Fascinating...Has everyone forgot that gun shows used to be private gun collector shows and the ATF would not allow FFL dealers to set up booths at gunshows?
Thanks. I was aware that there was federal regulation of dealing in livestock, but didn't know it extended to pets. It looks like the requirements focus on pet wholesalers and breeders for the wholesale trade.Except one doesn't need a federal license to sell puppies.
.
Actually, there are federal licenses to deal in pets.
https://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_welfare/downloads/aw/awlicreg.pdf
Pet breeders need to be licensed
Obviously it is still an apples and oranges analogy, especially since there are actual numbers which define an exempt "Hobby Breeder"
The reduction in the number of FFL's is not a myth. Saying that Clinton banned kitchen table FFL's is a myth. The fact remains that you can run a FFL out of your home if your local zoning allows it.
I personally know two people who have been denied a FFL because, (according to them) they didn't have what the ATF would call "true" business. They were both at least given the strong impression that that needed a separate building or address, at least that's what they told me. Both were in the last 3 years or so, neither one live in the city limits of anywhere so zoning codes are nonexistent.
That 'poor fellow' will have a lot of support and most likely win in court if such a thing were to ever happen.We are not going to have to wait long to see how the new EO works out.
Very soon the first "gun seller" will be arrested and charged for selling 3 guns, at a loss, from his personal collection, gun show or FTF, makes no difference. He will be paraded at a press conference by the ATF and FBI. CNN will jump all over the story and claim a victory for Obummer and we will have an idea about the "interpretation" of the law.
Just make sure you are not that poor fellow.
Time was that anybody could apply for their FFL and be able to purchase guns and receive them directly to their home.
Then the Clinton administration decided there were too many FFLs and weeded out all of the "kitchen table" dealers.
If we're going back to giving FFLs to anyone who asks, then I might apply for one myself.
It's not about saving lives.So how many lives will these Executive Orders save?
Suppose the Feds mandate that all private sellers who sell over , say, 50 guns a year MUST be FFLs.It actually wouldn't be hard to write out. All they would have to do is say if you sell x number of guns a year you are a dealer. Or if x% of your income is from selling guns you are a dealer.
I see FBI sting operations in the future where undercover cops try to buy guns so they can gather evidence on who is "in the business of dealing firearms".Suppose the Feds mandate that all private sellers who sell over , say, 50 guns a year MUST be FFLs.
Minor Issue:
They are now legislating intra state commerce, which is unconstitutional. Their argument will be that guns are made across state lines and hence they can enforce it, which is hoaky because by that measure, there is no such thing as intra-state commerce.
Major Issue:
How would they know if a private party person has sold over 50 guns a year, without knowing that sales had actually taken place? So, they have to know that the sale took place. To know that the sale took place between private parties requires them to know who owned the firearm before the sale and who owns it after. This is registration.
Hence why actual numbers are not used in legislative definition of what is an FFL.
I see FBI sting operations in the future where undercover cops try to buy guns so they can gather evidence on who is "in the business of dealing firearms".
To be quite honest, there are probably more than a few people who deem themselves "good guys" who have been "in the business" for years without an FFL.
We all know that nothing was actually done, no lives were saved, nothing really changed.
I wondered about that as well. Surely there will have to be some form of document, otherwise people could just claim "yeah, I stopped by the office and told the receptionist" or similar.Is there any information on what you have to do to inform the CLEO you're getting an NFA item?
( c) Notification of chief law enforcement officer. Prior to the submission of the application to the Director, all transferees and responsible persons shall forward a completed copy of Form 4 or a completed copy of Form 5320.23, respectively, to the chief law enforcement officer of the locality in which the transferee or responsible person is located. The chief law enforcement officer is the local chief of police, county sheriff, head of the State police, State or local district attorney or prosecutor. If the transferee is not a licensed manufacturer, importer, or dealer qualified under this part and is a partnership, company, association, or corporation, for purposes of this section, it is considered located at its principal office or principal place of business; if the transferee is not a licensed manufacturer, importer, or dealer qualified under this part and is a trust, for purposes of this section, it is considered located at the primary location at which the firearm will be maintained.
USAF_Vet said:But congress can deny funding for the useless pet project. Contact your reps and encourage them not to fund smart gun tech in the proposed FY2017 budget.
Believe me, I know it's an uphill battle. My own senators will goose step in line next to Obama, but my rep is Justin Amash, and he's been amazing in the fight for personal liberty. I'm pretty certain he'll fight to deny funding.That would take brains, fortitude and will. You overestimate my (D) Rep (and (D)) Senators