Realistically the "report" doesn't have a valid argument:
Most of the firearms being sold over the internet
are being reported, this is how it happens:
The "seller" invariably request that the "buyer" submit a FFL for the firearm to be shipped to and when the purchaser claims the firearm, he must satisfy the Federal regulations covering disposition of a firearm by a licensed dealer. The part the part the Feds don't grasp here is an
individual may send any firearm to any FFL holder without the sender supplying anything more than whatever information he responds to. (This varies from state to state) Some dealers choose not to recieve from a non-FFL, but they aren't leagally compelled to do so.
The guy claiming to have sold "hundreds of firearms over the 'net" doesn't qualify him as a dealer because he's sending them thru a FFL holder for disposition.
Lots of folks make huge claims to substantiate the validity of their argument, it's up to the prosecution to prove he did or (un-likely as they'll try) didn't.
The guy must have been buying firearms somewhere... if thru a dealer, they would be papered to him.
If he's picking them up from the locals, that's OK too. (provided they weren't stolen/illeagal).
Bottom line is there proabably isn't anything really illeagal in what he's doing, but the Feds won't like it because they aren't getting a cut, in spite of the fact that guns are being papered at least once or maby even twice, either way it's going to be a Witch hunt.