There are legit escrow services that anyone can use to secure a transaction. The buyer sends the money to escrow. Escrow verifies the funds arrived and are good. The seller sends the item(s) to the FFL or to the buyer directly. Once the goods are verified in the possession of the buyer the escrow company releases the funds to the seller. Very much the same way escrow works for home purchases. Since escrow services secures the transaction for both seller and buyer an honest seller would not balk at using an escrow service. But a scammer certainly would. So in the case of purchasing something from an unknown seller all one has to do is to “suggest” using an escrow service to the seller to secure the transaction. If they are a scammer they will argue with you about it or you will never hear from them again. If they are for real they have no argument against using the service. Even if the seller agrees to use escrow, it might just be enough of a “test” to see if the seller is honest. In that case you may decide not to use the escrow service if after they accept you feel the seller is on the up and up. The nice thing about using an escrow service is that they can enforce any 2 or 3 day inspection period for returns as well.

There are such easy ways of preventing oneself from being ripped off it is laughable. And the stupid thing about this is that you can Google how not to get ripped off from a dishonest seller.

As I mentioned to him, if he verified the FFL (easy enough to do on the ATF site and by calling them), the FFL makes a perfect "escrow" service.

Just have the seller deliver the firearm to the FFL.  They contact you that the firearm has been verified as being the one expected and is ready to ship.  You then make payment to the seller.  Once he's satisfied the payment was received, he green-lights the FFL to put the firearm in transit.

Not really complicated at all, and the FFL isn't doing that much more than they would normally have to do in a transaction -- just notifying the buyer they have the gun, then waiting for confirmation you paid before shipping.  Really hard to mess that up as long as you verify the FFL and are careful any caller IDs and emails look perfectly legit.  If you feel nervous, call the FFL's number listed on the ATF's list of FFLs, or get it from a third party website, like a yellow pages site or from that county's business licensing office.  Any number of ways to look up a company's info apart from trusting the info being sent to you by a stranger wanting your money.  Hell, just Google the FFL's name/business.  That should show a bunch of references with contact info if they are legit.

As I mentioned to him, if he verified the FFL (easy enough to do on the ATF site and by calling them), the FFL makes a perfect "escrow" service.

Just have the seller deliver the firearm to the FFL.  They contact you that the firearm has been verified as being the one expected and is ready to ship.  You then make payment to the seller.  Once he's satisfied the payment was received, he green-lights the FFL to put the firearm in transit.

Not really complicated at all, and the FFL isn't doing that much more than they would normally have to do in a transaction -- just notifying the buyer they have the gun, then waiting for confirmation you paid before shipping.  Really hard to mess that up as long as you verify the FFL and are careful any caller IDs and emails look perfectly legit.  If you feel nervous, call the FFL's number listed on the ATF's list of FFLs, or get it from a third party website, like a yellow pages site or from that county's business licensing office.  Any number of ways to look up a company's info apart from trusting the info being sent to you by a stranger wanting your money.  Hell, just Google the FFL's name/business.  That should show a bunch of references with contact info if they are legit.

I have stopped reading a lot of the posts here. I grow weary easily of all the BS that is going on in these threads. Actually, it is just a handful of particular users and their discussions that I have stopped reading. I am spending less time on forums , FB etc and more time communicating with people I know in other apps and platforms. Also, I am making some major changes in my real estate holdings (I’m doing a 1031 exchange) so I have been busy taking care of that business. So I didn’t know you had said this to him. If I had I probably would not have even written what I did. I don’t buy guns from individuals over the Internet. I buy C&R surplus from legit FFL’s and businesses using my FFL. Or if I am buying something expensive I only do face to face so I can examine the gun myself. I don’t put my hard earned dollars at risk.

Tucker Carlson Says There's Not Enough Fraud to Change Election Results: 'We Should Be Honest'

https://www.newsweek.com/tucker-carlson-election-fraud-may-not-alter-outcome-1546252?fbclid=IwAR2OziUqmUnIfzskU8Ll--Anw4ujIsrFX7VzwRB_J_Ek1soKNKIiZmsGSoc

Tucker Carlson Says There's Not Enough Fraud to Change Election Results: 'We Should Be Honest'

https://www.newsweek.com/tucker-carlson-election-fraud-may-not-alter-outcome-1546252?fbclid=IwAR2OziUqmUnIfzskU8Ll--Anw4ujIsrFX7VzwRB_J_Ek1soKNKIiZmsGSoc

The people that "should be honest" are you and the headline writers at "Newsweek".

Can you tell the difference between the headline:

"Tucker Carlson Says There's Not Enough Fraud to Change Election Results: 'We Should Be Honest'"

and the actual quote from Carlson (emphasis added)?:

"At this stage, the fraud that we can confirm does not seem to be enough to alter the election result. We should be honest and tell you that. Of course, that could change."

I see talk about dead people voting in the other thread so

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/08/fact-check-false-claim-14-k-dead-people-voted-michigan/6201900002/

OG - You need to take some time and actually READ and try to comprehend the article that you post. . .

