Must I ship muzzleloader to FFL?

[Naphtali]

I have a LeMat percussion cap lock revolver at sale. I just received a note from an interested buyer who wrote that I must ship the revolver to an FFL holder, per USPS web site information.

While this may or may not be accurate for USPS, I am unaware of any regulation change that forces me to send it to an FFL holder rather than directly to the buyer -- unless the buyer's state or municipality prohibits direct shipping.

Can anyone help me out here?

[marlinman93]

Unless it's a regulation of his state, no FFL is required to ship ANY muzzleloader, regardless of age of the gun. As long as the recipient is 18 or older. USPS doesn't require this at all, and neither do any other shippers. I think the prospetive buyer is misreading the USPS rules, and not reading far enough to see ML arms are exempt from those rules.

[awp101]

marlinman got it right in one!

There's a few states and cities that require it but no Fed regs.

[horsesoldier03]

If you read the shipping data from CABELAS, it states Residents of Hawaii, Mass., ILL., Mich., NY, and NJ need to check their local laws before ordering. You don't tell us where the guy lives. I suggest you google state laws rather than take the word of someone on an internet blog. The Post Office, UPS or FEDEX I am sure could be helpful at keeping you out of jail as well.

[Naphtali]

Thanks, guys. I wish I knew why the man sent me that note.

I have no idea where his residence is. I just got the note from him as a question from the auction site.

[Pete44ru]

I answered your question, over on the Ruger Forum - but after some consideration - why care ?

As long as YOU observe Federal law, and the laws of YOUR state, you are acting legally.

It's up to a buyer to act in accordance to both Fed Law and the laws of HIS state, whatever they may be.

After all, if it's going to be shipped to someone, what's the difference whether or not it's shipped directly to a buyer or his FFL ?

.

[kirkwood]

I answered your question, over on the Ruger Forum - but after some consideration - why care ?

As long as YOU observe Federal law, and the laws of YOUR state, you are acting legally.

It's up to a buyer to act in accordance to both Fed Law and the laws of HIS state, whatever they may be.

After all, if it's going to be shipped to someone, what's the difference whether or not it's shipped directly to a buyer or his FFL ?

.

Are you an attorney?
Didn't think so.

[jjames]

I would say if it isn't going to cost you anything why not send it to an FFL unless the FFL requires you to be an FFL and you are not. If that were the case make the buyer pay for any extra costs associated with the transfer. As a Californian I am very sensative about all the people who now refuse to ship to Ca because of the new requirement that the FFL receiving the gun must be verified as having all appropriate permits current. In speaking to several dealers that have shipped to my FFL the verification is a very simple on-line process that costs nothing. I am sure the antis see this law as a victory given that people won't sell into Ca. The Antis in the rest of the states now know of a successful ploy to disrupt free transfer without making it illegal which would be more difficult.