Gun show loophole closing?

[kjdoski]

IANAL but, IMO, a background check alone doesn't satisfy this. The seller must hold the FFL if they meet the definition of selling with intent to profit.

Doing a person to person transfer with a 4473 done by a third party would just provide a record of the sale.

I do think that the intent of this is to force universal background checks at some point.

I agree, but kind of a moot point, since you can't do a NICS check unless you're an FFL. So, I believe the ATF has effectively outlawed all person-to-person sales by making ANY sale basically a "dealer" sale.

 

[kjdoski]

I think until the new ruling is overturned (which I'm sure it will be), the only "legal" way of selling firearms will be for both parties to meet at an FFL, have the FFL take "possession" of the firearm(s) on their log, then "sell" the firearm(s) to the buyer after a 4473 and NICS completion.

What no one is talking about is what if you're the BUYER of a firearm FTF now? Are you not knowingly participating in an illegal purchase if it's not going through an FFL? This ruling is SO far over the line that "over reach" doesn't even start to do it "justice."

 

[firecadet613]

I think until the new ruling is overturned (which I'm sure it will be), the only "legal" way of selling firearms will be for both parties to meet at an FFL, have the FFL take "possession" of the firearm(s) on their log, then "sell" the firearm(s) to the buyer after a 4473 and NICS completion.

What no one is talking about is what if you're the BUYER of a firearm FTF now? Are you not knowingly participating in an illegal purchase if it's not going through an FFL? This ruling is SO far over the line that "over reach" doesn't even start to do it "justice."

Doesn't this all hinge on the seller doing it "for profit"?

 

[kjdoski]

Doesn't this all hinge on the seller doing it "for profit"?

You'd think so, BUT, the new rule establishes "presumptions of intent" to make a profit, among which is posting the firearm for sale on line...

 

[bobzilla]

Doesn't this all hinge on the seller doing it "for profit"?

Prove they didn't make a profit.

 

[firecadet613]

Prove they didn't make a profit.

We're almost here...

 

[bobzilla]

We're almost here...

View attachment 352917

We've been there since the AFT was created.

 

[Stengun]

We have substituted government approval for the common sense of knowing the buyer or asking some basic questions to assess the buyer. That is how the old 4473 worked for dealers and most private sellers.

 

[shootersix]

as I said before don’t make a profit on the gun!…sell the gun for a dollar…however the box that gos with it is a collector’s item and it costs 350 dollars!

 

[2in1evtime]

So if the unfortunate person that gets charged with selling a gun for supposed profit, will they tied up in court, massive legal fees since we know how the government works against the citizens, just how many people will be able to afford this for one? Lot of legal people by firearms in person because they don't want a paper trail from a dealer and the 4473 which the government is now putting into a computer base?? Selling a rifle like a m1 garland bought in early 80's for present market value is that considered a profit or inflation?

 

[KellyinAvon]

So if the unfortunate person that gets charged with selling a gun for supposed profit, will they tied up in court, massive legal fees since we know how the government works against the citizens, just how many people will be able to afford this for one? Lot of legal people by firearms in person because they don't want a paper trail from a dealer and the 4473 which the government is now putting into a computer base?? Selling a rifle like a m1 garland bought in early 80's for present market value is that considered a profit or inflation?

The people who say you are "engaged in the business..." are the same ones who won't issue you a license to be engaged in the business. When things (like "profit") are vague as hell it can mean anything they want.

The LR International Airport Director thread is below.

ATF Agent Shot

The Supreme Court has recognized several exceptions to the warrant requirement rule, including immediate loss of evidence under the exigent circumstances rule. Not saying that this fits this particular situation, I don't feel that it does. But that rule is a thing. SCOTUS gets things wrong...

www.indianagunowners.com

 

[gregr]

Just be aware and expect the unexpected. The jack-booted thugs at the atf executed an airport executive in Little Rock, seemingly, just because they could. These corrupt, criminal goons are worse than Gestapo, and they will murder any of us too.