RJ Renner 303 British

jswitzer said:

You guys should make sure that the guys you are sending your rifles to for work have FFLs and are legally allowed to accept them.

Click to expand...

I’ve made this same comment to a few members in a PM. It’s the main reason I haven’t sent him a gun.

Here are some pics of a very very early Lee Speed Pattern No1 rifle . Made before 1897 . It is all original . Made by BSA using a Magazine Lee Metford II action and barrel . This action has no safety as a design feature . There is a magazine cut off and full dust cover over the bolt . Barrel is 25 inches with Metford rifling . Still happily shoot 215 grain bullets at 2050 fps. The barrel has a full length turned rib - beautiful. The whole rifle including the 10 shot magazine is tastefully engraved . There is a trap with oil bottle and pull through in the stock . These were and remain fantastic rifles . And the 303 is still a brilliant cartridge .

PCC600 said:

Here are some pics of a very very early Lee Speed Pattern No1 rifle . Made before 1897 . It is all original . Made by BSA using a Magazine Lee Metford II action and barrel . This action has no safety as a design feature . There is a magazine cut off and full dust cover over the bolt . Barrel is 25 inches with Metford rifling . Still happily shoot 215 grain bullets at 2050 fps. The barrel has a full length turned rib - beautiful. The whole rifle including the 10 shot magazine is tastefully engraved . There is a trap with oil bottle and pull through in the stock . These were and remain fantastic rifles . And the 303 is still a brilliant cartridge .

Click to expand...

Old skool cool.
Beautiful rifle, thanks for posting.

jswitzer said:

You guys should make sure that the guys you are sending your rifles to for work have FFLs and are legally allowed to accept them.

Click to expand...

Wouldn’t have known he wasn’t.

Don’t be a nanny for the state. He’s been at this for a long time as long as nobody raises a stink nothing will happen. Don’t work to make them have to address it.

jswitzer said:

You guys should make sure that the guys you are sending your rifles to for work have FFLs and are legally allowed to accept them.

Click to expand...

Are you saying that Roger does not have an FFL?

Mtn_Infantry said:

I’ve made this same comment to a few members in a PM. It’s the main reason I haven’t sent him a gun.

Click to expand...

Maybe I’m late to the party, …. but RJ Renner doesn’t have even a gunsmith FFL?

From the pics and the comments, it appears he does Master-level work. How hard is it to acquire the appropriate license to be able to receive rifles for ‘smiffin’ work and return them when done?

WAB said:

Are you saying that Roger does not have an FFL?

Click to expand...

Jack Stevens said:

Maybe I’m late to the party, …. but RJ Renner doesn’t have even a gunsmith FFL?

From the pics and the comments, it appears he does Master-level work. How hard is it to acquire the appropriate license to be able to receive rifles for ‘smiffin’ work and return them when done?

Click to expand...

He has no form of FFL - there’s not a specific gunsmith FFL. Most have an 07 (manufacturer’s) instead of a dealer (01) FFL due to the type of work. It’s also why they stamp the barrel. He also doesn’t even have a C&R for antique collectors.

When mailing a firearm, you should always request a copy of the FFL and maintain it for your records. Shipping/mailing a firearm to a non-FFL receipt equals you committing a crime, even if done unknowingly. You can check the ATF’s database for FFL’s and you should run an EzCheck on the FFL to make sure it’s still valid. During Covid there was a scam where people were pretending to be a dealer and buy guns. They’d give a doctored FFL with a real number/fake address. Others ran it the other way where they’d pretended to be a seller and provide a real FFL number with a fake address doctored onto it and scam you for money.

@MontanaGrant good thing you’re not a lawyer, I’ll take being a nanny for the state and not jeopardizing my FFL just like @jswitzer
Getting an FFL is quite simple which is what makes this even worse.

@Mtn_Infantry I was merely meaning it should be up to people to choose that risk. Anyone should be able to figure it out themselves if they go to ship and he doesn’t provide a FFL.

Airing it publicly on open forum leaves it much easier for pearl clutchers to decide to help the government enforce idiotic laws.

MontanaGrant said:

@Mtn_Infantry I was merely meaning it should be up to people to choose that risk. Anyone should be able to figure it out themselves if they go to ship and he doesn’t provide a FFL.

