mn resident gets pinched for selling firearms w/o license

[jdege]

Most of the folks I know, who aren't FFLs, but who buy and sell more than a one or two firearms in a year, were FFLs, but had their licenses renewals declined, because they "weren't in the business".

Suppose, for the sake of argument, that this guy falls into that category. Would his having had his license pulled because he wasn't in the business be considered a defense against charges of engaging in the business without a license?

Probably not...

[Mn01r6]

Most of the folks I know, who aren't FFLs, but who buy and sell more than a one or two firearms in a year, were FFLs, but had their licenses renewals declined, because they "weren't in the business".

Suppose, for the sake of argument, that this guy falls into that category. Would his having had his license pulled because he wasn't in the business be considered a defense against charges of engaging in the business without a license?

Probably not...

He wouldn't get his license revoked for buying and selling as many as he did, so he should have reapplied when he decided to ramp up his activity. Especially after being warned by the ATF. He is just an idiot for ignoring their warning.

[Dick Unger]

There are certain folks who just like to trade in guns. You cannot buy retail and sell retail and make any money. But these are often folks who sell to questionable characters kind of as hangers os. It's doubtul they would go to a gun dealer for background checks, and it's unlikely they would stop selling guns. Probably the system worked.

I twill be interesting to see if he rolls over on the folks that purchased from him, if any of them are illegal to possess.

[Tronster]

Basic problem is how many sales constitutes profiting? Thats what the ATF needs to define, otherwise it's all subjective.

But yea, I doubt the guy was just "trying out" 60 different rifles to find the best one and selling the rest. That's $60K worth of guns!

[NMRMN]

I called it less than a month ago... viewtopic.php?f=55&t=41584&p=451732&hilit=batf#p451732

[infidel]

I think it comes down to whether you are in a business to make a profit or not.

Good luck convincing a jury.

[SparkyJeff]

Maybe I'll get roasted for this.
But if the guns aren't stolen, and they were sold to people that could possess them legally, WTF is the problem?
Why is selling one gun and making a profit different than selling a couple dozen?

I prefer my freedom without any goofy red tape.

[infidel]

SparkyJeff wrote: Why is selling one gun and making a profit different than selling a couple dozen?

What is your intent (as perceived by a jury)? Selling granddads estate is much different than buying 100 lowers and selling them on Armlist for double or triple.

Granted, the BATFE may not be needed, yet they regulate us. Why should someone without an FFL be able to profit like a BATFE authorized FFL?

If you want to be in the firearm business for profit, you will go through the red tape to obtain a FFL, or you will go to jail.

[TommyMN]

I called it less than a month ago... viewtopic.php?f=55&t=41584&p=451732&hilit=batf#p451732

You and I have mentioned this many times over the last months. Funny how everybody said we were wrong and hated capitalism.

[Holland&Holland]

I called it less than a month ago... viewtopic.php?f=55&t=41584&p=451732&hilit=batf#p451732

You and I have mentioned this many times over the last months. Funny how everybody said we were wrong and hated capitalism.

To be honest though these are to different issues. Someone who is a true capitalist would say that the regulation by the BATF is socialism at work. So your really are not proving your point.

[Back In Black]

Most of the folks I know, who aren't FFLs, but who buy and sell more than a one or two firearms in a year, were FFLs, but had their licenses renewals declined, because they "weren't in the business".

Suppose, for the sake of argument, that this guy falls into that category. Would his having had his license pulled because he wasn't in the business be considered a defense against charges of engaging in the business without a license?

Probably not...

I know someone with a FFL who hasn't sold one gun in over 20 years. Still has it.

[NMRMN]

I called it less than a month ago... viewtopic.php?f=55&t=41584&p=451732&hilit=batf#p451732

You and I have mentioned this many times over the last months. Funny how everybody said we were wrong and hated capitalism.

To be honest though these are to different issues. Someone who is a true capitalist would say that the regulation by the BATF is socialism at work. So your really are not proving your point.

I wasn't saying I agreed with the regulation -- but that folks flipping guns were asking for trouble.

[jdege]

He wouldn't get his license revoked for buying and selling as many as he did,

He would, if he didn't have a store front, or if he was working out of his home and it wasn't zoned for a business.

[Mn01r6]

He wouldn't get his license revoked for buying and selling as many as he did,

He would, if he didn't have a store front, or if he was working out of his home and it wasn't zoned for a business.

Your post makes no sense in light of the fact that they warned him and told him he needed a FFL.

[Back In Black]

He wouldn't get his license revoked for buying and selling as many as he did,

He would, if he didn't have a store front, or if he was working out of his home and it wasn't zoned for a business.

While it may be next to impossible to get a new FFL today without a storefront, it was not that way in the past. And they are not revoking nor refusing to renew current FFL's simply because you don't have a storefront.