- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
US Dept of Justice now says you have to have a FFL to sell a gun “for profit”
Posted on 4/11/24 at 7:59 am
Posted on 4/11/24 at 7:59 am
LINK
Oh and you must provide a background too.
I didn’t know they could make rules like the ATF thinks they can too.
Oh and you must provide a background too.
I didn’t know they could make rules like the ATF thinks they can too.
35
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:02 am to BearCrocs
so i cannot sell any of my guns privately?
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:04 am to BearCrocs
quote:
I didn’t know they could make rules like the ATF thinks they can too.
Every agency pretty much has rule making power that Congress has ceded to that agency... Most are WAY outside of their boundaries and need to be reeled back in...
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:04 am to BearCrocs
quote:
US Dept of Justice now says you have to have a FFL to sell a gun “for profit”
A gun?
I will bet you that the proposed rule requires more than one sale for profit.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:05 am to BearCrocs
"$10.00 and other consideration" should work.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:06 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
requires more than one sale for profit.
Prevents people from evading the licensing and background check requirements by claiming that they are just selling a few guns. The final rule clarifies that even a single firearm transaction may be sufficient to require a license, if there is other behavior to suggest commercial activity.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:06 am to BearCrocs
Sounds like an impairment of property without just compensation.
Hope they enjoy dolling out a shitton of damages and legal fees because even the dumbest lawyers on this site can win that one.
Hope they enjoy dolling out a shitton of damages and legal fees because even the dumbest lawyers on this site can win that one.
This post was edited on 4/11/24 at 8:09 am
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:09 am to The Maj
quote:
The final rule clarifies that even a single firearm transaction may be sufficient to require a license, if there is other behavior to suggest commercial activity.
You left that part out. Now you're expanding the discussion beyond selling a gun for profit.
Try again.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:09 am to udtiger
quote:
Sounds like an impairment of property without just compensation.
Hope they enjoy dolling out a shitton of damages and legal fees because even the dumbest lawyers on this site can win that one.
Why hasn't this victory already happened? FFL regs like this have been on the books for a long time.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:10 am to The Maj
quote:
Prevents people from evading the licensing and background check requirements by claiming that they are just selling a few guns. The final rule clarifies that even a single firearm transaction may be sufficient to require a license, if there is other behavior to suggest commercial activity
There's the specificity/non-ambiguity you want in "laws" that can result in criminal penalties.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:11 am to BearCrocs
quote:
I didn’t know they could make rules like the ATF thinks they can too.
You didn't?
quote:
Obama Administration legalized bump stocks. BAD IDEA. As I promised, today the Department of Justice will issue the rule banning BUMP STOCKS with a mandated comment period. We will BAN all devices that turn legal weapons into illegal machine guns.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:11 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You left that part out.
I did not leave that part out, putz... I highlighted the part that you needed to see...
Define "suggest commercial activity' for me...
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:13 am to BearCrocs
I use to sell firearms for a large company. We had an employee we had to fire because when he found a customer who wanted a gun but didn't want to run a background he would buy the gun himself off the clock and turn around and sell to them for profit (considering he got an employee discount and sold it for more than we were, he got a really nice profit each time). He was busted after a lengthy investigation from corporate.
I'm positive he is a very rare case but the textbook of who this law is likely designed for.
I'm positive he is a very rare case but the textbook of who this law is likely designed for.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:13 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Why hasn't this victory already happened? FFL regs like this have been on the books for a long time
See the post after yours.
Also, the fact they have been "on the books for a long time" doesn't make them legal (especially in light of the EPA decision last year and the [hopeful] forthcoming abrogation of Chevron deference.
Additionally, I don't believe any of these have been challenged on takings grounds.
This post was edited on 4/11/24 at 8:15 am
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:15 am to ThoseGuys
quote:
I'm positive he is a very rare case but the textbook of who this law is likely designed for.
Straw purchases were already illegal before this rule...
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:16 am to The Maj
quote:
I did not leave that part out, putz... I highlighted the part that you needed to see...
And ignored the part that changed the discussion entirely.
quote:
Define "suggest commercial activity' for me...
quote:
Based on this decades-long body of experience, the proposed rule provided that, absent reliable evidence to the contrary, a person would be presumed to have the intent to “predominantly earn a profit” when the person: (1) advertises, markets, or otherwise promotes a firearms business (e.g., advertises or posts firearms for sale, including on any website; establishes a website for selling or offering for sale their firearms; makes available business cards; or tags firearms with sales prices), regardless of whether the person incurs expenses or only promotes the business informally;97 (2) purchases, rents, or otherwise secures or sets aside permanent or temporary physical space to display or store firearms they offer for sale, including part or all of a business premises, table or space at a gun show, or display case;98 (3) makes or maintains records, in any form, to document, track, or calculate profits and losses from firearms purchases and sales;99 (4) purchases or otherwise secures merchant services as a business (e.g., credit card transaction services, digital wallet for business) through which the person makes or offers to make payments for firearms transactions;100 (5) formally or informally purchases, hires, or otherwise secures business security services (e.g., a central station-monitored security system registered to a business101 or guards for security102) to protect business assets or transactions that include firearms; (6) formally or informally establishes a business entity, trade name, or online business account, including an account using a business name on a social media or other website, through which the person makes or offers to make firearms transactions;103 (7) secures or applies for a State or local business license to purchase for resale or to sell merchandise that includes firearms; or (8) purchases a business insurance policy, including any riders that cover firearms inventory.104 Any of these firearms-business-related activities justifies a rebuttable presumption that the person has the requisite intent to predominantly earn a profit from reselling or disposing of firearms.
I'm not trying to defend the ATF here, but if you're doing that stuff it's not what's being referenced in OP where a baw sells a gun for a profit and the ATF shows up.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:16 am to ThoseGuys
quote:
I use to sell firearms for a large company. We had an employee we had to fire because when he found a customer who wanted a gun but didn't want to run a background he would buy the gun himself off the clock and turn around and sell to them for profit (considering he got an employee discount and sold it for more than we were, he got a really nice profit each time). He was busted after a lengthy investigation from corporate.
I'm positive he is a very rare case but the textbook of who this law is likely designed for.
Don't need a new law for this:
A straw purchase, as defined by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, involves someone who purchases a gun for someone who is prohibited by law from possessing one or for someone who does not want their name associated with the transaction.
Straw purchases are deemed a federal crime, punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:18 am to udtiger
quote:
See the post after yours.
That's been the standard in these laws/regs for decades.
quote:
Also, the fact they have been "on the books for a long time" doesn't make them legal (
Well you made it sound it it was so easy any Southern Law grad could print money, yet even the best attorneys in the US have ignored this alleged mega money making opportunity. You'd think at least one would have seized the opportunity by now if it was so easy.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:18 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
OP where a baw sells a gun for a profit and the ATF shows up.
You have no idea that it will not be interpreted that way given their insistence that private sales need to be tracked and regulated...
quote:
advertises or posts firearms for sale, including on any website
Pretty much opens the door for ANY private sale...
We don't need more rules...
Posted on 4/11/24 at 8:21 am to BearCrocs
All of this is unconstitutional.
Page 1 of 25
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News