I bought a brush-hog from a guy and just before taking possession he wanted a picture of my DL. I let him, but it still grinds me that I did. I should have taken a page from Midlandshooter's book and walked.
I bought a brush-hog from a guy and just before taking possession he wanted a picture of my DL. I let him, but it still grinds me that I did. I should have taken a page from Midlandshooter's book and walked.
"But then there are plenty of gun folks who think no one should rock the boat because it might piss off the anti gun crowd/politicians and cause even more gun control." - Bikenut
Submissive gun rights advocates need to lose their submissiveness before we lose our 2A rights.
I'm not sure what the logic is behind confirming the identity of someone buying a tractor implement but I totally understand wanting to do it for items where ownership is registered/tracked.
Several years ago I sold a motorcycle to a guy a couple hours away. I collected payment, signed over the title, and moved on with my life. A few months later, I received a notice from an impound yard warning me that I needed to pay a big towing/storage bill or they'd be sending it to collections. What had happened was that the person I sold the motorcycle to "flipped" it. He never did anything with the registration and then sold it on to a third person. That person ran a light and hit a car broadside in a city intersection, totalling the bike. What I learned was that without a valid Michigan bill of sale, which has very specific requirements, that the bike was still my responsibility. That whole experience cost me a bunch of money and even more hassle.
So now I'm very careful to verify who I'm dealing with and keeping records for items that can easily be tracked back to me down the road. Vehicles and firearms both fit those categories.
There's nothing very confidential on your driver's license and even less on your CPL.
As I mentioned in my first post, when I told him I didn't want him to take pictures of my ID's, he agreed to proceed with the sale without pictures. He was not disrespectful or a jerk about it. There is no need to call him names. It was a civil transaction.
People who do this do it to protect themselves from our horrible gun laws. I don't blame them for being extra cautious, I just don't see the need to have a picture of my ID when all the info they legally need is on the paperwork and if they retain their copy of the form, it proves they sold the gun. But again, this is down to personal preference, and that is FINE. I don't care what you want to do, just as long as you inform me upfront.
If I don't want to purchase something because the seller wants pictures of my ID, that should not bother them. I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who don't care who has pictures of their ID who would love to purchase the firearm.
My opinion is that we have to give up way too much information already as it is in this state so I'm not going to give more than what is required by law.
The beauty of all this is that a buyer is under no obligation to purchase a product and a seller is under no obligation to sell a product if they both don't agree to the terms.
Sellers wants a copy of your ID and you don't want to provide it? You're free to walk. Buyer isn't willing to provide you with a copy of his ID and you want it? Tell him to walk. Done and done. Easy peasy.
I do agree with 93bandit: If you're going to want a copy of an ID, let the buyer know up front. Although I'm an FFL, I make sure that my customers know up front that I will be keeping a copy of their ID and CPL with their completed 4473, and that even though they may send me electronic copies ahead of time, I need to see the physical card(s) when the pick up their purchase.
.gov has done good work brainwashing the populace