testtest

You gotta be kiddin'?

ex13F

ex13F

Master Class
A buddy of mine sent me this link to an article and a website I hadn't heard of before. He lives on the internet while I just pass by on occasion. If this is common knowledge for others, my apologies but I thought I would share this.

www.activistpost.com

"Even One Firearm Sale" Could Land You In Jail Under Biden's New ATF Rule - Activist Post

The rule is also full of unclear language that gives ATF wiggle room to prosecute gun owners as they please.
www.activistpost.com www.activistpost.com
 
well this will not mean much to me..i only sold 1 firearm to my buddy like nearly 3 years ago.

if i want to be rid of a firearm, i go to my large LGS, and sell it to them, as they are always looking for used guns.

so no background check is required by me.

and it was "Republican backed" as the article stated....not just "Sleepy Joe's" doings.

i guess the best thing to do in the future of individual sales would be to go to the lGS, and sell it to them, they in turn sell it whoever wanted it from you..????

also i should add that i no longer put any of my guns on consignment, as too many times, someone doesn't pass the background check, or they change thier mind, and leave me hanging...BS....direct sale back to the LGS, he takes them.
 
Last edited:
Old_Me said:
and it was "Republican backed" as the article stated....not just "Sleepy Joe's" doings.

i guess the best thing to do in the future
Click to expand...
...Is vote the SOBs out of office! (ya I know fat chance)
U.S. murders in 2021 – 20,958 involving a gun. CDC
42,915 people died in motor vehicle traffic crashes 2021. NHTSA.
Maybe the Bleeping RINOs should be thinking of how we sell our cars. What part of "Shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
 
Faulkner said:
The main reason they pick on law abiding citizens is they are the only ones who comply with draconian unconstitutional laws. These laws have proven over and over not to impact thugs, crooks, perverts, mental cases, and just plain mean people one bit.
Click to expand...
it's a "small minority thing"

i'll explain it this way...

i got like 40+ years as a trucker, as a result, we are a "small minority" of road users.

4 wheelers, the average John and Joan Public, are into the high millions of road users...

there IS a difference, as truckers are supposed to be "professionals" where as John and Joan Public don't have to be.

so, who do you think the law enforcement, government, law makers, and states crack down on more...??

the "minority".....that's who.

we (truckers) are an easier target, cuz we are a captured target, easier to find, and control, over the tens of millions of general road users.

so legal gun owners, licensed or permitted to carry gun owners, are a "smaller minority" to CONTROL, over the millions of thugs, criminals and gang bangers out there, that are so large in numbers, they simply cannot be CONTROLLED.
 
So, is it not within our best interests to expect people in the business of selling firearms to have a license? Can you imagine the chaos if there was no licensing requirement? Think Middle Eastern arms bazaar. If I engage in the business of selling firearms the number of guns I sell is not relevant. I think the "one firearm" paragraph is taken out of context of the full text of the rule.
 
I live in a state that passed a passed a "background check" law in 2020. It's really nothing more than a back door into "gun registration". The number of gun crimes now are no less than they were then. The Dems will continue to chip away until there is no legal gun ownership. It's like being nibbled to death by ducks!
 
Recusant said:
I live in a state that passed a passed a "background check" law in 2020. It's really nothing more than a back door into "gun registration". The number of gun crimes now are no less than they were then. The Dems will continue to chip away until there is no legal gun ownership. It's like being nibbled to death by ducks!
Click to expand...
ducks have teeth......??

Jesus H. Christ..........

"look out Martha.....we gots us some wild teeth chomping ducks, coming for our lasagna"......!!!!!!
 
Old_Me said:
ducks have teeth......??

Jesus H. Christ..........

"look out Martha.....we gots us some wild teeth chomping ducks, coming for our lasagna"......!!!!!!
Click to expand...
1694964666773.jpeg
 
HayesGreener said:
So, is it not within our best interests to expect people in the business of selling firearms to have a license? Can you imagine the chaos if there was no licensing requirement? Think Middle Eastern arms bazaar. If I engage in the business of selling firearms the number of guns I sell is not relevant. I think the "one firearm" paragraph is taken out of context of the full text of the rule.
Click to expand...
In the scheme of things, ATF regs make it very difficult for the average gun owner to have an FFL. The main stumbling block is the maze of area zoning laws. In my county your business location has to be zoned for retail which doesn't apply to most residental homes. If your location isn't zoned for commerical use ATF won't issue a license. The ATF also frowns on FFL's that only do gun shows. They require the FFL to have a physical location with regular hours which won't work if you live in an area of the country that's banned gun shops. For those lucky enough to get an FFL you'll have to endure the current admins campaign to strip your license because of a minor bookkeeping error. Also, it's hard to only sell one gun a month and stay in business per ATF. All of this on top of finding distributors that will deal with a small independent dealer that only orders a few guns at a time, not to mention the cost of the security necessary to protect your inventory if you manage to have one. So basically the gov't makes it as hard as it can to get an FFL and then say you have to have an FFL to sell one of your guns. See how it works. God bless those dealers that will do transfers between individuals for a modest fee because the system is really stacked against them.
 
HayesGreener said:
So, is it not within our best interests to expect people in the business of selling firearms to have a license? Can you imagine the chaos if there was no licensing requirement? Think Middle Eastern arms bazaar. If I engage in the business of selling firearms the number of guns I sell is not relevant. I think the "one firearm" paragraph is taken out of context of the full text of the rule.
Click to expand...
The challenge here is to define what constitutes a business. In the opinion of many, one is involved in a business should they hope to realize a substantive profit from ongoing activity, not a single transaction.