Airing it publicly on open forum leaves it much easier for pearl clutchers to decide to help the government enforce idiotic laws.

Click to expand...

I’d respectfully disagree.

The average hunter/shooter/person has very little knowledge of firearms laws and even less understanding of them. Furthermore, it’s not uncommon for the ATF to change their stance on something and what was once legal, no longer is. I’d hate for someone like @WAB to send a rifle off and be THE person who’s caught up in a shitstorm if/when the ATF decides to intervene. I’d especially feel bad if he didn’t know, or was told ann FFL isn’t needed for gunsmith work. I wonder how I know that’s the reply you’ll get …

Not knocking his work. His stock work is amazing. I have a rifle of his, that I bought from someone else.

MontanaGrant said:

Wouldn’t have known he wasn’t.

Don’t be a nanny for the state. He’s been at this for a long time as long as nobody raises a stink nothing will happen. Don’t work to make them have to address it.

Click to expand...

He doesn't have an FFL and tries to use other guys as a "receiving agent" his words...which is illegal and puts the other guy and his license at risk also. I'm not a nanny for the state. In fact I brought it up to him and he threated to sue me for slander.

Tons of guys work very hard to follow the laws set down before us. Allowing guys to do this illegally only poisons our ranks. And as you suggested "been at this for a long time" isn't a valid reason to excuse poor behavior and I'd suggest you think about supporting actual gunmakers who are trying to elevate the craft.

MontanaGrant said:

@Mtn_Infantry I was merely meaning it should be up to people to choose that risk. Anyone should be able to figure it out themselves if they go to ship and he doesn’t provide a FFL.

Airing it publicly on open forum leaves it much easier for pearl clutchers to decide to help the government enforce idiotic laws.

Click to expand...

Also disagree heavily. A guy should have enough respect to admit to his customers that he is operating outside the lines of legal activities. Most guys trust that gunsmiths are following the rules so it's not a standard question.

If you take your truck to a shop you probably don't ask to see the mechanics ase certs do you? Probably just trust that he has them and is not a hack.

Jack Stevens said:

Maybe I’m late to the party, …. but RJ Renner doesn’t have even a gunsmith FFL?

From the pics and the comments, it appears he does Master-level work. How hard is it to acquire the appropriate license to be able to receive rifles for ‘smiffin’ work and return them when done?

Click to expand...

I forgot to answer part of your question.

It's not hard to get an FFL. It's just time consuming and you can't get one when you live in an apartment building because you need written permission from the owner.

Refusing to get an FFL because you don't agree with the law BUT then turning around and using the law to threaten to sue everyone who says anything about you is BS in my opinion.

jswitzer said:

Also disagree heavily. A guy should have enough respect to admit to his customers that he is operating outside the lines of legal activities. Most guys trust that gunsmiths are following the rules so it's not a standard question.

If you take your truck to a shop you probably don't ask to see the mechanics ase certs do you? Probably just trust that he has them and is not a hack.

Click to expand...

While I agree with you, having an FFL is no guarantee of ethics and I've learned that the hard way!

I have a rifle with Tip Burns now that spent 2 years with Dan Pederson in Arizona & 3 years with Dennis Olson in Montana and still isn't completed; both of those men have FFL's and both of them absolutely shit the bed when it comes to what they said vs what they did.

Dan Pederson has done it so many times the local cops and nearest ATF branch are tired of hearing about it and neither would/could do a damn thing and I had a list of 10 people who had guns held by Dan for over two years.

My lawsuit against Dan finally brought enough light to his fraud that he closed up shop, got drunk and shot up his own house with his wife inside!

deewayne2003 said:

While I agree with you, having an FFL is no guarantee of ethics and I've learned that the hard way!

I have a rifle with Tip Burns now that spent 2 years with Dan Pederson in Arizona & 3 years with Dennis Olson in Montana and still isn't completed; both of those men have FFL's and both of them absolutely shit the bed when it comes to what they said vs what they did.

Dan Pederson has done it so many times the local cops and nearest ATF branch are tired of hearing about it and neither would/could do a damn thing and I had a list of 10 people who had guns held by Dan for over two years.

