User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 2:31:13 AM EDT
[#1]
You really don't get it?
He doesn't care about ATF and any number and ATFs likely loss of power (short term) or panty fluttering. One: forcing more people to get FFLs will result in not much over the long term. ATF can write regs that say you have to have a commercial storefront (no kitchen-table FFL), or must follow all state and local business regulations then have Bloomie et al press states and cities to change zoning, insurance requirements, even something like number of parking spots. Oh, and more ATF examiners to examine. Things that sound like bullshit until you have to pay for them, or have bars on your home's windows, or commercial insurance becomes too expensive, or your neighbors no longer want four government cars parked on their street for your multi-day twice yearly inspection. Two: of course, none of that is the endgame. The endgame is the opposite of all you thinking that the number 50 makes it all OK. He, or his successor socialist-in-chief, will argue that without all transfers going through a central clearinghouse there is no way to know who among us should be required to get that nifty license. It won't be that blunt or immediate, but come on, this isn't rocket surgery. Don't ask what's in it for us; ask what's in it for him. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 2:35:08 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Selling 50 guns is FFL territory Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If they use the 50 number it sounds more reasonable than the ATF has been. yup might be doing us a favor.. most times they will bust at 25. Wouldn't it be kind of silly to sell that many guns a year and not have an FFL? I don't really see the plus side to selling that many guns and not having a license. Not that I agree with the 0 or anything, I'm just wondering. Why would that be silly? I have a large-ish collection and I am getting somewhat burned out on it. I might want to liquidate quite a few guns in the near future to fund other hobbies. Why should I not be able to do this? Selling 50 guns is FFL territory Leave it to Hammermill to not comprehend how a person could amass a several hundred gun collection over 15 years, fall on hard times or become ill and need to sell 50+ guns in a single year. FFL is for profit business, meaning recurring sales and profit motivation, an arbitrary number of guns sold in a year is meaningless. At least you get an atta boy for actually commenting on a thread instead of spamming GD. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 2:51:24 AM EDT
[#3]
He'd weigh his balls too...but he can't find them.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 3:22:56 AM EDT
[#4]
so I can buy and sell 49 a year??
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 3:28:23 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
so I can buy and sell 49 a year?? Absolutely. Until the prewritten 'study' comes out proving that a dealer selling 49 guns a year is 42 times more dangerous than one selling 25 guns a year. Rinse. Repeat. Endgame cause 'we've got this handy list now'. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 3:32:14 AM EDT
[#6]
Dear obama, Go to Hell. Sincerely, America |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 3:53:13 AM EDT
[#7]
Background check you say?
(1)-The Stanley Ann Dunham/Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. marriage license- Not available (2)-Barack Hussein Obama, Jr.´s original vault copy birth certificate- Not available (3)-Records of Barack Obama´s adaption by Lolo Soetoro- Not available (4)-Barry Soetoro/Barack Obama´s baptism records- Not available (5)-Barry Soetoro/Barack Obama´s Noelani Kindergarten records- Not available (6)-Barry Soetoro´s passport records- Not available (7)-Barry Soetor´s Punahou School records- Not available (8)-Barry Soetoro´s Occidental College records- Not available (9)-Barry Soetoro´s Columbia University records- Not available (10)-Barry Soetoro´s Harvard Law School records- Not available (11)-Barry Soetoro´s financial aid records- Not available (12)-Barry Soetoro´s medical records- Not available (13)-Barry Soetoro´s Illinois State Bar Association records- Not available (14)-Barry Soetoro´s Illinois State Senate records- Not available Have a nice day. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 4:36:52 AM EDT
[#8]
   
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 4:44:55 AM EDT
[#9]
lol. yawn.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 5:42:49 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My guess is that he's going to issue a 'feel good' executive order that basically says to do what the law already says. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've had a really long day so maybe I'm just missing something... but isn't this system already in place? You sell guns for a living, you have to have a license (ffl). What is he proposing to be different? Yeah, I'm not getting it. My guess is that he's going to issue a 'feel good' executive order that basically says to do what the law already says. This |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 5:46:46 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
FBHO FPNI. FHRC. and... FBHO. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 5:49:03 AM EDT
[#12]
I feel safer now.
