Originally Posted By: craigd
Originally Posted By: L. Brown
If the 2nd guy who borrowed the gun didn't notice that bulge, he'd have to be blind--and he would have called Barnett's attention to it. Seems to me pretty certain that it happened the 2nd time it was loaned out....

I think this makes two, possibly, unfair assumptions. First, how come the seller can't be held to the same blindness standard. I'd be highly certain that the gun at least got wiped down for smudges and finger prints, as well as the bores, after the first shooter brought it back, and likely after the next borrower. To command the likely asking price, it had to present well on the table. And second, how do we know the bulge wasn't there before the two shooters.


Craig, these are people who had a potential interest in buying a gun. And a relatively expensive one at that. You're suggesting that both the two guys who tried it out to see if they wanted to purchase it missed what are, from the photos, very obvious bulges? Easier for me to see the seller--one like Barnett, who has a large inventory--maybe being busy with other customers when shooter #2 returned with the then-bulged gun. Guy puts it back on the table, thanks Steve, strolls away. Barnett doesn't notice anything wrong until he's packing up his guns. Or maybe until he's unpacking, back at his shop.