Nothing happens. Did he buy it with the intent of selling it 50 years later at a profit? If not then none of this applies.
-
ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info
ATF changes definition
- Thread starter Howie
- Start date
It would be nearly impossible to prove that he bought a gun with the intent of selling it 50 years later and making a profit. That has nothing to do with what this new rule is about anyway. It plainly states that it does not effect this sort of transaction. From the OP's link:
“The final rule recognizes that individuals who purchase firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or a legitimate hobby are permitted by the GCA to occasionally buy and sell firearms for those purposes, or occasionally resell to a licensee or to a family member for lawful purposes, without the need to obtain a license.” Without an FFL, an individual must ensure they are not “engaged in the business” and the transaction is not “to predominantly earn a profit”, which now focuses only on whether the intent of the underlying sale or disposition of the firearms is predominantly of the obtaining pecuniary gain. Individuals may continue to engage in private intrastate sales, without a license, provided the individuals are not “engaged in the business” and the transaction is otherwise compliance with the law.
abso****inlutely
In my humble opinion the purpose of this rule change is:
1. Grandstanding. It's an election year, gotta apeal to the base "We tried everything we could to ban those mean, old guns"
2. Frighten you into "compliance", a.k.a. Universal Background Checks. Most people would be scared to transfer privately anymore. If they frighten everyone into going to the local FFL for a background check then a 4473 is filled out. That 4473 can then be illegally scanned into an ATF database. Illegal as heck, but they decide who to persecute, er, prosecute, so they don't care.
3. Provide the lead in for national registration. I mean, when we REQUIRE background checks BY LAW, but they still aren't done, then what is a law abiding society to do? It's for the children.
Every person selling a gun could just sell it for what he paid for it, or less, even - Along with a REALLY expensive case or trigger lock. "I won't sell an unsecured gun. $200 trigger lock is a mandatory part of the sell".
1. Grandstanding. It's an election year, gotta apeal to the base "We tried everything we could to ban those mean, old guns"
2. Frighten you into "compliance", a.k.a. Universal Background Checks. Most people would be scared to transfer privately anymore. If they frighten everyone into going to the local FFL for a background check then a 4473 is filled out. That 4473 can then be illegally scanned into an ATF database. Illegal as heck, but they decide who to persecute, er, prosecute, so they don't care.
3. Provide the lead in for national registration. I mean, when we REQUIRE background checks BY LAW, but they still aren't done, then what is a law abiding society to do? It's for the children.
Every person selling a gun could just sell it for what he paid for it, or less, even - Along with a REALLY expensive case or trigger lock. "I won't sell an unsecured gun. $200 trigger lock is a mandatory part of the sell".
He makes $6825 profit. What do I win?