FBHO, all his supporters and those who keep him in power. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 5:51:16 AM EDT
[#13]
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 6:05:22 AM EDT
[#14]
I seriously doubt there are many people selling 4-5 guns every single month without an FFL. That's like a gun a week. As of today (no changes), the ATF will be up your ass if they catch wind of your Pinnochio ass doing that, while claiming it's not a business.
Neva been dun befo. Whatever. Yawn. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 6:05:29 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It might be better than that. The ATF being forced to say you sell xx guns a year and you need an FFL is something they have resisted doing for decades. They don't want a set number for good reason and that reason is so they could charge whoever they wanted with violating the law. Now they will have to prove you sold a certain number, a number everyone will know and be able to follow the law. A number that if they set too low can be challenged in court. Obama might just hand us a gift thinking he is hurting us. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've had a really long day so maybe I'm just missing something... but isn't this system already in place? You sell guns for a living, you have to have a license (ffl). What is he proposing to be different? Yeah, I'm not getting it. My guess is that he's going to issue a 'feel good' executive order that basically says to do what the law already says. Yep. Won't do shit. It might be better than that. The ATF being forced to say you sell xx guns a year and you need an FFL is something they have resisted doing for decades. They don't want a set number for good reason and that reason is so they could charge whoever they wanted with violating the law. Now they will have to prove you sold a certain number, a number everyone will know and be able to follow the law. A number that if they set too low can be challenged in court. Obama might just hand us a gift thinking he is hurting us. After reading FatMcNasty's posts... Yeah, this is what he is aiming at. Define what the ATF has long undefined. And yeah, I think that HELPS us a lot more than hurts us!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 6:06:15 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm betting his threshold is 1 gun when it's all said and done. A very high probability |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 6:15:35 AM EDT
[#17]
My guess is the room full of burecrats couldn't even correctly explain the laws to him so he feels like he is doing something courageous and new. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 10:09:32 AM EDT
[#18]
What a fuckin retard.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 10:11:16 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah, this is what he is aiming at. Define what the ATF has long undefined. And yeah, I think that HELPS us a lot more than hurts us!!! LOL. Yeah, I'm sure they'll loosen up the criteria to get a FFL to pre-Clinton standards to match their arbitrary numerical cutoff. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 10:36:39 AM EDT
[#20]
Quoted:
Obama weighs expanding background checks through executive authority In response to the latest mass shooting during his presidency, President Obama is seriously considering circumventing Congress with his executive authority and imposing new background-check requirements for buyers who purchase weapons from high-volume gun dealers. Under the proposed rule change, dealers who exceed a certain number of sales each year would be required to obtain a license from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and perform background checks on potential buyers. ... The proposed executive action aims to impose background checks on individuals who buy from dealers who sell a significant number of guns each year. The current federal statute dictates that those who are “engaged in the business” of dealing firearms need to obtain a federal license — and, therefore, conduct background checks — but exempts anyone “who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms.” White House officials drafted the proposal in late 2013 to apply to those dealers who sell at least 50 guns annually, after Congress had rejected legislation that would have expanded background checks more broadly to private sellers. While the White House Office of Legal Counsel and then-Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. initially concluded the regulation was legally defensible, according to several individuals involved in the discussions, some federal lawyers remained concerned that setting an arbitrary numerical threshold could leave the rule vulnerable to a challenge. ATF officials, moreover, objected that it would be hard to enforce and that it was unclear how many sellers would be affected by the change. “Everyone realized it would be hugely politically controversial,” said one individual, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private discussions. The part in red is also really important - and amusing - to note. This was almost certainly an "executive action" that they wanted to do in the wake of Sandy Hook - and ended up NOT doing. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 1:50:27 PM EDT
[#21]
Another news article I read on this issue stated that Obama might go with an even higher number of no FFL required sales, setting it at 100 per year. Either number would be a net win for gun owners, since currently the BATF can pull out any number they want and say you are a dealer.