Tucker Carlson Says There's Not Enough Fraud to Change Election Results: 'We Should Be Honest'

https://www.newsweek.com/tucker-carlson-election-fraud-may-not-alter-outcome-1546252?fbclid=IwAR2OziUqmUnIfzskU8Ll--Anw4ujIsrFX7VzwRB_J_Ek1soKNKIiZmsGSoc

the greater issue:

"But changing the election results is not the whole point. The real point is that fraud took place, and that should horrify us. If you want people to believe that our system is real, that our system is worth say joining the military and dying to protect, then you've got to get to the bottom of what just happened and you've got to do it as quickly and responsibly as you can. You can't have fraud in an election because then no one will believe in elections and then things fall apart."

the greater issue:

"But changing the election results is not the whole point. The real point is that fraud took place, and that should horrify us. If you want people to believe that our system is real, that our system is worth say joining the military and dying to protect, then you've got to get to the bottom of what just happened and you've got to do it as quickly and responsibly as you can. You can't have fraud in an election because then no one will believe in elections and then things fall apart."

Yes fraud is bad.  Fix the fraud.  I am not arguing against that.  Its that there is no deepstate democrat uber corruption stealing elections.  Or at least no evidence of widespread organized fraud.

Yes fraud is bad.  Fix the fraud.  I am not arguing against that.  Its that there is no deepstate democrat uber corruption stealing elections.  Or at least no evidence of widespread organized fraud.

Yeah, you're right. It looks like, at this point, that there is accumulating a great deal of evidence of widespread disorganized fraud. What else could be expected from Democrats?

Yes fraud is bad.  Fix the fraud.  I am not arguing against that.  Its that there is no deepstate democrat uber corruption stealing elections.  Or at least no evidence of widespread organized fraud.

That's what the DS wants you to think.  Mission accomplished. LMK if you want to buy a tin foil hat.  $100 via paypal please.

Or at least no evidence of widespread organized fraud.

I still want to know what you think about all the videos and other evidence posted so far.

CLAIM: Donald Trump's claims of election fraud are unsubstantiated and baseless.

FACT CHECK: Our researchers have concluded the above claim is FALSE and MISLEADING.

I still want to know what you think about all the videos and other evidence posted so far.

Some are fake, some are misleading, some have merit.  But nothing that would influence the election results.  Also I can't judge authenticity, hence waiting for courts to decide.  So much fake news, if it can't pass the courts, than its probably not real.   You can accuse someone of murder all you want but until you prove it beyond a reasonable doubt they are innocent.

Another big problem with pre-election fraud was all the wrong polls.  Those polls do not just suppress/increase voter turnout (my guy is going to lose -- no need to vote; my guy is winning -- I'll be glad to wait in line to vote for him just to add my voice).

Polls are also used by parties and candidates to raise funds.  In SC, Sen Graham's challenger was predicted by polls to be even with Graham.  The challenger and his party (D) used the polls to raise funds for the campaign.  Nobody wants to waste their donations on a campaign that can't possibly win.  The money, in turn, helps the candidate's changes.  Self-licking ice cream cone.

The outcome?  Even though Jaime Harrison raised a record $100M in the election cycle, Graham was called as the winner with just 46% of the vote reporting.  With nearly all votes counted in the race now, Graham 54.5%, while Harrison received 44.2%.  Not exactly the "toss-up" fund raisers and pollsters were predicting. 

10.3 points is not a small number.  That's a difference of 258,321 votes.

This is why polling will continue to favor Democrats.  It interferes with election day voting, and dishonestly convinces donors to write checks.

Some are fake, some are misleading, some have merit.  But nothing that would influence the election results.  Also I can't judge authenticity, hence waiting for courts to decide.  So much fake news, if it can't pass the courts, than its probably not real.   You can accuse someone of murder all you want but until you prove it beyond a reasonable doubt they are innocent.

There is no way for you to know that.  Unless the guilty parties confess and provide documentation, you'll NEVER know the full extent of the election meddling.  But, you don't need all that.

The media is doing something you obviously have adopted.  They/you continue to harp on "election fraud" only, excluding documented incidents of voting machine malfunctions flipping red votes to blue, counting and reporting errors, irregularities, process violations, state supreme courts acting as the legislature, and blocking GOP observers. 

These don't have to be labeled "fraud" for the vote totals that resulted to be deemed invalid.  Add all those instances together, and you'll have enough votes to destroy any lead Biden had.

That's what the DS wants you to think.  Mission accomplished. LMK if you want to buy a tin foil hat.  $100 via paypal please.

Wave off OG!  Wave off! 

Yes fraud is bad.  Fix the fraud.  I am not arguing against that.  Its that there is no deepstate democrat uber corruption stealing elections.  Or at least no evidence of widespread organized fraud.

what did you think of Trump-Russia collusion interference?

The biggest fake news I've seen so far is the news that claim there is zero evidence.

They should in fact claim that Trump's team has presented some troubling evidence which will depend on the courts to decide upon.