Colt LE6920 in Stock?

[critter_bill]

LT Phoon, I got my 6920 today from Clyde Armory. One business day delivery...can't beat that. Came in under $1300 with shipping, insurance, and credit card fee. I would do business again with them.

Thanks again for all the leads. Happy shooting.

[LTPhoon]

LT Phoon, I got my 6920 today from Clyde Armory. One business day delivery...can't beat that. Came in under $1300 with shipping, insurance, and credit card fee. I would do business again with them.

Thanks again for all the leads. Happy shooting.

Pretty slick, huh? Mine was $1337 or something because I got a couple of extra mags. No shenanigans then?

[critter_bill]

Flawless transaction. Mine was $1296 ($1229 + $37 + $30). Of course, my FFL charged $35 on top of that to receive it so I guess actual cost is $1,331. Still better than the $1,500 I spent on separate upper and lower.

[The_Biased_Observer]

I asked my FFL if he would do the transfer and he said "No problem." And it wasn't, nor were all the other transfers he did for me. I read that thread a number of times and for the life of me couldn't understand what it was all about. Perhaps the backstory is not completely known here in the world of intertubes...

Generally, FFL's throw a copy of their FFL in with guns they ship to other FFL's so it is easy to properly document the weapon transfer from FFL to FFL in each's bound book. It is not required, but over the years of this being done some FFL's took it as law or procedure, and even took it a step ahead and decided they could not accept guns from persons without a FFL (interstate shipment). Having an FFL is a very repetitive process with all the firearms logging that happens.

It is my understanding the buyer bought the gun and it was promptly shipped, but the seller did not, and will not supply the paper copy of his ffl, for whatver reason. The receiving FFL sounded like one of "those types" who assumed the copy was required by law and would not release the gun to the buyer until he was satisfied the send was an FFL holder (again, even that is not required but apparently the receiving FFL thought so). To top it off, he was apparently unable or unwilling to check the senders FFL number against the ATF's website, so a standoff of sorts ensued.

Combine the above with 3 cranky gun enthusiasts, and mayhem often results.

Individual state law not included. It is my understanding that certain states, Illinois being one of them, require a firearm to originate at an FFL if it is crossing state lines. Most states are not like this however and only required Federal Law be followed, which is that an interstate transfer of a firearm must go thru at least one FFL, via the transfer to the buyer. (Cops/govm't not included).

I am please to see everyone getting their rifles, rather tempting.

[Jim D]

First I've heard of it. But the again, I don't get out much.

I've heard it from some supposedly good sources...but I'm not buying it unless I can hear it from others, too.

I'm not trying to start a rumor, just trying to confirm what I'm being told from whom we buy our Colts from...