I honestly do not think Obama has a clue. He clearly wants to hurt gun owners, but his utter ignorance works against him. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 1:59:17 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
snip Selling 50 guns is FFL territory What a complete crock of shit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 2:11:18 PM EDT
[#23]
If you sell 50 guns a year you must get an FFL.
No FFL's will be issued to they type of people that sell ~50 guns a year. - Then - If you sell 20 guns a year..... If you sell 10.... In order to sell guns (1 gun)....... |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 2:42:06 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: OH! they are putting a real documented number to show when its a hobby and when you really become a dealer needing a 01.. as of right now that number is fuzzy.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 2:49:05 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've had a really long day so maybe I'm just missing something... but isn't this system already in place? You sell guns for a living, you have to have a license (ffl). What is he proposing to be different? VP Biden explaining there's "not enough time or manpower" to enforce the existing laws |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 2:50:10 PM EDT
[#26]
First three response nails it.
FBHO. FHRC. LOL. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 2:53:25 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What a complete crock of shit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
snip Selling 50 guns is FFL territory What a complete crock of shit. Not that I agree with the law (I don't think a federal license to sell firearms should even exist to begin with), but i'm having a hard time seeing how selling a gun a week is anything other than a small business. Calling it a hobby at that point kind of seems to stretch the limits of credulity, doesn't it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 3:16:59 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not that I agree with the law (I don't think a federal license to sell firearms should even exist to begin with), but i'm having a hard time seeing how selling a gun a week is anything other than a small business. Calling it a hobby at that point kind of seems to stretch the limits of credulity, doesn't it? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
snip Selling 50 guns is FFL territory What a complete crock of shit. Not that I agree with the law (I don't think a federal license to sell firearms should even exist to begin with), but i'm having a hard time seeing how selling a gun a week is anything other than a small business. Calling it a hobby at that point kind of seems to stretch the limits of credulity, doesn't it? Don't be ridiculous. The real question is whether or not you are making a living by selling guns for profit. If someone has the money to buy a gun, try it out, then sell it for a loss the next week...every week for a year... they are not a dealer, not making a living at selling guns for profit, and shouldn't need an FFL just to sell their property as long as they are following the law otherwise. How you can possibly say that an arbitrary # of guns sold in a year makes someone a dealer or means that they are not taking part in a hobby is beyond me unless you are incredibly unimaginative. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 3:19:49 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not that I agree with the law (I don't think a federal license to sell firearms should even exist to begin with), but i'm having a hard time seeing how selling a gun a week is anything other than a small business. Calling it a hobby at that point kind of seems to stretch the limits of credulity, doesn't it? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
snip Selling 50 guns is FFL territory What a complete crock of shit. Not that I agree with the law (I don't think a federal license to sell firearms should even exist to begin with), but i'm having a hard time seeing how selling a gun a week is anything other than a small business. Calling it a hobby at that point kind of seems to stretch the limits of credulity, doesn't it? Agreed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 3:27:42 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not that I agree with the law (I don't think a federal license to sell firearms should even exist to begin with), but i'm having a hard time seeing how selling a gun a week is anything other than a small business. Calling it a hobby at that point kind of seems to stretch the limits of credulity, doesn't it? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
snip Selling 50 guns is FFL territory What a complete crock of shit. Not that I agree with the law (I don't think a federal license to sell firearms should even exist to begin with), but i'm having a hard time seeing how selling a gun a week is anything other than a small business. Calling it a hobby at that point kind of seems to stretch the limits of credulity, doesn't it? Why? If I have spent years amassing a large collection that just doesn't do it for me anymore and I want to liquidate all or part of it how is that "being in the business of selling guns"? I am not ordering in guns and turning around and selling them, these were not purchased with the intent to sell for profit (and most would probably be at a loss with today's prices). They have been owned, modified as I see fit and used by me for YEARS and now if I want to shift gears a bit and do something else I am "Dealing" guns? Nonsense. Selling off your own personal collection is NOT being a gun dealer. You draw an arbitrary line at a gun a week but what about one every two weeks, one a