By extension, if we apply your logic, wouldn't it be in our best interests to expect people who sell motor vehicles to be licensed? Again, if we follow your logic, there should be chaos in automotive resale. I don't know that anyone would argue such is the case here.

The sticking points on this "common sense gun control" is that, by intention, the definition is vague (or absent altogether) which becomes a license for governmental abuse. Add to that penalties for failing to obtain permission from Big Brother to engage in an activity essentially unregulated for nearly any other commodity, and it isn't a stretch to see this farcical regulation is designed to deny citizens of their constitutionally protected rights.
 
HayesGreener said:
So, is it not within our best interests to expect people in the business of selling firearms to have a license? Can you imagine the chaos if there was no licensing requirement? Think Middle Eastern arms bazaar. If I engage in the business of selling firearms the number of guns I sell is not relevant. I think the "one firearm" paragraph is taken out of context of the full text of the rule.
Click to expand...

People have been selling guns in the private sector forever. Flea markets or whatever. The world hasn't ended. That's not what's driving crime, we all know what's driving crime. All the GCA and Brady have done is dramatically increase the number of guns the government knows about.
 
Blackmesa96 said:
The challenge here is to define what constitutes a business. In the opinion of many, one is involved in a business should they hope to realize a substantive profit from ongoing activity, not a single transaction.

By extension, if we apply your logic, wouldn't it be in our best interests to expect people who sell motor vehicles to be licensed? Again, if we follow your logic, there should be chaos in automotive resale. I don't know that anyone would argue such is the case here.

The sticking points on this "common sense gun control" is that, by intention, the definition is vague (or absent altogether) which becomes a license for governmental abuse. Add to that penalties for failing to obtain permission from Big Brother to engage in an activity essentially unregulated for nearly any other commodity, and it isn't a stretch to see this farcical regulation is designed to deny citizens of their constitutionally protected rights.
Click to expand...
Maybe where you live, but everywhere I have lived car dealers, insurance agents, electricians, plumbers, restauranteurs, contractors, junk dealers, ice cream trucks, clothing boutique, and every other kind of seller needs a license to sell their products and services.
 
HayesGreener said:
Maybe where you live, but everywhere I have lived car dealers, insurance agents, electricians, plumbers, restauranteurs, contractors, junk dealers, ice cream trucks, clothing boutique, and every other kind of seller needs a license to sell their products and services.
Click to expand...
Where the issue is in my thoughts is the administration is trying to combine business and private sales under one term, as stated here, people have been selling guns in private for ever, now this administration wants to say you can’t sell your guns and make any profit, cause if you make any profit, now your a business, and anybody knows guns appreciate in value, so this is there strategy……
 
HayesGreener said:
Maybe where you live, but everywhere I have lived car dealers, insurance agents, electricians, plumbers, restauranteurs, contractors, junk dealers, ice cream trucks, clothing boutique, and every other kind of seller needs a license to sell their products and services.
Click to expand...
But an individual doesn't need a license to do so. Biden and his minions would restrict the activity of a private individual not engaged in an ongoing series of sales. That is a dramatic difference.
 
Let’s say , I have no heirs to pass down to. If I want to sell off my collection may I still do so as long as each item is taken to local FFl for it to go “on the books” or is that prohibited as well and I have to sell it all off at once in something similar to an estate sale and take the loss?
 
I agree that private citizens should be able to sell or transfer firearms to other private citizens with no FFL involved. I have bought and sold many guns this way over the years as I built and refined my collection. On the other side of the coin I have attended many gun shows, and encountered sellers who have a table labeled "private collection no FFL". I have no objection if that is what they are selling, but when you see the same guy at all the gun shows in your area year after year, you have to question whether he is running an off the books gun business. Likewise the local guy on the internet who always seems to have a bunch of guns for sale from his personal collection. I think they are trying to reign in the guy who is running an off the books gun business as a number of guns turning up in crimes are being sold that way. If they had just left it alone at 5 or 10 or 15 guns it would be less ambiguous.
 
HayesGreener said:
I agree that private citizens should be able to sell or transfer firearms to other private citizens with no FFL involved. I have bought and sold many guns this way over the years as I built and refined my collection. On the other side of the coin I have attended many gun shows, and encountered sellers who have a table labeled "private collection no FFL". I have no objection if that is what they are selling, but when you see the same guy at all the gun shows in your area year after year, you have to question whether he is running an off the books gun business. Likewise the local guy on the internet who always seems to have a bunch of guns for sale from his personal collection. I think they are trying to reign in the guy who is running an off the books gun business as a number of guns turning up in crimes are being sold that way. If they had just left it alone at 5 or 10 or 15 guns it would be less ambiguous.
Click to expand...
Certainly there are always going to be some people who want to exploit an ambiguous section of the law. It comes down to the fact that that individual should be held liable for their actions.

Anytime the 2A community agrees to any restrictions on freedom it opens a Pandora's box the anti-gun fringe will exploit to pile further restrictions and unconstitutional policies on. Inevitably, they will argue along the lines that our new restrictions aren't anything more than a "clarification" of previous restrictions. Consequently, if you were willing to accept that, you should accept this as well.

No more compromises. Everything they want must be opposed because of where they intend to take it. Incremental loss of freedom is no more tolerable than the sudden imposition of tyranny.
 

Attachments

  • ZomboMeme 0065.jpg
    ZomboMeme 0065.jpg
    62.2 KB · Views: 84
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top