Did you notice this? Section 921 of title 18, United States Code, is amended

[The Gila Bender]

I'm sure you've all seen this in the Bipartisan Communities Safety Act:

19 SEC. 12002. DEFINING ‘‘ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS’’.
20 Section 921 of title 18, United States Code, is
21 amended—
22 (1) in paragraph (21)(C), by striking ‘‘with the
23 principal objective of livelihood and profit’’ and in
24 serting ‘‘to predominantly earn a profit’’;

Discussion Draft S.L.C.
1 (2) by redesignating paragraphs (22) through
2 (29) as paragraphs (23) through (30), respectively;
3 and
4 (3) by inserting after paragraph (21) the following:

6 ‘‘(22) The term ‘to predominantly earn a profit’
7 means that the intent underlying the sale or disposition
8 of firearms is predominantly one of obtaining pecuniary
9 gain, as opposed to other intents, such as improving or
10 liquidating a personal firearms collection: Provided, That
11 proof of profit shall not be required as to a person who
12 engages in the regular and repetitive purchase and disposi
13 tion of firearms for criminal purposes or terrorism.

My thought here is that FFL's, including C&R's, are good to go. Unlicensed persons who flip firearms with any frequency should be aware of this provision. Further, one could assume that gun show table rentals for the purpose of "private sales" are going to come under additional scrutiny.

 

[Buick]

Very good post! Looks like it just got a lot easier to make a Federal case against "flippers". Forewarned is forearmed.

 

[armadillo]

I recall that about 1993 Treasury Secretary Lloyd Benson bragged that he reduced the number of FFLs from about 250,000 to under 100,000. He did it by telling 150,000 "dealers" that what they were doing did not meet the definition of a business.

I know a lot of those guys didn't stop selling guns at gun shows - they just couldn't order new guns from a distributor. They didn't have to do backgrounds checks or keep records any more.

Now almost 30 years later the they want to criminalize them for not having a FFL ????

 

[biku324]

When I had a business, I knew I had to get an FFL, so I did. Guns were a tiny part of my business, but part nonetheless.

 

[BB57]

I recall that about 1993 Treasury Secretary Lloyd Benson bragged that he reduced the number of FFLs from about 250,000 to under 100,000. He did it by telling 150,000 "dealers" that what they were doing did not meet the definition of a business.

I know a lot of those guys didn't stop selling guns at gun shows - they just couldn't order new guns from a distributor. They didn't have to do backgrounds checks or keep records any more.

Now almost 30 years later the they want to criminalize them for not having a FFL ????

Those were the days when the ATF insisted you have a brick and mortar storefront to keep your FTL. It impacted a number of FFLs who dealt in surplus firearms and who predominantly sold them at gun shows. That was back in the day when:
- a DCM Garand could be procured for $125;
- a very good to excellent condition M1 carbine sold for $125-175;
- an excellent condition Garand sold for $350-400;
- a very nice 1903A1 or A3 sold for $125-150;
- P14 and P17 Enfields in very good condition sold for $125;
- SMLEs sold for $100; and
- SKSs were around $65-$70, about the same as a crate (2 cans) of Russian surplus 7.62x39 ammo.

Those FFLs sold more firearms out of their garages and at shows than most “brick and mortar” gun stores.

Fast forward to the last decade or so and I once again saw FFLs who sold at shows without a brick and mortar store.

It sounds like the ATF is trying to put them out of business - again.

 

[Kevin J.]

Further, one could assume that gun show table rentals for the purpose of "private sales" are going to come under additional scrutiny.

One more nail in the coffin of gun shows which are already on life support. IMO.

 

[2152hq]

The great majority or FFL's put out of business in the 90's/Clinton administration was done thru a simple rule change in the FFL application.
It demanded that the FFL's business premises address be OK with the local zoning where they were located.

That had never been a part of the application/renewal process in the past.
At that point, FFL's with their business licensed premises listed in residential addresses were being denied a license or renewal in great numbers.

