Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Boatme98
I think most new guns are probably test fired, so there's a slim chance of having a "unfired" gun these days. If I'm wrong, I'll be quickly corrected.
|
Despite the fact that most guns are fired at the factory, they are nonetheless considered as "unfired" unless someone fires them after they arrive at the gun shop. For a mass-produced "commodity" such as a Glock or a Kimber 1911, firing won't significantly reduce the value of the firearm. Other guns may be more affected.
As an example, the original Colt WW1 replica, the Model O1911, was a limited production run of 4000 pistols. I looked at one once in a small, rural gunshop. The shop owner made a point of telling me that he hadn't even racked the slide because he expected a Colt collector would buy it, and he didn't want there to be any marks on it that didn't come from the factory.
What I find ironic is that most people who participate in "gun" forums agree that guns are intended to be shot, so go ahead and shoot them. But many of these same people will pay a hefty premium for an older, out-of-production gun if it hasn't been fired. To me that's a logical disconnect. If their argument is that keeping a gun unfired doesn't add (or retain) value, why are they willing to pay more for unfired?