been able to show their source, or get me to the applicable bit of legalese in minutes.

That said, the liability isn't something you want.

[Omega]

I doubt it's illegal, but it can definitely get you in hot water if something happens to the buyer if they are not notified (I see you did).  If you sell it as is, I would do a bill of sale and make sure they initial where you told them the safety does not work.  Broken things are sold all the time, yes even cars with no brakes, broken trans, motors etc.  You just have to notify the buyer what issues you KNOW about to at least have a defense if not to keep you out of court.  If I buy or sell something with something broken, I make sure the price reflects that either partially or in total depending on what is broken. 

[macville]

Would you sell someone a car with no brakes, when it had brakes when it was sold to you?  Even if you informed the buyer your car had no brakes, I would get a written signed release document of some sort if you did want to repair it yourself.  Just makes very common sense.

 

That is a extremely bad analogy. A safety is a feature, not a critical function of a firearm. Breaks are critical for any vehicle period. A safety is closer to an air conditioner, radio, or at worse, air bags. If that were not the case then every glock and any other gun without a safety would be inherently dangerous.
 

A signed release stating that the safety is non functional and that the buyer is aware of it is all you need for legal reasons. Broken stuff is bought and sold all the time that way. Besides, if a person lets their kid get ahold of a loaded firearm with a broken safety and the kid shoots someone, I think they are going to have more legal issues to deal with than suing you over the safety.

[DaveTN]

There are no federal safety requirements for domestically produced firearms. However, there are states you couldn’t ship it to with a non-functioning safety. I wouldn’t sell a gun with a faulty safety. You don’t have to violating a law to lose in civil court.

[DaveTN]

A signed release stating that the safety is non functional and that the buyer is aware of it is all you need for legal reasons.

So someone can waiver liability in Tennessee and you are good to go?

[runco]

That is a extremely bad analogy. A safety is a feature, not a critical function of a firearm. Breaks are critical for any vehicle period. A safety is closer to an air conditioner, radio, or at worse, air bags. If that were not the case then every glock and any other gun without a safety would be inherently dangerous.
 

 

To common gun handlers, like the ones on this board, I agree with you, but for general public I do liken the safety feature of a gun to the brakes of the car. 

[Ted S.]

I've bought a shotgun with a broken safety. Didn't find out about it till I got home. So I fixed it. Don't know or care if any laws were broken, the shotgun works great now.

[glock55]

Joej615 why don't you call 5 reputable gun shops and ask them the same question then follow their lead. You will probably be ok if you do.

[macville]

So someone can waiver liability in Tennessee and you are good to go?

 

Try visiting a ropes course or other attraction with "danger" involved. Can you still be sued? Yes. But it's very unlikely because they know you have their signature on a doc that clearly states the issue with the gun.

[crossfire]

I would NEVER sell a gun that did not have the functioning safety it came with. Realize that no matter how much preplanning or forethought goes into safeguarding yourself you can ALWAYS be sued and no matter what you MUST have an attorney before stepping foot into any court room. Even if they sign a liability waiver you can still be sued. Doesn't mean they will win but they have every right to sue you even if it does get thrown out, eventually. Showing up in court to have it thrown out will cost you thousands of dollars. I would not expose myself or my family to that risk for what probably amounts to $30-$50 in repairs by a gunsmith.

 

Imagine if some 5,6 or 7 year old grabbed that gun and shot another kid. The parents would demand action and guess who would be at the front of the action? Yep, you would be because you knowingly sold a gun that you modified into a defective firearm. At a minimum you would get sued and God forbid you find a sympathetic judge who would allow it which is the first step in loosing. Then after a trial full of pictures of a dead kid and then the jury finds you culpable in some way and you are ordered to pay for the rest of your life. Courts do the wrong thing all the time.

 

I just cannot see exposing myself to the risk to save myself $50. BTW, an attorney is going to cost you 100x that just to retain them.

 

It is not illegal to sell a gun with a defective safety. The FFL is probably just trying to get a better price. BTW, a non functioning gun (which this one is) is only worth about 25% of the original price unless it is some sort of a rare gun. If it is a gun that is still being sold I would say it is worth 25% assuming everything else is like new. But fixed 75% of new is what it would be worth. If the difference between 25% and 75% more than the repair then it is a no brainer to get it fixed if for nothing else than to get as much as you can out of it. But in doing so it removes all the risk of selling a defective gun.

 

If it were me and I MUST sell the gun I would take it apart and remove the safety completely. I would hand the safety, and related parts, to the buyer in a plastic bag and have them sign an "as-is" bill of sale. That way there is no doubt in anyone's mind that the safety is not functioning. Still doesn't keep you from getting sued but between that and the "AS-IS" bill of sale it should at least keep you from getting a judgment against you but you can still be sued.

 

BTW, nothing you can say or do can prevent you from being sued. What you say or do can prevent them from winning but not you from being sued.

This :up:

Just my :2cents:

Edited October 15, 2015 by crossfire

[macville]

To common gun handlers, like the ones on this board, I agree with you, but for general public I do liken the safety feature of a gun to the brakes of the car. 

 

It doesn't matter who you are talking to, a false analogy is a false analogy. We have hollywood spreading enough FUD about guns without us doing it too. A safety is a feature of a gun, not a critical function of a gun.  :up:

[runco]

It doesn't matter who you are talking to, a false analogy is a false analogy. We have hollywood spreading enough FUD about guns without us doing it too. A safety is a feature of a gun, not a critical function of a gun.  :up:

Absolutely disagree.  We agree to disagree.  It does matter to some.  When I was in the biz, you would not believe the 1st timers that were very concerned about the gun safety feature.  Can you explain that concern to that person, and explain to that person that the safety is not a critical function. 

[xsubsailor]

 I just plugged "fixing a safety on a mossberg 590" into google and a couple of youtube videos came up. 

[DaveTN]

Try visiting a ropes course or other attraction with "danger" involved. Can you still be sued? Yes. But it's very unlikely because they know you have their signature on a doc that clearly states the issue with the gun.

It was a question. You posted that a signed release is all you need for legal reasons, as though it was fact. That doesn’t sound right to me but maybe it is in this state?

[bersaguy]

If it were me and I was trying to sell a gun that is designed with an external safety I would not sell it till the safety was fully operational. If I could not fix it myself I would take it to my gunsmith and get it fixed. Then and only then would I sell the gun. There is no way I could sleep at night knowing I sold and unsafe gun to someone that might have young children either in the home or visiting the home. Or even some adults for that fact.................JMHO