Multiple reasons for that under varying local zoning laws around the country.
Some localitys would plainly just not allow a firearms based business in a residential zoned area.
Other varying things like signage, lighting, parking, handicap access, storage requirements, fire and theft alarm & security requirements,,,many just couldn't meet requirement to continue.
So they dropped their dealer FFL...and that was the whole idea.

ATF still checks zoning on each compliance check to an FFL. Part of the check list.
Zoning laws change.

There was never a demand that you had to have a separate so called brick and mortar building/store.
You could and still can have the FFL/Dealer license out of your home.
I did that for 50yrs. My local zoning allowed for it.

Many were not so 'lucky' and had to close up business and turn it their FFL Deaer lic.
It was that link to local zoning that killed off a great many of those Dealer FFL's in the 90's.

 

[bushmaster1313]

As an attorney I found the old language confusing and find the new language more confusing still. Predominantly because the definition of predominantly includes the word predominantly.

 

[ISCS Yoda]

My thought here is that FFL's, including C&R's, are good to go. Unlicensed persons who flip firearms with any frequency should be aware of this provision. Further, one could assume that gun show table rentals for the purpose of "private sales" are going to come under additional scrutiny.

I have less issue with "predominantly" than my fellow member of the Bar above but the whole concept in the new statute is obviously aimed at gun show sales by non-FFLs.

My FFL operates his business out of his house and has been doing it for years and years and ATF just passed his records as 100% compliant. He expects to open his door to ATF when they come knocking. I had an FFL and gave it up in the Clinton era because I did NOT want ATF knocking on my door.

 

[rockquarry]

It would appear that whether you are an FFL holder or not and you deal in guns on a regular basis and rent table space at gun shows frequently to buy, sell, and trade for profit, then you would be engaged in at least a part-time gun business, but it's nevertheless a business. The actual number of gun transactions probably wouldn't matter but the number would almost always be more than a few.

If you're renting table space and selling personal collection stuff that you've had for years, regardless of the number of guns, and you don't do it regularly, how could that be interpreted as a business? Pretty easy to show the distinction between being in business and not being in business.

Or, is that explanation oversimplified?

 

[Mike SC Hunter]

One more nail in the coffin of gun shows which are already on life support. IMO.

Internet pricing and over charging for all items put GS's on life support.

 

[pantannojack]

One more nail in the coffin of gun shows which are already on life support. IMO.

I quit going to g shows because of the arrogant and insulting attitude of "flippers". It won't hurt me a bit if some of them get huge fines.

 

[Recusant]

Where did the law ever say a person who sold guns had to make a profit?

 

[ladder13]

Where did the law ever say a person who sold guns had to make a profit?

I have a habit of buying high, selling low.

 

[John Patrick]

I have a habit of buying high, selling low.

I’m good at that too.

 

[rockquarry]

It would appear that whether you are an FFL holder or not and you deal in guns on a regular basis and rent table space at gun shows frequently to buy, sell, and trade for profit, then you would be engaged in at least a part-time gun business, but it's nevertheless a business. The actual number of gun transactions probably wouldn't matter but the number would almost always be more than a few.

If you're renting table space and selling personal collection stuff that you've had for years, regardless of the number of guns, and you don't do it regularly, how could that be interpreted as a business? Pretty easy to show the distinction between being in business and not being in business.

Or, is that explanation oversimplified?

Okay, maybe I should have omitted "for profit". For many of us, some gun show transactions have been of the non-profit variety.

 

[robvious]

if you deduct the "storage fees" while they have been in my possession, along with losses base on inflation... you would never make a profit... my story at least... and for the record.. I don't flip.. I accumulate.

 

[NFrameFred]

I have a habit of buying high, selling low.

So . . . . whaddaya got for sale ?

 

[Racer X]

Washington State now requires anyone buying and selling more than 5 cars/trucks in a year to register as a used vehicle dealer and all that entails. Parting out more than 5 you need a wrecking yard license and all that entails. AFAIK (my neighbor got busted)

I don't see it as unreasonable.

 

[Engineer1911]

So, when I switch from 'Accumulating' to "Living Estate Sale', do I need an FFL? The selling is about to start in the next few months.