month, one a quarter? Depending on the size of ones collection it could take years to sell off at that point. To me being a dealer means you are buying in guns specifically to re-sell (difficult to prove intent I know but that is not my problem) and you are making a living or a significant portion of your living thru the sale of guns. Neither of these would be true in my case if I were to sell off part or all of my collection so why should the time frame in which I sell them be relevant? ETA: Also consider this. If I were to sell off my collection and just to avoid the appearance of dealing without a license I went to the ATF to get a FFL are they going to give me one? My understanding is that no they would not as I do not have a store front or other physical location to "deal" from so according to them I don't meet the definition of a "dealer". But then if I sell too many guns in a given time (whatever arbitrary number that may be) I could be at risk for "dealing without a license"? A license that they would not give me were I to seek one? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 3:42:12 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This post nailed it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Who sells 50 guns a year?  None of your fucking business, that's who. This post nailed it. this post nailed the nailing of the previous post. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 5:18:31 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why? If I have spent years amassing a large collection that just doesn't do it for me anymore and I want to liquidate all or part of it how is that "being in the business of selling guns"? I am not ordering in guns and turning around and selling them, these were not purchased with the intent to sell for profit (and most would probably be at a loss with today's prices). They have been owned, modified as I see fit and used by me for YEARS and now if I want to shift gears a bit and do something else I am "Dealing" guns? Nonsense. Selling off your own personal collection is NOT being a gun dealer. You draw an arbitrary line at a gun a week but what about one every two weeks, one a month, one a quarter? Depending on the size of ones collection it could take years to sell off at that point. To me being a dealer means you are buying in guns specifically to re-sell (difficult to prove intent I know but that is not my problem) and you are making a living or a significant portion of your living thru the sale of guns. Neither of these would be true in my case if I were to sell off part or all of my collection so why should the time frame in which I sell them be relevant? ETA: Also consider this. If I were to sell off my collection and just to avoid the appearance of dealing without a license I went to the ATF to get a FFL are they going to give me one? My understanding is that no they would not as I do not have a store front or other physical location to "deal" from so according to them I don't meet the definition of a "dealer". But then if I sell too many guns in a given time (whatever arbitrary number that may be) I could be at risk for "dealing without a license"? A license that they would not give me were I to seek one? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
snip Selling 50 guns is FFL territory What a complete crock of shit. Not that I agree with the law (I don't think a federal license to sell firearms should even exist to begin with), but i'm having a hard time seeing how selling a gun a week is anything other than a small business. Calling it a hobby at that point kind of seems to stretch the limits of credulity, doesn't it? Why? If I have spent years amassing a large collection that just doesn't do it for me anymore and I want to liquidate all or part of it how is that "being in the business of selling guns"? I am not ordering in guns and turning around and selling them, these were not purchased with the intent to sell for profit (and most would probably be at a loss with today's prices). They have been owned, modified as I see fit and used by me for YEARS and now if I want to shift gears a bit and do something else I am "Dealing" guns? Nonsense. Selling off your own personal collection is NOT being a gun dealer. You draw an arbitrary line at a gun a week but what about one every two weeks, one a month, one a quarter? Depending on the size of ones collection it could take years to sell off at that point. To me being a dealer means you are buying in guns specifically to re-sell (difficult to prove intent I know but that is not my problem) and you are making a living or a significant portion of your living thru the sale of guns. Neither of these would be true in my case if I were to sell off part or all of my collection so why should the time frame in which I sell them be relevant? ETA: Also consider this. If I were to sell off my collection and just to avoid the appearance of dealing without a license I went to the ATF to get a FFL are they going to give me one? My understanding is that no they would not as I do not have a store front or other physical location to "deal" from so according to them I don't meet the definition of a "dealer". But then if I sell too many guns in a given time (whatever arbitrary number that may be) I could be at risk for "dealing without a license"? A license that they would not give me were I to seek one? Selling off all or part of a collection is specifically exempted in the law and Obama can't change that by directing the ATF to make a regulation. (C) as applied to a dealer in firearms, as defined in section 921(a)(11)(A), a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms, but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms; |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 8:56:20 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not that I agree with the law (I don't think a federal license to sell firearms should even exist to begin with), but i'm having a hard time seeing how selling a gun a week is anything other than a small business. Calling it a hobby at that point kind of seems to stretch the limits of credulity, doesn't it? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
