Gun Control through Ammo Control - Fact or Fiction

[LinuxRandal]

More and more, companies are selling licenses rather than products. For example, when you buy software you are buying a license or right to use the software, not the software itself. That's why it's not legal to resell Windows, for example. Some companies are doing that with other products, too. For example, you might "buy" a computer, but you are really only buying a license, which means you have the right to use the hardware but do not actually own it, and therefore cannot legally resell it, etc.

Typically, buying a computer is a two sale deal. You OWN the hardware (first sale doctrine covers you on resale), but NOT the software (where a license covers you). This is why you can donate the computer to an organization, or sell it to a friend/at a garage sale, etc.

Even then, a license, must be properly written, to be enforceable (see your lawyer) and cannot force upon you conditions that are illegal, or you don't agree to.

I haven't seen any of these resell conditions, but I wasn't in the market for an overpriced (due to fear) gun, until recently, when I found a left handed friendly firearm, from a friend who needed the money. (less then half price from anything I looked at new) I have a box of reloads, from when I shot with a former LEO/postal police officer and sniper, 20 years ago. Fine for the home defense stuff, but I would like to shoot a few hundred rounds through, with either hand, to know the feel of the gun, first.

[woodturner]

Where I come from, with a few exceptions, when you buy something it is yours to do with as you please. You can use it, sell it, give it away, eat it, burn it, or do anything you please with it. It's a transfer of goods in return for payment.

A lot of people think that, and some purchases were conducted that way in the past, but not anymore. Your rights on what you can do with a "purchased" iterm are, in fact, legally restricted. Thank the lawyers for that .

When you make a purchase, you are signing a contract with the retailer. It meets all the legal requirements for a contract - meeting of the minds, exchange of consideration, etc. Next time you buy something, look at the signs in the store, typically posted at customer service, and the receipt. Typically an abbreviated form of the terms are on the receipt and the full terms are incorporated by reference. However, whether listed on the receipt or not, the terms and conditions still apply and are binding.

If you go to the customer service desk of a retailer and ask, they will produce a binder with the terms and conditions of sale. Bring a chair if you are planning on reading it though - it's typically 10 to 20 pages or more for major retailers like HD, Lowes, Sears, Walmart, Kmart, Rockler, etc.

When a retailer starts telling me what I can or can't do with goods, that's the day I will be going to another retailer.

As a buyer, you can choose to not buy from a retailer if you do not agree with their terms. The problem is that essentially every retailer in the US restricts resale - so if you don't agree to those terms, you can't shop any retailer in the US.


As a practical matter, we all unwittingly agree to terms and conditions we haven't really read or understand. While we have technically legally agreed to those terms, it really only becomes an issue if the retailer seeks to enforce them, which they usually don't.

In other words, the prohibition against resale is likely to be enforced only if you are making a big issue of it. While it is technically prohibited to garage sale the hammer you originally bought at HD, as a practical matter they are unlikely to sue you over it.

[cabinetman]

I've been in many establishments that displayed no signs whatsoever. The receipts I have, both for cash purchases or charge, have no references explicit or implied with an absence of any "reference numbers". The most they have are refund information. Purchases are unencumbered.

.

[phrog]

I've been in many establishments that displayed no signs whatsoever. The receipts I have, both for cash purchases or charge, have no references explicit or implied with an absence of any "reference numbers". The most they have are refund information. Purchases are unencumbered.

.

Same here. And as my brother, a lawyer for many decades, once told me, quoting an old adage: "Possession is, indeed, nine-tenths of the law." He further stated: "If you have something I want, I have a much greater problem than you."

The greater question is, "How did we get here in a discussion about ammo and gun control?"

[tommyt654]

It was me,I dunnit

[3thumbs]

DHS is buying a hundred million rounds per year, plus armored personnel carriers for "domestic" use. There is no question in my mind about why people are hoarding ammo, and it is not for resale!

[phrog]

It was me,I dunnit

Guilty, by confession! I figured it was you all along.

[tommyt654]

http://blogs.militarytimes.com/gears...not-worry-you/,,

[gsmittle]

For those who just can't wait , http://ammoseek.com/?from=resultspag...ks=&sortby=cpr

http://www.ammonow.com/rifle_ammunition.html

I didn't know whitetails had a driver's license.

g.

[gsmittle]

My question would be how much Ammo is enough? I probably have several hundred rounds for the Rifles and maybe a 100 for the shot gun and several hundred for each of the Handguns that is mainly because I do shoot them. Haven't bought any Ammo in years. Does it have a shelf life? Now when the deliver my Grenade launcher, flame thrower and my M1A1 I will be set. I think the possible gun and ammo control legislation is probably the cause of the hoarding. There probably are profiteers in there also. In California they are talking of Taxing Ammo more to raise money than to control the sale of Ammo or Guns. I am not trying to make political statement that is just a fact here in CA

Tom

Did you get the Tank option with that grenade launcher?

g.

[gsmittle]

The greater question is, "How did we get here in a discussion about ammo and gun control?"

We took a U-turn at "resale."

I've noticed the ammo shortage around here, too, even though I haven't bought any in a while. The last time I bought 20 ga shells in October I got the last box in the store. Weird.

Randall, I'd be interested in your source for lefty-friendly firearms.

g.

[cabinetman]

http://blogs.militarytimes.com/gears...not-worry-you/,,

What's interesting is a quote from your link about the article in Forbes posted earlier. Excerpt below.

" I was disappointed by the Forbes article – rather than talk cold hard facts, it was rife with ill-informed speculation."

.

[LinuxRandal]

Randall, I'd be interested in your source for lefty-friendly firearms.

g.

I can't give you my friend, but i can tell you the range of handgun (been manufactured, by a few companies, and two calibers)
http://www.cz99.org/

Decocker and clip release are ambidextrous (I have both lefties and righties in the family), barrel release is not.

[woodturner]

http://blogs.militarytimes.com/gears...not-worry-you/,,

Interesting blog article, though I had to smile a bit at his "I was disappointed by the Forbes article – rather than talk cold hard facts, it was rife with ill-informed speculation. " comment, which was followed by his own speculation. Unfortunately, he says nothing more than that about the Forbes article, so I couldn't determine which facts in the Forbes article he questions.

He suggests that Requests for Quotes (RFQ) don't correspond to purchases. An RFQ is issued when there is funding and approval for a purchase, and nearly always results in a purchase. He is technically correct that an RFQ is not a purchase commitment, but it's definitely more than the "Craigs list want ad" he suggests.

With the proliferation of blogs such as this, as well as web pages, etc. the question of credibility must be raised. I couldn't find any information on the site that explained their credentials, whether they considered their articles to be op-ed or news, or their fact checking process. In my mind, the credibility of an objective, established source like Forbes is greater than the apparently op-ed articles of an action group.

I found the comments from LEOs and others to his article quite interesting - apparently I am not the only one to draw that conclusion.

[tommyt654]

Forbes=credibility,now thats funny, Considering its agenda towards the gov't/dhs period. At least the info/thoughts on the miltarytimes blog relates to the usage by the military/veterans,which I have a much greater respect for than anything out of that rags biased print IMHO