User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/12/2016 2:04:08 PM EDT
[#1]
You can sell at a profit and you can sell them FTF legally ( assuming your state allows that ) or through an FFL.
The only thing that is illegal is selling guns in a business without having an FFL |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2016 2:07:07 PM EDT
[#2]
Apparently that's incorrect.
A private individual can NOT sell for a profit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2016 2:12:27 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Apparently that's incorrect. A private individual can NOT sell for a profit. yes they can. You can not be in the buisness of dealing firearms.... but if he chose to sell a gun he originally intended to be for him...and got more money for it for whatever reason.....There is no law against that/ |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2016 2:16:29 PM EDT
[#4]
There is no way the individual can prove that he did not purchase the firearms without an intention to profit.
As per the ATF: "Determining whether you are “engaged in the business” of dealing in firearms requires looking at the specific facts and circumstances of your activities." "As a general rule, you will need a license if you repetitively buy and sell firearms with the principal motive of making a profit. In contrast, if you only make occasional sales of firearms from your personal collection, you do not need to be licensed." "Courts have identified several factors relevant to determining on which side of that line your activities may fall, including: whether you represent yourself as a dealer in firearms; whether you are repetitively buying and selling firearms; the circumstances under which you are selling firearms; and whether you are looking to make a profit. Note that while quantity and frequency of sales are relevant indicators, courts have upheld convictions for dealing without a license when as few as two firearms were sold, or when only one or two transactions took place, when other factors were also present." https://www.atf.gov/file/100871/download |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2016 2:18:40 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Apparently that's incorrect. A private individual can NOT sell for a profit. why the hell not? you're in Louisiana?? far as I know FTF sales are fine..you get a table at the gun show with 50 receivers on it and someones gonna call the ATF, get a table full of holsters, belts, knives and 3 receivers on it..no one's gone say shit unless you do it every weekend then you're acting as a gun dealer and may get a visit from Mr or Ms ATF |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2016 2:21:58 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There is no way the individual can prove that he did not purchase the firearms without an intention to profit. As per the ATF: "Determining whether you are “engaged in the business” of dealing in firearms requires looking at the specific facts and circumstances of your activities." "As a general rule, you will need a license if you repetitively buy and sell firearms with the principal motive of making a profit. In contrast, if you only make occasional sales of firearms from your personal collection, you do not need to be licensed." "Courts have identified several factors relevant to determining on which side of that line your activities may fall, including: whether you represent yourself as a dealer in firearms; whether you are repetitively buying and selling firearms; the circumstances under which you are selling firearms; and whether you are looking to make a profit. Note that while quantity and frequency of sales are relevant indicators, courts have upheld convictions for dealing without a license when as few as two firearms were sold, or when only one or two transactions took place, when other factors were also present." https://www.atf.gov/file/100871/download and the ATF can't prove if you did...this is the issue where casual dealers buy a gun at a gun show or from Mr ATF agent and in turn sell it 15 min later(put it on their table for sale) that would say you were acting as a DEALER the casual dealer who sells a gun a week at a gun show is usualy NOT viewed as a dealer unless they're stupid.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2016 2:24:22 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There is no way the individual can prove that he did not purchase the firearms without an intention to profit. As per the ATF: "Determining whether you are “engaged in the business” of dealing in firearms requires looking at the specific facts and circumstances of your activities." "As a general rule, you will need a license if you repetitively buy and sell firearms with the principal motive of making a profit. In contrast, if you only make occasional sales of firearms from your personal collection, you do not need to be licensed." "Courts have identified several factors relevant to determining on which side of that line your activities may fall, including: 1. whether you represent yourself as a dealer in firearms; 2. whether you are repetitively buying and selling firearms; 3. the circumstances under which you are selling firearms; and 4. whether you are looking to make a profit. Note that while quantity and frequency of sales are relevant indicators, courts have upheld convictions for dealing without a license when as few as two firearms were sold, or when only one or two transactions took place, when other factors were also present." https://www.atf.gov/file/100871/download Profit is not the sole defining factor. Sell 50 guns (number arbitrarily chosen) at a gun show and all for a loss, and you'll likely be defined as a dealer. Sell a small personal collection for a small profit and it would take an ATF agent with a boner to make a problem out of it. But, ATF agents are known to have boners. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2016 2:36:38 PM EDT
