MODIFIED SKS RIFLES > SKS Legal Issues
BATFE New Rule on Unlicensed Dealers
LESchwartz:
--- Quote from: ATF ---Rather than establishing a minimum threshold number of firearms purchased or sold, the NPRM proposed to clarify that, absent reliable evidence to the contrary, a person would be presumed to be engaged in the business of dealing in firearms when the person:
(1) sells or offers for sale firearms, and also represents to potential buyers or otherwise demonstrates a willingness and ability to purchase and sell additional firearms;
(2) spends more money or its equivalent on purchases of firearms for the purpose of resale than the person’s reported taxable gross income during the applicable period of time;
(3) repetitively purchases for the purpose of resale, or sells or offers for sale firearms—
(A) through straw or sham businesses, or individual straw purchasers or sellers; or
(B) that cannot lawfully be purchased or possessed, including: (i) stolen firearms (18 U.S.C. 922(j)); (ii) firearms with the licensee’s serial number removed, obliterated, or altered (18 U.S.C. 922(k); 26 U.S.C. 5861(i)); (iii) firearms imported in violation of law (18 U.S.C. 922(l), 22 U.S.C. 2778, or 26 U.S.C. 5844, 5861(k)); or (iv) machineguns or other weapons defined as firearms under 26 U.S.C. 5845(a) that were not properly registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (18 U.S.C. 922(o); 26 U.S.C. 5861(d));
(4) repetitively sells or offers for sale firearms—
(A) within 30 days after they were purchased;
(B) that are new, or like new in their original packaging; or
(C) that are of the same or similar kind (i.e., make/manufacturer, model, caliber/gauge, and action) and type (i.e., the classification of a firearm as a rifle, shotgun, revolver, pistol, frame, receiver, machinegun, silencer, destructive device, or other firearm);
(5) as a former licensee (or responsible person acting on behalf of the former licensee), sells or offers for sale firearms that were in the business inventory of such licensee at the time the license was terminated (i.e., license revocation, denial of license renewal, license expiration, or surrender of license), and were not transferred to a personal collection in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 923(c) and 27 CFR 478.125a; or
(6) as a former licensee (or responsible person acting on behalf of a former licensee), sells or offers for sale firearms that were transferred to a personal collection of such former licensee or responsible person prior to the time the license was terminated, unless:
(A) the firearms were received and transferred without any intent to willfully evade the restrictions placed on licensees by chapter 44, title 18, of the United States Code; and
(B) one year has passed from the date of transfer to the personal collection.
--- End quote ---
This is the meat of the new rule: A list of items where YOU must prove your innocence! If you are engaged in one of these six activities ATF will claim you are a dealer . . . to read all 400+ pages of the rule yourself, see: https://www.atf.gov/firearms/final-rule-definition-engaged-business-dealer-firearms.
I expect that #2 and #4A are most troubling to folks here. For more information see (meat starts at 13:15): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSxU345wu9A.
Larry
Onepoint:
Seems like #1 would be problematic to most people whittling down a collection, or even in estate sales. Sell a rifle and they ask if you have more kind of puts a bullseye on you. I wonder how this will effect auctions.
But the real issue is this part "...absent reliable evidence to the contrary" The burden of proof is on you to prove a negative, and in very few cases can that be done without a trial.
LESchwartz:
--- Quote from: Onepoint on April 17, 2024, 07:29:43 AM ---Seems like #1 would be problematic to most people whittling down a collection, or even in estate sales. Sell a rifle and they ask if you have more kind of puts a bullseye on you. I wonder how this will effect auctions.
--- End quote ---
I think that would be more like taking "orders" . . . "Hey, do you have this in FDE?" . . . "No, but I can get it!"
Of course, just how any of these rules plays out in practice is speculation at this point.
Larry
Onepoint:
Or sell an SKS and get asked "Do you have a Romanian" would be just as applicable, the wording is there to make it prosecutable, and we depend on the good nature and common sense of an ATF agent in making that decision. You are using common sense and logic, buts that's not how weaponized law works, and that's what this entire rule is designed to be.
LESchwartz:
Rule #2 could catch folks up as well: I just spent many $$$$ on that SVD I've been waiting half a lifetime to buy. Shortly after I finally get it, I lose my job and experience extreme buyer's remorse (mainly due to my wife's getting on my case). My buddy tells me "don't worry I'll take it off your hands for what you paid". And *presto* you've violated the rules.
I expect rule #2 might also catch up retired folks who are on a fixed income.
Larry
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version