The Ethics of Gun Sales

[Michael Zeleny]

In May 2007, I paid $4,950.00 for this 1936 S&W .357 Registered Magnum to David Carroll, who is currently serving as President of the Collector Arms Dealers Association (CADA). Then as now Mr. Carroll's policy was not to furnish any photographs of guns listed in his catalog, referring instead to his reputation among gun collectors. However, he reassured me that the gun was 100% mechanically sound, which was my main concern for this purchase.

Several months later, I realized that the bluing wear on the left hand side of the frame above the trigger was consistent with the cylinder having rubbed there while being rotated with the yoke fully swung out of the frame. Admittedly, at present the cylinder edge rotates free of the frame at all times, the action is completely within factory spec, and all chambers align with the bore at lockup. The yoke matches the frame in tight fit and correct number, and there are neither marks nor records of factory rework. Nevertheless, I feel that in view of strong evidence of past damage to the yoke, the seller materially misrepresented the gun as 100% mechanically sound. Yet when I asked Mr. Carroll to make good on his description, he informed me that according to his lawyer he had no duty to disclose the damage at issue.

I have half a mind to disclose this back story in my auction listing, shaming publicly what I take to be arrant dishonesty on the seller's part. Short of that, I would appreciate some feedback from my fellow collectors as to the right thing to do under the circumstances.