[#8]
The whole discussion at all shouldn't even be happening. We should be free to sell our private property as we see fit. How the person uses it later is up to them and them only, unless you can be proven to be knowledgeable that they would use the gun for harm (which would be hard to prove I imagine). It all comes back to personal responsibility, which exists less and less these days. I'm relatively new to the AR world, but my eyes have been opened to how restrictive the government (ATF) is on firearms, and it makes me sick. The fact that using a stock instead of a SigBrace on the exact same firearm suddenly turns it into an EVIL SHORT BARRELED RIFLE defies all logic and sense. It's like adding a spoiler suddenly makes the car change from a BMW to a Top Fuel Dragster. No, it's the same car. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED should be tattooed on every lawmaker's forehead.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2016 7:05:11 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The whole discussion at all shouldn't even be happening. We should be free to sell our private property as we see fit. How the person uses it later is up to them and them only, unless you can be proven to be knowledgeable that they would use the gun for harm (which would be hard to prove I imagine). It all comes back to personal responsibility, which exists less and less these days. I'm relatively new to the AR world, but my eyes have been opened to how restrictive the government (ATF) is on firearms, and it makes me sick. The fact that using a stock instead of a SigBrace on the exact same firearm suddenly turns it into an EVIL SHORT BARRELED RIFLE defies all logic and sense. It's like adding a spoiler suddenly makes the car change from a BMW to a Top Fuel Dragster. No, it's the same car. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED should be tattooed on every lawmaker's forehead. Nice rant, but you are 82 years late to the party. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2016 9:52:12 PM EDT
[#10]
The ATF has specifically stated it can be just one or two guns, so volume really isn't the issue at all. The problem is that the ATF won't define stated criteria that differentiates a collector from a dealer and they want to continue to make it up as they go along and prosecute people according to what they "believe" the person is doing.
There is no longer a safety net, there are no longer practiced guidelines that protect you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2016 10:47:51 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The ATF has specifically stated it can be just one or two guns, so volume really isn't the issue at all. The problem is that the ATF won't define stated criteria that differentiates a collector from a dealer and they want to continue to make it up as they go along and prosecute people according to what they "believe" the person is doing. There is no longer a safety net, there are no longer practiced guidelines that protect you. Well then, it looks like you are stuck with your guns. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2016 11:20:25 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well then, it looks like you are stuck with your guns. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The ATF has specifically stated it can be just one or two guns, so volume really isn't the issue at all. The problem is that the ATF won't define stated criteria that differentiates a collector from a dealer and they want to continue to make it up as they go along and prosecute people according to what they "believe" the person is doing. There is no longer a safety net, there are no longer practiced guidelines that protect you. Well then, it looks like you are stuck with your guns. Are you being facetious ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2016 12:02:48 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The ATF has specifically stated it can be just one or two guns, so volume really isn't the issue at all. Since 1968 ATF has had the same standard of what defines engaging in the business of dealing in firearms. There has never been a minimum #, but there has always been criteria that describes "engaging in the business of dealing in firearms". The problem is that the ATF won't define stated criteria that differentiates a collector from a dealer Yes, they do. Where have you been the last five decades? 
and they want to continue to make it up as they go along and prosecute people according to what they "believe" the person is doing. There is no longer a safety net, there are no longer practiced guidelines that protect you. "No longer practiced guidelines..."? ATF hasn't changed regulations that define a dealer in firearms. Please enlighten us on what the "safety net" is? Somebody needs to read some ATF regs.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2016 3:22:15 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Somebody needs to read some ATF regs. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The ATF has specifically stated it can be just one or two guns, so volume really isn't the issue at all. Since 1968 ATF has had the same standard of what defines engaging in the business of dealing in firearms. There has never been a minimum #, but there has always been criteria that describes "engaging in the business of dealing in firearms". The problem is that the ATF won't define stated criteria that differentiates a collector from a dealer Yes, they do. Where have you been the last five decades?
