Sue ffls for not releasing

[Arcamm]

I finally understand the reason for a "cooling off" period.

Yes, 7 days to "cool off".

But the next 83+ days become the "boiling over" period.

 

[webb297]

I can't believe people are sitting here saying dude is mentally unstable because hebhad thoughts of a frickin lawsuit! Get real

All this crap about finding his name and sending it to every ffl in Maryland to turn him away is what's wrong with this state and country. WTF the level of petty is unbelievable really. Listen to the shit people are suggesting and then look at the shot omalley is doing. What the he'll is the differance? Good lord. When I joined this forum I had nooo idea there would bs a significant amount of people just like omalley that hates omalley.

says the guy who is defending the OP who wants to sue FFLs for not releasing his firearm because it could put their license in jeopardy. That seems much more petty to me.

 

[annihilation-time]

FFLs want to transfer purchased firearms as much as customers want them. At the same time, they need to do what's best for their business. This is pretty simple. No FFL is going to put their livelihood and/or family before your desire to have a regulated firearm in hand. If you need a gun that bad, go get yourself a long gun. A pump-action shotgun is fun, easy to manipulate, and extremely destructive.

 

[Bang]

FFLs want to transfer purchased firearms as much as customers want them. At the same time, they need to do what's best for their business. This is pretty simple. No FFL is going to put their livelihood and/or family before your desire to have a regulated firearm in hand. If you need a gun that bad, go get yourself a long gun. A pump-action shotgun is fun, easy to manipulate, and extremely destructive.

THIS!

 

[ELEMENT94]

They ALL need to release. MSP said OK as well as ATF who even said if audited the FFLs would not be held responsible. We dont live in a perfect world. Thats about as good as you are gonna get.

 

[cmecha]

Dealing with MSP it seems yhe left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[garyad]

It is a liability issue. Hypothetical: Gun Shop sells a gun to a guy. After 8 days, Gun Shop does a NICS check, Guy comes up clean, Gun Shop releases gun exactly the way y'all "real 2A guys" want them to. 6 weeks later, MD State Police return "disapproved" paper work, because Guy was previously the resident of a nut house for violent tendencies, but did not show up on the NICS database. The next night, Guy uses the purchased gun to kill Little Johny. Little Johny's parents are very upset that a crazy person was given a gun. Guy was given the gun, by the Gun Shop, and was not approved by State Police. Little Johny's parents bring a civil lawsuit against Gun Shop, for releasing the gun. Gun Shop argues: "I did what was legal, thats all I care about" Judge says, just because you can, does not mean you should, judgment is for the plaintiff, 1o million dollars. Bye, bye, Gun Shop.

I am not a lawyer

This scenario could happen even with a ND. Whos going to get sued then? Does the fact that the MSP gave a ND get the FFL off the hook? If so how? Both were lawful legal transactions. Thanks

 

[Wojo]

They ALL need to release. MSP said OK as well as ATF who even said if audited the FFLs would not be held responsible. We dont live in a perfect world. Thats about as good as you are gonna get.

Do you possess the affidavit of those "approvals" by the ATF and MSP?

What if an FFL feels they are dealing with a shady character that realizes the process if f'd up now and is taking advantage of the situation? Still release?

 

[SummitCnty]

Because I have a couple of grand just sitting around for a lawyer.

 

[Sthomas229]

Should or would it be possible to file a lawsuit against an ffl who won't release and is holding our paid in full firearms hostage. Many reputable sources have confirmed it is legal with both the ATF and msp to release before msp paperwork is returned.
I would never sue a gun shop for this I was just seeing the consensus, nor am I saying all ffls are the enemy. I do plan to move in the future to a friendlier state, but in the meantime when I make purchases I will use a different ffl, and on moving my current purchases I've been waiting to see if they loosen up on policy, I've even heard some shops are not shipping to other in state ffls, that's a problem for me because I bought off gunbroker and cannot simply return and buy from another shop. Being at a non releasing shop I'm worried that due to the flood of 8 dayers the backlog will compound. Sorry for all the hurt feelings I'm not threatening to get my lawyer just taking a pulse

Don't let the door hit you in the azz on the way out.

 

[ELEMENT94]

Do you possess the affidavit of those "approvals" by the ATF and MSP?

What if an FFL feels they are dealing with a shady character that realizes the process if f'd up now and is taking advantage of the situation? Still release?

