selling on gunbroker.com

[dmpickers]

on gunbroker.com, as a seller, is there an advantage to using a FFL to ship to the buyer's FFL? it seems like the cost would be almost the same b/c of the FFL fee versus me mailing it directly the buyer's FFL using UPS/Fedex.

 

[daorhgih]

FFL / no FFL

Better check your state laws.

 

[kingpin008]

Well for one, many FFLs will only accept shipments from other FFLs. It's not against any law for them to accept from individuals, but many simply won't. So yeah, in that case it's better to go through a FFL on your end as well.

Also, depending on the type of gun, it can be much easier for an FFL to ship it out, vs. a non-licensee. For instance, FFLs can walk right into the USPS and ship handguns all day long. Non-licensees, not so much. So even with the transfer fee, it'll likely be cheaper (in terms of time, money, AND hassle) for you to go through a FFL on your end in the long run.

And yeah, as Daorhgih mentioned, some states (Cali comes immediately to mind) will only allow incoming shipments from FFL to another FFL.

 

[nalioth]

Also, depending on the type of gun, it can be much easier for an FFL to ship it out, vs. a non-licensee.

Also, depending on the type of gun, it can be much easier for an FFL to ship it out, vs. a non-licensee. For instance, FFLs can walk right into the USPS and ship handguns all day long. Non-licensees, not so much. So even with the transfer fee, it'll likely be cheaper (in terms of time, money, AND hassle) for you to go through a FFL on your end in the long run.

I think you mean "much cheaper", and there is no difference in "hassle" or "time" for you to do it or your FFL.

And yeah, as Daorhgih mentioned, some states (Cali comes immediately to mind) will only allow incoming shipments from FFL to another FFL.

Really? When did California throw off the yoke of Federal oppression? It is quite legal to ship firearms to FFLs in CA if you're a private individual.

 

[natman]

Well for one, many FFLs will only accept shipments from other FFLs. It's not against any law for them to accept from individuals, but many simply won't. So yeah, in that case it's better to go through a FFL on your end as well.

Also, depending on the type of gun, it can be much easier for an FFL to ship it out, vs. a non-licensee. For instance, FFLs can walk right into the USPS and ship handguns all day long. Non-licensees, not so much. So even with the transfer fee, it'll likely be cheaper (in terms of time, money, AND hassle) for you to go through a FFL on your end in the long run.

And yeah, as Daorhgih mentioned, some states (Cali comes immediately to mind) will only allow incoming shipments from FFL to another FFL.

Your first two points are correct. However, like the Feds, CA allows individuals to ship directly to an FFL:

http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/cflcfaqs.php#2

"2. I am not an FFL but I want to ship a firearm to a California FFL. Do I have to obtain a Firearms Shipment Approval number before shipping a firearm to California?

No. The requirement to obtain a Firearms Shipment Approval number only applies to holders of valid FFLs."

 

[ZeroJunk]

I have shipped several long guns that I sold on Gunbroker directly to the FFL of the buyer's choice. Just took them to the post office 500 yards away. Doesn't get any easier than that.

Only shipped one pistol and the buyer's FFL requested it be shipped from another FFL which was OK with me since I can't ship a pistol USPS.

Might be a good idea to put in your add that if the buyer's FFL requires that it be shipped from an FFL that the buyer's pays the fee on your end since as near as I can tell there is no legal requirement for it, in this state anyway.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

The only advantage I can see is having him mail the gun to the receiving FFL. They are allowed to to that, whereas we have to use a "common carrier" and overnight service.

 

[Seattlefungus]

Being an FFL for a while. I no longer accept transfers from Non-FFL's. Why? Lack of documentation for where the gun came from. No name, no address. email to some "Hotmail account." Dispite many attempts to get the name and home address to do the loging, So, three times dealing with that with different sellers. No more transfers from non-ffls. Gun arrives without an FFL copy, package is refused and sent back.

 

[ZeroJunk]

Being an FFL for a while. I no longer accept transfers from Non-FFL's. Why? Lack of documentation for where the gun came from. No name, no address. email to some "Hotmail account." Dispite many attempts to get the name and home address to do the loging, So, three times dealing with that with different sellers. No more transfers from non-ffls. Gun arrives without an FFL copy, package is refused and sent back.

I had one FFL that wanted a copy of my driver's license in lieu of being shipped by an FFL. OK with me.

I don't mind shipping through an FFL. Just don't see why I, the seller, should pay for it since it is not a legal requirement. Perhaps that is why you see some shipping cost that are high, they are adding $25 or so for an FFL to do his paperwork on the shipping end.

 

[NavyLCDR]

Being an FFL for a while. I no longer accept transfers from Non-FFL's. Why? Lack of documentation for where the gun came from. No name, no address. email to some "Hotmail account." Dispite many attempts to get the name and home address to do the loging, So, three times dealing with that with different sellers. No more transfers from non-ffls. Gun arrives without an FFL copy, package is refused and sent back.

Well, that's interesting. I would have thought there would have been a return address on the package. At a minimum, I would think the buyer could tell you to whom and to where they sent payment for the gun to. I find it hard to believe that someone would send you a gun out of the blue, without specifying to whom they were intended for or with a return address. I know I certainly have better things to do with my guns than mail them to FFLs anonymously. But there are certifiable idiots in the world, so I am sure anything is possible.

 

[nalioth]

Being an FFL for a while. I no longer accept transfers from Non-FFL's. Why? Lack of documentation for where the gun came from. No name, no address. email to some "Hotmail account." Dispite many attempts to get the name and home address to do the loging, So, three times dealing with that with different sellers. No more transfers from non-ffls. Gun arrives without an FFL copy, package is refused and sent back.

