P5 Guy
Member
Which is illegal in Pinellas County, the FFL must have a storefront in a commercial zone.
Gun show loophole?
- Thread starter MikeInOr
- Start date
You might have to talk to the county and maybe the ATF. There's an 01 licensee in here and there isn't a storefront.
Attachments
.455_Hunter
Member
Because of Columbine fallout, Colorado has experienced a gun show BG check requirement for all firearms sales/transfers involving non-dealers for a long time. Until the recent stupidity, it worked relatively well. The purchaser went to a common station at the venue for 4473 execution and left with their firearm, really no different than a proper dealer. I never sold at a show, so I am unsure of any extra paperwork or fees paid by the seller.
Last edited:
dogtown tom
Member
What you describe doesn't require an FFL.
An FFL is required when you intend to engage in the business of dealing in firearms.
The current definition:
I've sold about 40 guns out of my collection in the last year to dealers for wholesale prices. Bought 4 or 5. Perfectly legal, I know.
I want to part with about 50 or 60 more guns. If I do what my friends have suggested and get a table at the gun show, I understand that it's perfectly legal to sell off my private collection.
But if someone came by with a revolver that's better than something I have in my collection for a good price, I would probably buy it. And if it was still at the show and someone wanted to offer me an obscene amount of money for it I might sell it. The ATF is not a mind reader and that's looks a lot like I intended to flip a gun and am engaging in business with the intent to profit.
FFL also means I can sell on gunbroker and ship stuff.
dogtown tom
Member
I would get an FFL.
Otto
Member
- Joined
- May 14, 2007
- Messages
- 2,355
The definition you’ve provided is outdated. “principal objective of livelihood and profit,” is no longer used when determining if a person is considered “engaged in the business” as a firearms dealer.
The word “livelihood” was removed by the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act of 2022.
dogtown tom
Member
doc hamer
Member
I don't know why but all of this reminds of that great scene in Taxi Driver where Travis was buying "illegal" guns from Easy Andy in an apartment. Bet there wasn't an ffl to be seen. Lol.
Otto
Member
- Joined
- May 14, 2007
- Messages
- 2,355
They are already aware of the new legislation that closed the “livelihood” loophole.
Furthermore, there is no opposition in Congress to reverse the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA) of 2022. It’s a done deal.
You may want to read this article for a better understanding.
Third Way
tws3b2
Member
There's no loop holes. It's not about gun shows. The dems are the most back stabbing underhanded low life's your gonna find. Look behind you. It's being able to sell/give to your brother, son/daughter, your neighbor, a friend, a collector or anyone else.
Accept Nothing as truth from them. You are just the peon. They are the gods. "In their fantasy world". Watch your back.
Accept Nothing as truth from them. You are just the peon. They are the gods. "In their fantasy world". Watch your back.
doc hamer
Member
dude, i vote Democrat most things but i also own guns. i don't really care what a peron's political leanings.
tws3b2
Member
So, You make your own bed. Don't cry because you have to sleep in it.
dogtown tom
Member
Until they update the CFR.....its the current regulation. Hence the need to publish the new rule regardingThey are already aware of the new legislation that closed the “livelihood” loophole.
Furthermore, there is no opposition in Congress to reverse the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA) of 2022. It’s a done deal.
You may want to read this article for a better understanding.
Third Way
www.thirdway.org
Definition of “Engaged in the Business” as a Dealer in Firearms which doesn't take effect until thirty days following publication in the Federal Register.
Last edited:
dogtown tom
Member
I think the Republicans are neck and neck with them for back stabbing, underhanded low lifes.
No, it isn't. This is about engaging in the business of dealing in firearms.
The rule repeatedly addresses occasional sales, trades or gifts.
I'm not worried. Donald Trump is going to get rid of all federal gun laws when elected.
Elkins45
Member
Arfcom and the guntubers are absolutely wound into a tizzy that trading a gun with an FFL makes you an unlicensed dealer because you both don’t have a license. I asked them to send me a link to the story when that arrest happens. They accused me of being an ATF plant.
People do love a bit of drama.
People do love a bit of drama.
1) The great Milwaukee Urinal newspaper use to brag about stopping "Saturday Night Specials" if they cost less than $200. Somebody wrote in to the paper and politely explained a typical S&W Model 10 police revolver sold for under $100 at that time. We didn't hear much about "the problem" after that.
2) Now according to the president, it's EVIL AR type rifles as the real problem. But his own FBI deny it. It's really ELECTION TIME
with smoke and mirrors!!!
A bit of history: Anti-gun rights campaigns first focused on handguns. By the late 80's that campaign had run out of steam, so an anti-gunner named Josh Sugarmann came up with a new approach to pep up his anti gun organization. From his paper, Assault Weapons and Accessories in America:
It will be a new topic in what has become to the press and public an “old” debate. Although handguns claim more than 20,000 lives a year, the issue of handgun restriction consistently remains a non-issue with the vast majority of legislators, the press, and public. .....Assault weapons—just like armor-piercing bullets, machine guns, and plastic firearms—are a new topic. The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons—anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun—can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons. [underlining added]
The upshot: It's easy to market bans on "Assault weapons" because they are scary looking, especially to people who don't know anything about guns. Based on many of the posts here, the strategy has worked quite well.
