- 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
re: US Dept of Justice now says you have to have a FFL to sell a gun “for profit”
Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:40 am to RogerTheShrubber
Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:40 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Youre pretending this doesnt add additional restrictions.
It defines terms for a law that already imposes those restrictions.
And I never said or implied anything about "adding additional restrictions", just that a private party likely would not violate the rule by selling one personal firearm for a profit (assuming some things, like that he didn't buy the firearm and treat it like it was an investment to make a profit in the first place, which has always violated this law).
1
Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:41 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
This rule doesn't have anything to do with that question, so I can't answer it.
Correct, because the language seems to change the entire field of who can sell relics, antiques, muzzle loaders and black powder guns.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:42 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:\
It defines terms for a law that already imposes those restrictions.
It appears it may go further.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:43 am to udtiger
Was “impairment of property “ covered in ConLaw class?
Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:46 am to BearCrocs
So as long as I don’t sell the gun for more than I paid for it I’m good?
Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:48 am to Free888
quote:
So as long as I don’t sell the gun for more than I paid for it I’m good?
As long as the gubment doesnt see any other "flags" which point to commercial activity youre fine.
I'm sure this EO was done to help us poor gunowners and the ambiguity will work in our favor.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:54 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
My comments weren't judging the law. They were an objective analysis of what that law is, not its propriety or goodness/evilness.
Dude. This is some AggieHank level 'I didn't say what I said' weaseling. This post was edited on 4/11/24 at 10:55 am
Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:55 am to Taxing Authority
No. I even posted a disclaimer on page 3
quote:
Also, just to clarify for the boomers and dullards, me explaining how this law works and how regulations work isn't an endorsement of the law itself. I'm not personally in favor of these laws. However, they do exist so it's possible to dislike the laws while still understanding how they apply in reality, which is what I am doing.
There is a lot of work to do with disinformation dissemination like we saw in OP (and the source used in OP), which is used to create emotional triggers (anger, fear, etc.) in boomers and dullards. I'm trying to help them come back to a rational reality.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:56 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
how this law works and how regulations work isn't an endorsement of the law itself
Yet, youre claiming it does nothing but clarify.
Sounds like advocacy.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:57 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
Dude. This is some AggieHank level 'I didn't say what I said' weaseling.
I used to think he did this shite on purpose, today I am starting to believe he really has some massive blind spots.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:57 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Yet, youre claiming it does nothing but clarify.
and define, yes.
quote:
Sounds like advocacy.
How?
"This regulation clarifies and defines terms".
Explain to me how that above quote is in any way advocacy.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:57 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:I know.
No. I even posted a disclaimer on page 3
The problem is you claim to:
quote:while ignoring the practaclities of how the government conducts it's buisness.
explaining how this law works
It's a bit like saying "The patriot act is fine, it's never going to be used for US citizens, the no-fly list will never be abused, and FISA will never be misused. It's right there in the law!"
Next up, you'll tell us the ACA made medical care more affordable.
This post was edited on 4/11/24 at 10:58 am
Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:58 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
quote:
Sounds like advocacy.
How?
Youre literally arguing that this doesnt change anything.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:58 am to Taxing Authority
while ignoring the practaclities of how the government conducts it's buisness.
quote:
Message
He;s using the "its always happened" reasoning here and its very dishonest.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:58 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
It's a bit like saying "The patriot act is fine
I never said nor implied this, however.
In fact I even gave my personal opinion that I didn't like the law.
quote:
it's never going to be used for US citizens, the no-fly list will never be abused, and FISA will never be misused. It's right there in the law!"
I never made any predictions about future behaviors, either.
I did go through one hypothetical with someone melting, which is what led to the disclaimer actually, just to explain how presumptions work because he was confused about how this works.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:59 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Youre literally arguing that this doesnt change anything.
Where?
Posted on 4/11/24 at 11:02 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Youre literally arguing that this doesnt change anything.
Where?
JFC..
Posted on 4/11/24 at 11:03 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:You literally argued the law was limited.
I never made any predictions about future behaviors, either.
quote:
You left that part out. Now you're expanding the discussion beyond selling a gun for profit.
Try again.
Even Stevie Wonder can see that won't be the case.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 11:04 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
You literally argued the law was limited.
Actually, I argued how the post he replied to was limited.
quote:
Now you're expanding the discussion
Discussion = this thread, not the law/reg being discussed.
Posted on 4/11/24 at 11:05 am to Pettifogger
quote:
everything the administration does is just intended to provide pathways to persecute ideological enemies
My favorite is making suppressors an NFA item. You would think less noise would benefit society.
I still dont get the stupidity of the pistol brace rule.
Page 5 of 25
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News