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?p=2475364#post2475364

 

[BigToe]

Do you possess the affidavit of those "approvals" by the ATF and MSP?

What if an FFL feels they are dealing with a shady character that realizes the process if f'd up now and is taking advantage of the situation? Still release?

Exactly....even if the dealer can "legally" release after the 8th day, do you want to be the FFL to release early, have the firearm used in a crime, traced back to your store, and next thing you know, you're establishment is on the news?

Look at the FFL dealer that sold the Bushmaster used at Sandy Hook. They were closed down for "undisclosed reasons" within days of the tragedy.

 

[Wojo]

http://www.mdshooters.com/showthread.php?p=2475364#post2475364

So that's a no. A1 is taking a stand based on conversations they had with ATF and MSP. That is their decision. Other may want an affidavit, notice on official letterhead or other like document. Nothing has changed. Even A1 is NOT releasing to everyone without receiving a ND from MSP.

 

[ELEMENT94]

So that's a no. A1 is taking a stand based on conversations they had with ATF and MSP. That is their decision. Other may want an affidavit, notice on official letterhead or other like document. Nothing has changed. Even A1 is NOT releasing to everyone without receiving a ND from MSP.

Imperfect world. Time will tell.

 

[Wojo]

Imperfect world. Time will tell.

Don't get me wrong I don't fault either side. The federal component is what I would worry about.

Let's say that ATF contact that gave the verbal leaves his/her positions. New contact decides to do a surprise inspection at the FFL. FFL has a bunch of paperwork with released firearms without an NTN. New ATF guy/girl says "that's ur ass". FFL says " but I has a verbal from Agent Wrong". Agent Wrong says " see you in Federal Court, tell it to the judge".

Now FFl has to retain a lawyer for Federal Court. Bet that's cheap. probably not too expensive to sink an FFL though.

 

[webb297]

This scenario could happen even with a ND. Whos going to get sued then? Does the fact that the MSP gave a ND get the FFL off the hook? If so how? Both were lawful legal transactions. Thanks

If the state tells the Vendor that the customer is "Not Disapproved", then what that means is that all reasonable precautions (as defined by the state) have been taken to ensure that an unqualified person does not receive a weapon. At that point the Vendor should not have any liability. To release with out the ND is opening the vendor up to liability, because a case could be made that they did not go through all reasonable precautions to prevent someone from having a firearm they should not legally have. Once the ND comes back the State is pretty well insulated from lawsuits (unless they screw up some paperwork). Again, not a lawyer.

 

[PJDiesel]

I feel like I am in some alternate universe here lately.



(Also)

It warms my heart to NOT be the one getting banned from here every other month, there's a whole rash of new pukes to take up the slack.

 

[KingGeorge]

says the guy who is defending the OP who wants to sue FFLs for not releasing his firearm because it could put their license in jeopardy. That seems much more petty to me.

Says the guy who didn't defend shit, I never defended his idea I said it's his life and his money to waste. Never said it was good or bad because I don't care. What I'm not goina do is say he's some kinda ticker that's unstable and should be reported to all ffl dealers in the state to avoid. Really? Lol man I'm done though. If that's how you all are living then so bs it. Just know that your type or those types don't make this country a better place.

Thee end

 

[ELEMENT94]

Don't get me wrong I don't fault either side. The federal component is what I would worry about.

Let's say that ATF contact that gave the verbal leaves his/her positions. New contact decides to do a surprise inspection at the FFL. FFL has a bunch of paperwork with released firearms without an NTN. New ATF guy/girl says "that's ur ass". FFL says " but I has a verbal from Agent Wrong". Agent Wrong says " see you in Federal Court, tell it to the judge".

Now FFl has to retain a lawyer for Federal Court. Bet that's cheap. probably not too expensive to sink an FFL though.

That may happen with some obscure, isolated incident on a person to person level. But this is a question that has been asked thousands of times in the last week. They would not be able to say Joe Blow doesnt work here anymore, and we dont know what you are talking about.

ETA - No I dont think FFLs should be sued though.

 

[KingGeorge]

Were all in the same fight regardless of differences. There's no need to stand in little clicks and go at people that you need to be on the same page. Were already out numbered and people want to send off the vibe that ::certain:: people ain't good enough. I'm already getting (warned) for whatever reasons by mods I guess. Probably for being new and putting people in there place.

Think I'm done with this forum already.