and they want to continue to make it up as they go along and prosecute people according to what they "believe" the person is doing. There is no longer a safety net, there are no longer practiced guidelines that protect you. "No longer practiced guidelines..."? ATF hasn't changed regulations that define a dealer in firearms. Please enlighten us on what the "safety net" is? Somebody needs to read some ATF regs. There are three or four unfired Colt Pythons in original boxes (not even a wear line on the cylinders) in my safe from 20 years ago. I sure as h*ll better be able to sell them for more than I paid. I did sell the Model 52-1 when I stopped shooting Bullseye regularly. Probbaly should have held onto it. Fellow shooter talked me out of it for a very nice price. I see some going around $1,600 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2016 12:31:24 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The ATF has specifically stated it can be just one or two guns, so volume really isn't the issue at all. Since 1968 ATF has had the same standard of what defines engaging in the business of dealing in firearms. There has never been a minimum #, but there has always been criteria that describes "engaging in the business of dealing in firearms". Since 1986. Part of FOPA was to further define what a dealer was, to prevent this stuff. The standard has also changed as a result of Case Law. One way to know what the criteria is, is to read the convictions. Some are down right scary, like a guy who flipped one gun at a gun show, and another guy who dumped pre-bans into a ban state after the AWB expired. For example, in 2015 there were 57 convictions for dealing without a license, and I have read almost every one of them  .
Common denominators in almost all of these cases, is record keeping, BOS, and a profit was made. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2016 2:15:14 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Since 1986. Part of FOPA was to further define what a dealer was, to prevent this stuff. The standard has also changed as a result of Case Law. One way to know what the criteria is, is to read the convictions. Some are down right scary, like a guy who flipped one gun at a gun show, and another guy who dumped pre-bans into a ban state after the AWB expired. For example, in 2015 there were 57 convictions for dealing without a license, and I have read almost every one of them .
Common denominators in almost all of these cases, is record keeping, BOS, and a profit was made. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The ATF has specifically stated it can be just one or two guns, so volume really isn't the issue at all. Since 1968 ATF has had the same standard of what defines engaging in the business of dealing in firearms. There has never been a minimum #, but there has always been criteria that describes "engaging in the business of dealing in firearms". Since 1986. Part of FOPA was to further define what a dealer was, to prevent this stuff. The standard has also changed as a result of Case Law. One way to know what the criteria is, is to read the convictions. Some are down right scary, like a guy who flipped one gun at a gun show, and another guy who dumped pre-bans into a ban state after the AWB expired. For example, in 2015 there were 57 convictions for dealing without a license, and I have read almost every one of them .
Common denominators in almost all of these cases, is record keeping, BOS, and a profit was made. Thank you, Renegade. Someone gets it. Where may I find transcripts of the cases mentioned? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2016 6:55:53 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Since 1986. Part of FOPA was to further define what a dealer was, to prevent this stuff. The standard has also changed as a result of Case Law. No argument that FOPA further defined what was a dealer, but it fell right in line with what ATF said was a dealer since 1968. One way to know what the criteria is, is to read the convictions. Some are down right scary, like a guy who flipped one gun at a gun show, and another guy who dumped pre-bans into a ban state after the AWB expired. For example, in 2015 there were 57 convictions for dealing without a license, and I have read almost every one of them .