My lawsuit against Dan finally brought enough light to his fraud that he closed up shop, got drunk and shot up his own house with his wife inside!

Click to expand...

You are absolutely correct. Federal licenses are no guarantee that man has an ethical compass.

Just trying to helps guys not commit felonies by sending their guns to unlicensed people.

That's a bummer you had those experiences. I will say there aren't many of us custom makers and most that I know need a good wife to help us with the paperwork as we are all nerdy craftsmen and office stuff is definitely not our strong suit.

This whole situation is bad. I can't believe we are having this discussion.

What a good way for someone to end up with an total mess on their hands over sending something for work.

I always require a copy of the FFL before I will ship something for work. I even include it in the shipping. Ifa FFL can't be provided, then that isn't someone I'm sending my hard earned dollars to.

txtrout75218 said:

This whole situation is bad. I can't believe we are having this discussion.

What a good way for someone to end up with an total mess on their hands over sending something for work.

I always require a copy of the FFL before I will ship something for work. I even include it in the shipping. Ifa FFL can't be provided, then that isn't someone I'm sending my hard earned dollars to.

Click to expand...

100% correct! Now imagine us guys standing up to this getting threatened with lawsuits over trying to keep dudes from getting felonies!

Huge problem is the guys who say well he's been doing it a long time. That doesn't make it legal guys. Not to mention you send anyone a gun without an ffl and it's on you as much as him. Sovereign citizen or not.

deewayne2003 said:

* * *
Dan Pederson has done it so many times the local cops and nearest ATF branch are tired of hearing about it and neither would/could do a damn thing and I had a list of 10 people who had guns held by Dan for over two years.
My lawsuit against Dan finally brought enough light to his fraud that he closed up shop, got drunk, and shot up his own house with his wife inside!

Click to expand...

Sounds like he was more of a pistolero than a rifle-‘smiff.

jswitzer said:

Not to mention you send anyone a gun without an ffl and it's on you as much as him.

Click to expand...

I suppose that's technically true but generally not much to worry about unless the "smith" has been doing activities that have raised BATF suspicion. They do have a lot on their plate...

I ship and receive the occasional gun at my home - pre 1899 antiques as I do not have any sort of FFL.
Now, I've bought all sorts of antiques which are the very same model as those made after 1898 - think 1885s, Colts etc.
Under Xray (if they even bother doing that...) they are identical and the only thing differentiating them is the number stamped on them. Nothing else.
Never once in 30 years has any shipment of mine, in or out, been internally inspected or opened.
I have received packages with the bolt, butt plate and once even the muzzle sticking out of a poorly packaged shipment and that didn't even raise any further scrutiny!
The only loss was once I shipped an Enfield action to an FFL holding shop and it went missing in transit - last tracked to a depot in Colorado.
By the law, it is a firearm, right? Oooooh....scary...
Well, guess what the response was...
Absolutely nothing - zero shits given

So, I say leave it alone and let others decide their tolerance level

jswitzer said:

...I'd suggest you think about supporting actual gunmakers who are trying to elevate the craft.

Click to expand...

So, in your opinion Renner isn't trying to "elevate the craft"?
Holding an FFL has zero correlation to the craft of gunsmithing.

Huvius said:

I suppose that's technically true but generally not much to worry about unless the "smith" has been doing activities that have raised BATF suspicion. They do have a lot on their plate...

Click to expand...

All non antique firearms have to legally ship to an FFL. The only exception is shipping a gun you already own to yourself, or back to the manufacturer for repair. The manufacturer can ship the same serial number firearm back to you as an individual (very few do). If the repair involves a replacement frame, or anything serialized it has to go to a FFL for another 4473.

This is the exact argument certain senators made when pressuring the shipping companies into only allowing Dealers with an approved firearms shipping account ship. They argued individuals were shipping guns across state lines without sending to a licensed FFL dealer.

Any work being taken on but a gunsmith that can’t be turned around that day is supposed to get logged into their bound book. “Same day” is technically a grey area and the ATF or the local IOI could change their stance on it. Not having a FFL definitely prevents abiding by those statutes and decisions. I don’t know about you but even before having an FFL, I wasn’t going to risk something on “generally” when it’s not hard to play by the rules, even if I disagree with them.