According to the FBI's 2019 crime statistics, there were 364 murders committed in the US that year using rifles. That's ALL rifles of all kinds. They don't keep statistics for "assault rifles", but given the hundreds of millions of other kinds of rifles out there, it's unlikely that it's more than half. Let's call it 200 to be generous. This is tiny compared with the 1,476 murders committed with "knives and cutting instruments". Just to put it into perspective, there were 600 murders committed using fists. So the odds of being killed by someone punching you are three times as high as being killed with an "assault rifle".
Yet attacking "assault rifles" is a cornerstone of Democratic gun policy. "Hell, yes, we're going to take your AR-15!". Why are they making such a big deal about them if they are so rarely used in murders?
First and foremost is to generate an atmosphere of fear from which you can only be saved if you vote Democratic.
The second reason is that the Supreme Court has declared that weapons "commonly used for lawful purposes" are protected by the Second Amendment. AR-15s are commonly used for lawful purposes. They are also used in a very small percentage of crimes. So why are the Democrats so determined to ban them? Because they desperately want to establish some way around the common use protection. Once they've done that, more and more guns will be classified as "assault weapons". First all semiautos. Then bolt action "sniper rifles". Etc, etc. This is entirely consistent with a long established strategy of incrementalism as manifested in Democratic anti-gun states like California, New York and Illinois.
So given the near certainty that assault weapon bans are going to be found unconstitutional, why are so many Democratic states rushing to pass them? So that when the bans are overturned, they can claim "We tried to save you, but that nasty old Supreme Court doesn't care about your children" and use it to try and pack the court.
Ignition Override
Member
As far as Gun show sellers still being able to offer several guns on their tables:
Several years ago the Senate didn’t even want to vote on UBC/ Univ. background checks. At that the “experts” predicted that The Sky Would Fall, immediately.
Unless private sellers at gun shows live in the anti-Constitutional states, this extremely normal activity won’t be affected.
The ATF can’t even keep up with tracking guns stolen en masse from break-ins of retail stores, illegal explosive devices.
Several years ago the Senate didn’t even want to vote on UBC/ Univ. background checks. At that the “experts” predicted that The Sky Would Fall, immediately.
Unless private sellers at gun shows live in the anti-Constitutional states, this extremely normal activity won’t be affected.
The ATF can’t even keep up with tracking guns stolen en masse from break-ins of retail stores, illegal explosive devices.
Elkins45
Member
Exactly. Until I see the guys who rent two tables at every show and sell hundreds of guns a year getting arrested I’m not going to worry about the 2-3 I trade a year.
Ignition Override
Member
Elkins45: Yes. You have the Big Picture.
Folks: Remember that millions of gun owners (over 300 million guns) reside in the US and a huge number sometimes sell 2-3 guns. There is nothing illegal about this.
The comments from Asparagus Head
were created by the Puppet Masters out of Election Year Desperation. They are Painfully aware that their jobs will evaporate if they are on a sinking ship.
I'm never gonna sit around fretting because of --words-- splashed around the mainstream media.........good gosh.
Folks: Remember that millions of gun owners (over 300 million guns) reside in the US and a huge number sometimes sell 2-3 guns. There is nothing illegal about this.
The comments from Asparagus Head
were created by the Puppet Masters out of Election Year Desperation. They are Painfully aware that their jobs will evaporate if they are on a sinking ship.I'm never gonna sit around fretting because of --words-- splashed around the mainstream media.........good gosh.
Here's one guy's take on it:
wtop.com
“The law is now clear: If you’re selling firearms at a gun show or online, you are presumed to be engaged in the business of dealing guns and must obtain a license and run background checks on all customers,” John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety, said in a statement. “This game-changing rule will thwart criminals, save lives, and serve as a testament to the Biden-Harris Administration’s steadfast commitment to keeping communities safe from gun violence.”
The thing he's wrong about is that there's a "rebuttable presumption" that you're engaged in the business if you sell guns at a gun show or online. If you didn't intent to make a profit you can argue you're not a gun dealer.
Some criminals are using dating app Tinder to purchase guns, ATF says - WTOP News
Federal officials are learning that guns are also being trafficked using social media platforms, including an app where you would more likely find a date than a Glock.
wtop.com
“The law is now clear: If you’re selling firearms at a gun show or online, you are presumed to be engaged in the business of dealing guns and must obtain a license and run background checks on all customers,” John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety, said in a statement. “This game-changing rule will thwart criminals, save lives, and serve as a testament to the Biden-Harris Administration’s steadfast commitment to keeping communities safe from gun violence.”
The thing he's wrong about is that there's a "rebuttable presumption" that you're engaged in the business if you sell guns at a gun show or online. If you didn't intent to make a profit you can argue you're not a gun dealer.
Last edited:
HowardC
Member
Didn't happen in Illinois.
-West out
AlexanderA
Member
Those of us who attend gun shows on a regular basis know who the "unlicensed dealers" are. We're in willful denial if we don't recognize that this is a real problem.
Another real problem that we're in willful denial of is that we let people out of prison or mental institutions knowing they're likely to kill people. And they do.
So, let's put people in prison if they're selling guns without background checks to make sure that the known killers we let out of prison won't get guns. Makes sense. Because in a free country where guns are more common than staplers someone who is a criminal can't possibly find a criminal way to get a gun. Besides, we need to make room for gun dealers.
Similar threads
- Locked