How many of those convictions actually went to trial? I'll bet most pled out before going in front of a jury. Common denominators in almost all of these cases, is record keeping, BOS, and a profit was made. Yet recordkeeping, a BOS and whether a profit is made has absolutely nothing to do with a nonlicensee selling firearms from his own collection. I'll bet if you checked, those convictions had quite a few other "common denominators"........namely repetitive buying and selling, no intent to purchase for their own collection and a host of other red flags that someone is actually dealing in firearms. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The ATF has specifically stated it can be just one or two guns, so volume really isn't the issue at all. Since 1968 ATF has had the same standard of what defines engaging in the business of dealing in firearms. There has never been a minimum #, but there has always been criteria that describes "engaging in the business of dealing in firearms". Since 1986. Part of FOPA was to further define what a dealer was, to prevent this stuff. The standard has also changed as a result of Case Law. No argument that FOPA further defined what was a dealer, but it fell right in line with what ATF said was a dealer since 1968. One way to know what the criteria is, is to read the convictions. Some are down right scary, like a guy who flipped one gun at a gun show, and another guy who dumped pre-bans into a ban state after the AWB expired. For example, in 2015 there were 57 convictions for dealing without a license, and I have read almost every one of them .
How many of those convictions actually went to trial? I'll bet most pled out before going in front of a jury. Common denominators in almost all of these cases, is record keeping, BOS, and a profit was made. Yet recordkeeping, a BOS and whether a profit is made has absolutely nothing to do with a nonlicensee selling firearms from his own collection. I'll bet if you checked, those convictions had quite a few other "common denominators"........namely repetitive buying and selling, no intent to purchase for their own collection and a host of other red flags that someone is actually dealing in firearms. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2016 2:27:25 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thank you, Renegade. Someone gets it. Where may I find transcripts of the cases mentioned? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The ATF has specifically stated it can be just one or two guns, so volume really isn't the issue at all. Since 1968 ATF has had the same standard of what defines engaging in the business of dealing in firearms. There has never been a minimum #, but there has always been criteria that describes "engaging in the business of dealing in firearms". Since 1986. Part of FOPA was to further define what a dealer was, to prevent this stuff. The standard has also changed as a result of Case Law. One way to know what the criteria is, is to read the convictions. Some are down right scary, like a guy who flipped one gun at a gun show, and another guy who dumped pre-bans into a ban state after the AWB expired. For example, in 2015 there were 57 convictions for dealing without a license, and I have read almost every one of them .
Common denominators in almost all of these cases, is record keeping, BOS, and a profit was made. Thank you, Renegade. Someone gets it. Where may I find transcripts of the cases mentioned? Lexis/Nexus? I usually do not read the entire transcripts. Just press releases. For example, this chump got hit with dealing without a license, even though he did not sell any firearms! https://www.justice.gov/usao-mt/pr/stevensville-man-convicted-manufacturing-and-dealing-firearms-without-license |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2016 9:34:55 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lexis/Nexus? I usually do not read the entire transcripts. Just press releases. For example, this chump got hit with dealing without a license, even though he did not sell any firearms! https://www.justice.gov/usao-mt/pr/stevensville-man-convicted-manufacturing-and-dealing-firearms-without-license Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The ATF has specifically stated it can be just one or two guns, so volume really isn't the issue at all. Since 1968 ATF has had the same standard of what defines engaging in the business of dealing in firearms. There has never been a minimum #, but there has always been criteria that describes "engaging in the business of dealing in firearms". Since 1986. Part of FOPA was to further define what a dealer was, to prevent this stuff. The standard has also changed as a result of Case Law. One way to know what the criteria is, is to read the convictions. Some are down right scary, like a guy who flipped one gun at a gun show, and another guy who dumped pre-bans into a ban state after the AWB expired. For example, in 2015 there were 57 convictions for dealing without a license, and I have read almost every one of them .
Common denominators in almost all of these cases, is record keeping, BOS, and a profit was made. Thank you, Renegade. Someone gets it. Where may I find transcripts of the cases mentioned? Lexis/Nexus? I usually do not read the entire transcripts. Just press releases. For example, this chump got hit with dealing without a license, even though he did not sell any firearms! https://www.justice.gov/usao-mt/pr/stevensville-man-convicted-manufacturing-and-dealing-firearms-without-license Yeah, I remember reading that one. There's gotta be more to the story. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
