John Ross not delivering paid for JR500

(1) “Bash” implies an unfounded or exaggerated claim. Not the case here....

Click to expand...

Really?

Actually, bash means “to criticize severely”. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/bash

Which is the case here. Thirteen pages of wrath and handwringing is twelve too many.....


.

Falling on hard times is no excuse for screwing someone out of money. Last I checked, it was also illegal.

The guys at CB should also be ashamed of themselves.

This entire event could have been avoided with simple communication. JMHO.

S.B. said:

Odd Job, as I stated earlier, I've dealt with John on my 500 and it went very well.

Click to expand...

So what? What on Earth does that have to do with the OP's situation?

S.B. said:

Haven't we all fell on hard times in the past?

Click to expand...

Is it your position that falling on hard times justifies or excuses absconding with your customers' money?

25-20 WCF said:

Really?

Click to expand...

Yes, really.

25-20 WCF said:

Actually, bash means “to criticize severely”. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/bash

Click to expand...

Akshully, dictionaries don't always capture every local semantic variation of a word. "Appeal to definition / appeal to the dictionary" is an informal logical fallacy for a reason.

An accusation of "bashing," as it's used on every one of the dozen or so gun forums I read, is invariably not merely a neutral referent to the act of criticizing something -- it's used to suggest that the criticism is invalid or overstated, at least in part.

25-20 WCF said:

Thirteen pages of wrath and handwringing is twelve too many.....

Click to expand...

The length of the thread is of no relevance whatsoever. (And the person with the most control over the eventual length of the thread was John Ross.)

I am surprised that the self-described candidate for BATF Director actually refunded the money.

Falling on "hard times" (empty beer cooler?) doesn't mean you can take people's money and not deliver the merchandise as intended.

I was recently alerted to this 14 page(!) thread about my alleged thievery. I had not logged in to this site for quite some time and was not aware of this thread's existence until two days ago. Perhaps those of you who speculated about why I never shipped the customer's gun would like to hear the "rest of the story"...

The fellow sent me a check, and later, an FFL, yes. I did not ship the gun, so he contacted his local police department and the Missouri Attorney General to lodge formal complaints against me. He had carefully documented all of his correspondence to me, had a photocopy of the check I had cashed, and provided these things to the law enforcement agencies.

ALL OF THIS IS TRUE.

Now, here's a question for all of you to ponder: Can any of you think of a logical and acceptable reason why a person of integrity would deliberately and intentionally fail to ship a gun that had been paid for?

Go ahead, think on it for a bit, I'll wait...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


Here's what he DIDN'T tell you at any point in this 14 page thread:

The FFL he eventually sent me was EXPIRED.

When he contacted the police and the Missouri AG, he did NOT include copies of either the FFL, or the emails and texts that I had sent HIM. My emails pointed out that the FFL he had provided had expired before he had sent it to me, and to please get me a current one, either a physical copy or a scanned one sent by email.

I explained in my emails that I would be committing a felony if I shipped a gun to his dealer without having a current copy of their license in hand, and I wasn't going to do that.

After getting threatening letters from the authorities, I wrote back to the police department and the Missouri Attorney General, explaining these facts. I enclosed a photo of the expired license on top of the envelope (showing postmark) it came in, and the check that I was sending to refund his money with a 20% annualized interest rate added for the days that I had the funds.

Now, can any of you come up with a scenario where this story makes any sense at all? I have the man's money, and I have the gun he wants. All I need is a valid, current copy of an FFL in his state, and I'll ship the gun. Instead of emailing me a current scan with an apology for the oversight, he contacts law enforcement? How does that make any sense? Go ahead, think on it, I'll wait...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


There is an old adage "never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence." However, failing to provide something as basic as a current FFL after repeated requests, and then siccing law enforcement on me goes far beyond mere incompetence.

This situation was smelling more and more like the "customer" or his alleged dealer had run afoul of the ATF, and one or both of them had been recruited by that agency to lure me into actions that would constitute a felony. That is the way the ATF operates.

In my letter to the AG, I freely admitted that I had been critical of the ATF in the past, and I wasn't going to fall for a game of entrapment. I explained that I was NEVER going to do business in the future with the Montana licensee in question, current FFL copy or not.

The guy cashed my check, and I sent bank photocopies to the authorities. This immediately closed the case to the satisfaction of both enforcement agencies, and I never heard from the guy or his dealer again.