snip Selling 50 guns is FFL territory What a complete crock of shit. Not that I agree with the law (I don't think a federal license to sell firearms should even exist to begin with), but i'm having a hard time seeing how selling a gun a week is anything other than a small business. Calling it a hobby at that point kind of seems to stretch the limits of credulity, doesn't it? I've seen plenty of guys who bought and sold guns constantly. Most of them did it at a loss. When I worked at a range we had one guy who came in every week and generally bought 1 - 3 guns. It depends on how they're selling 1 gun a week. Is it whatever is profitable, or whatever caught their eye that they decided they didn't need anymore. Is it someone who buys a lot of guns, but they have an agreement w/ their wife where they can't have more than XX guns, so they sell one for every one they buy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 9:08:21 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
lol, ok. Fuck him. I will not comply. Comply? the engrish doesn't even make sense. comply with giberish |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 9:14:30 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO FBHO |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 9:15:17 PM EDT
[#36]
Criminals dont follow laws.
Why is this so god damn hard to understand? Why are we to be punished? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 9:15:35 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Unadulterated Bull Shit. Selling for prophet or "engaged in the business of.." Is already illegal without an FFL... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
wtf did i just read? Nonsense. Unadulterated Bull Shit. Selling for prophet or "engaged in the business of.." Is already illegal without an FFL... Which prophet> Mohammed? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 9:17:07 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, he wants to expand licensing to "unlicensed" dealers, or people who may sell firearms from their personal collection. Not those currently considered "engaged in the business". Whoever is selling 50 to 100 guns a year from their "personal collection" is already living dangerously IMO. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 9:20:23 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
so I can buy and sell 49 a year?? If you sell 49 a year you will get prosecuted for structuring around the law that requires you to get an FFL, just like making cash deposits to your bank account below the reporting limit does, even though the bank is required to make the reports and depositing the reporting limit is not illegal. Mark my fucking words. This govt is out of control. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 9:21:05 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The shooter was on a cocktail of psych drugs wanna take a look at that at all Barry? Most of them are, but you'll never see it addressed... Fuck obama! |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 10:09:59 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you sell 49 a year you will get prosecuted for structuring around the law that requires you to get an FFL, just like making cash deposits to your bank account below the reporting limit does, even though the bank is required to make the reports and depositing the reporting limit is not illegal. Mark my fucking words. This govt is out of control. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
so I can buy and sell 49 a year?? If you sell 49 a year you will get prosecuted for structuring around the law that requires you to get an FFL, just like making cash deposits to your bank account below the reporting limit does, even though the bank is required to make the reports and depositing the reporting limit is not illegal. Mark my fucking words. This govt is out of control. Had the exact same thought. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 10:36:34 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Had the exact same thought. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
so I can buy and sell 49 a year?? If you sell 49 a year you will get prosecuted for structuring around the law that requires you to get an FFL, just like making cash deposits to your bank account below the reporting limit does, even though the bank is required to make the reports and depositing the reporting limit is not illegal. Mark my fucking words. This govt is out of control. Had the exact same thought. It would require the legislature to modify the law do that. Structuring is a different part of the US code. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 10:44:26 PM EDT
[#43]
These "laws" only matter if you let them.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2015 11:24:08 PM EDT
[#44]
perform background checks on potential buyers
Wouldn't that be a violation of the 5th Amendment since the potential buy hasn't done anything yet?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/10/2015 12:58:41 AM EDT
[#45]
He needs to EO some common sense into that pile of mush between his jug ears
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/10/2015 1:11:46 AM EDT
[#46]
So Barry is going to write a EO to the ATF to enforce a law they already enforce. Then claim he won some sort of victory.
|
|
|
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.
