ATF and DOJ say you can't sell a firearm without an FFL license

I don't care for the new regs, but they do not appear to be so broad as to prohibit all private sales. They broaden the definition of engaging in the business of firearms dealing, but they don't cover every private sale.

quote:

---

The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA), enacted June 25, 2022, expanded the definition of engaging in the business of firearms dealing to cover all persons who devote time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business to predominately earn a profit through the repetitive purchase and sale of firearms. On March 14, 2023, President Biden issued Executive Order 14092, which, among other things, directs the Attorney General to develop and implement a plan to clarify the definition of who is engaged in the business of dealing in firearms and thus required to obtain a federal firearms license.

---

quote:

---

The NPRM explained that the statutory definition of “engaged in the business” excludes “a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms.” 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(21)(C).

---

I'll wait for someone with more time to parse the new rule that defines the personal collection/hobby exclusion and see how narrow or broad it is. Until then, I wouldn't leap to the conclusion that "you can't sell a firearm without an FFL license".

Id imagine value of a weapon usually follows inflation.

For instance if someone bout a $75 sks 20 years ago its worth 4-700 now. Can the person not sell the sks for market value?

quote:

---

For instance if someone bout a $75 sks 20 years ago its worth 4-700 now. Can the person not sell the sks for market value?

---

As I read it, I would think that owning a gun for 20 years and then selling it would not meet this criteria.

quote:

---

person must intend “to predominantly earn a profit.”.

---

But who knows what our DOJ would decide? Which is why I tend to be leery.

I would think the primary objective is to have prosecutorial means for dealing with straw man purchasers who resell for profit to criminals or those who would not otherwise pass a background check. But, again, we have seen how folks with an agenda that is not the same as the law sometimes manipulate these things to their own ends.