Oh, and someone mentioned in this thread that I "don't even have an FFL."

ALSO TRUE. After dragging their feet on renewing my license in July of 2016, saying they were "busy" and giving me extension letters, ATF stopped taking my calls or answering my emails in November 2016, starting the day after Trump won the election. On January 19, 2017, ATF called and said they were not renewing my license after over 40 years of being in business. Note the date...

As a final note, I must say that after reading this lengthy thread two days ago, I'm disappointed that many of you elected to pile on, but nobody thought to ask "Hey, is the FFL you sent him current?"

John Ross

Thank you for the detailed explanation.

Sorry to hear that you got caught up in such a mess.

EDIT:

I must add that I find it interesting that none of the currently active membership felt that they knew you enough to contact you about this Thread/situation over the past year. Well, you did state that you have not logged in here for quite some time, so ...

John Ross said:

I was recently alerted to this 14 page(!) thread about my alleged thievery. I had not logged in to this site for quite some time and was not aware of this thread's existence until two days ago. ...

Click to expand...

It puzzles me to no avail that someone would start a thread like this without laying out ALL of the facts. Clearly there was an ulterior motive.

OP, want to explain why you ignored the request by Mr. Ross for a valid license from your FFL and why you failed to put that into your rant/defamation.

This whole thing sounds pretty rotten. I didn't read all 14 pages, just the first and last. This "He said - He said" doesn't quite do it for me. I'd like to see copies of the checks (after they have been cashed, if available).

and no communication to a paying client ? Hmmmmmmm?

This seems like an unfortunate set of circumstances, especially if you have made good on all of your business dealings. Sorry to say that any time I've ever heard your name brought up in a topic it is an angry customer saying hes been ghosted by you and is looking to get in touch with authorities and warn folks off from doing business with you.

It's a shame. It seems you are very good at your craft....

I tell everyone I speak to who is interested in buying a gun from me that I am a one-man operation. I do not have a secretary, let alone a shipping department.

Further, I'm somewhat crippled up, and all guns are stored in a bank vault away from my home, so it may take a bit before I can get there and retrieve it for packaging and shipment.

In addition, speaking engagements and family issues regularly take me out of town, often to places in rural areas where Internet and cell phone service is spotty at best. When that happens, I'm not ghosting you, it's the reality of the circumstances.

Most gun sellers have enough employees that someone is always there who can always ship within 24 hours of receiving good funds and a valid FFL. That is NOT my situation…

I tell all potential customers this up front, but apparently some don't listen.

I'm not in the firearms business any longer, as I no longer have a license. ATF has ruled that selling off either a personal collection or the inventory of a closed business is a legitimate endeavor and not "dealing in firearms without a federal license." That is what I am doing. Most of my NFA weapons are going to the Rock Island auction house for their June 2021 auction.

A private investor is trying to get a bank loan to purchase my existing stock of John Ross .500 revolvers, which he intends to hold for at least a year before selling any of them. This would put his profits in the long term capital gains category instead of ordinary income, and according to his lawyer, would shield him from any charges of dealing in firearms without a license. Serial number JRA0001 sold for over $4200 at auction a year ago.

So this was resolved already. We got both stories. Do we need the continued bickering? No one here knows who is correct and its likely that neither are 100% correct. Let us judge it from whats here.

I have a JRC 500. Fantastic gun, and it was basically new in box when I got it used a few years ago. I think it had 12 rounds put though it. There are ways to get them not through John.

I ask myself one simple question? if the seller firmly believed he was dealing with a purchaser whose FFL had indeed expired, He had an option that he COULD AND SHOULD HAVE USED! He should have returned the money!~
Failure to do so is considered theft! NO IFF ANDS OR BUTS! Took the cash and didn't ship!
BUYERS BEWARE ~ Purchase locally or from someone you know well!
After reading all the responses from both parties I would never deal with John Ross and I dont think too many others on the forum would either

In the absence of any verifiable evidence, I would score mtshooter69 1, John Ross 0.

John Ross said:

I have the man's money, and I have the gun he wants. All I need is a valid, current copy of an FFL in his state, and I'll ship the gun.

Click to expand...

Giving him his money back occurs to me as being a way to have honorably resolved the "dispute" from the get-go.