Well, that's interesting. I would have thought there would have been a return address on the package. At a minimum, I would think the buyer could tell you to whom and to where they sent payment for the gun to. I find it hard to believe that someone would send you a gun out of the blue, without specifying to whom they were intended for or with a return address. I know I certainly have better things to do with my guns than mail them to FFLs anonymously. But there are certifiable idiots in the world, so I am sure anything is possible.

Indeed. The Post Office will not handle anything that does not have a return address.

 

[Full Metal Jacket]

Indeed. The Post Office will not handle anything that does not have a return address.

just got a letter today with no return address.


to the OP: you can only ship a gun to someone through the USPS if you have an FFL. otherwise use Fedex or UPS. UPS sux, so i would use Fedex if i didn't have an FFL. if you do have an FFL, the USPS is cheapest.

I don't mind shipping through an FFL. Just don't see why I, the seller, should pay for it since it is not a legal requirement.

it is a legal requirement. not shipping a firearm through a FFL holder that is not a curio/relic is a federal crime.

 

[nalioth]

Indeed. The Post Office will not handle anything that does not have a return address.

just got a letter today with no return address.

My post office won't accept anything w/o a return address on it. With humans involved, I'm sure some slip through.

to the OP: you can only ship a gun to someone through the USPS if you have an FFL. otherwise use Fedex or UPS. UPS sux, so i would use Fedex if i didn't have an FFL. if you do have an FFL, the USPS is cheapest

I'm sorry, but this is incorrect.

A private citizen can mail long guns to anyone legally able to receive them.

 

[Full Metal Jacket]

 

[ZeroJunk]

He 's correct FMJ. I can ship a long gun through the post office to an FFL and I don't have an FFL. I do it fairly regularly. If I ship it straight to the buyer and not through an FFL that would be illegal. The USPS restriction on shipping for non FFL's is for pistols. Long guns are OK. I have also shipped long guns UPS, but I don't know what their pistol rules are. I have not tried FedEx, but my hunting partner this year tried to ship his rifle back to himself from a MT hunting trip and FedEx would not do it even though it is legal and specifically addressed on the ATF website for hunting purposes, so I guess FedEx is more difficult.

 

[nalioth]

If I ship it straight to the buyer and not through an FFL that would be illegal.

I said "any legal recipient", and I meant it.

Unless your state or local laws prohibit it, you can mail a long gun directly to any legal recipient of your state.

 

[jim in Anchorage]

I just checked into this a week ago. Wanted to ship a rifle to a out of state individual. His FFL said FFL to FFL only. My FFL said get a copy of the out of state dealers FFL, bring it to Fed X and they will ship it if the shiping address matchs the FFL.

 

[nalioth]

I just checked into this a week ago. Wanted to ship a rifle to a out of state individual. His FFL said FFL to FFL only. My FFL said get a copy of the out of state dealers FFL, bring it to Fed X and they will ship it if the shiping address matchs the FFL.

THat was a business decision made by the FFL holder.

It is not the law.

[18 U.S.C. 921(a)(32), 922(g)(8) and 925(a)(1)]

(B7) May a nonlicensee ship a firearm through the U.S. Postal Service?[Back]

A nonlicensee may not transfer a firearm to a non-licensed resident of another State. A nonlicensee may mail a shotgun or rifle to a resident of his or her own State or to a licensee in any State. The Postal Service recommends that long guns be sent by registered mail and that no marking of any kind which would indicate the nature of the contents be placed on the outside of any parcel containing firearms. Handguns are not mailable. A common or contract carrier must be used to ship a handgun.

 

[ZeroJunk]

I said "any legal recipient", and I meant it.

Unless your state or local laws prohibit it, you can mail a long gun directly to any legal recipient of your state.

Not arguing with you at all, but if I ship a gun in state it is still going to an FFL transfer agent.

 

[Vector]

The USPS restriction on shipping for non FFL's is for pistols. Long guns are OK. I have also shipped long guns UPS, but I don't know what their pistol rules are. I have not tried FedEx, but my hunting partner this year tried to ship his rifle back to himself from a MT hunting trip and FedEx would not do it even though it is legal and specifically addressed on the ATF website for hunting purposes, so I guess FedEx is more difficult.

I never thought of that, but it make sense. Can't imagine why FedEx would not allow him to ship it to himself.

 

[nalioth]

I said "any legal recipient", and I meant it.

Unless your state or local laws prohibit it, you can mail a long gun directly to any legal recipient of your state.

Not arguing with you at all, but if I ship a gun in state it is still going to an FFL transfer agent.

As with the FFL above, that is your personal choice and not required by the law.

 

[Guns and more]

Indeed. The Post Office will not handle anything that does not have a return address.

Can anyone tell me why?
I tried to mail a book to a friend as a surprise. The Post Office refused it.
The lady behind the counter said it was because of the anthrax situation.
She was so upset I feared she would throw my package away, so I complied.
But the anthrax laden package DID have a return address, wasn't it some school?
And they didn't solve the case by looking at the return address.
So I could have put any return address on my package and they would have been happy.
Is this supposed to make sense?

 

[mgkdrgn]

Can anyone tell me why?

Because stupid people with nothing else to do make up stupid rules.

 

[DoubleTapDrew]

But the anthrax laden package DID have a return address, wasn't it some school?
And they didn't solve the case by looking at the return address.

That would be priceless if some terrorist was dumb enough to use his own address on the return label.