On the 31st anniversary of the Federal government’s assault on the Branch Davidian complex in Waco, Texas, more questions are being asked about another gross case of government overreach regarding the botched March 19 ATF SWAT team raid that killed Little Rock Airport executive director, Bryan Malinowski. Just as in Waco where more than 900 FBI and ATF agents attempted to storm the complex by pumping tear gas into the building and ramming it with armored vehicles, leading to a conflict that caused fires that killed 76 people, Malinowski, was awakened by an ATF SWAT team storming into his home in the middle of the night. When he ran from his room, armed and unsure of who was invading his home, agents shot and killed him. The very rule the ATF has used to justify their storming of the man’s house in the middle of the night is just now being issued and won’t be made final until 30 days after it appears in the Federal Register.
The Justice Department announced last week it had submitted to the Federal Register the āEngaged in the Businessā Final Rule, which makes clear the circumstances in which a person is āengaged in the businessā of dealing in firearms and thus required to obtain a federal firearms license, in order to increase compliance with the federal background check requirement for firearm sales by federal firearms licensees. Here’s what they had to say:
āUnder this regulation, it will not matter if guns are sold on the internet, at a gun show, or at a brick-and-mortar store: if you sell guns predominantly to earn a profit, you must be licensed, and you must conduct background checks,ā said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. āThis regulation is a historic step in the Justice Departmentās fight against gun violence. It will save lives.ā
āThe Bipartisan Safer Communities Act enhanced background checks and closed loopholes, including by redefining when a person is āengaged in the businessā of dealing in firearms. Todayās rule clarifying application of that definition will save lives by requiring all those in the business of selling guns to get a federal license and run background checks ā thus keeping guns out of the hands of violent criminals,ā said Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco. āI applaud the hard work of ATF in drafting this rule and reviewing the hundreds of thousands of public comments, which overwhelmingly favored the rule announced today. Because of that work, our communities will be safer.ā
āThis is about protecting the lives of innocent, law-abiding Americans as well as the rule of law. There is a large and growing black market of guns that are being sold by people who are in the business of dealing and are doing it without a license; and therefore, they are not running background checks the way the law requires. And it is fueling violence,ā said Director Steven Dettelbach of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). āTodayās Final Rule isĀ about ensuring compliance with an important area of the existing law where we all know, the data show, and we can clearly see that a whole group of folks are openly flouting that law. That leads to not just unfair but, in this case, dangerous consequences.ā
The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA), enacted June 25, 2022, expanded the definition of engaging in the business of firearms dealing to cover all persons who devote time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business to predominately earn a profit through the repetitive purchase and sale of firearms. On March 14, 2023, President Biden issued Executive Order 14092, which, among other things, directs the Attorney General to develop and implement a plan to clarify the definition of who is engaged in the business of dealing in firearms and thus required to obtain a federal firearms license. The Final Rule conforms the ATF regulations to the new BSCA definition and further clarifies the conduct that presumptively requires a license under that revised definition, among other things.
Federally licensed firearms dealers are critical to federal, state, local, Tribal, and territorial law enforcement in our shared goal of promoting public safety. Licensees submit background checks on potential purchasers to the FBIās National Instant Criminal Background Check System, which helps to keep firearms out of the hands of prohibited persons. Further, licensees keep records of sales transactions to help ensure that when a gun is used in a crime and recovered by law enforcement it can be traced back to the first retail purchaser; they help identify and prevent straw purchasers from buying firearms on behalf of prohibited persons and criminals; and they facilitate safe storage of firearms by providing child-safety locks with every transferred handgun and offer customers other secure gun storage options. Unlicensed dealing, however, undermines these public-safety features ā which is why Congress has long prohibited engaging in the business of dealing in firearms without the required license.Ā
To increase compliance with the statutes Congress has enacted, the Final Rule identifies conduct that is presumed to require a federal firearms license. And, in addition to implementing the revised statutory definition discussed above, the Final Rule clarifies the circumstances in which a license is ā or is not ā required by, among other things, adding a definition of āpersonal firearms collectionā to ensure that genuine hobbyists and collectors may enhance or liquidate their collections without fear of violating the law. The Final Rule also provides clarity as to what licensees must do with their inventory when they go out of business. Ā
The Final Rule goes into effect 30 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register.
On Sept. 8, 2023, theĀ Justice Department published a notice of proposed rulemaking, and during the 90-day open comment period, ATF received nearly 388,000 comments.
The final rule, as submitted to the Federal Register, can be viewed here.
And this is what the ATF announced:
On April 10, 2024, the Attorney General signed ATFās final rule, Definition of āEngaged in the Businessā as a Dealer in Firearms, amending ATFās regulations in title 27, Code of Federal Regulations (āCFRā), part 478. The final rule implements the provisions of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (āBSCA,ā effective June 25, 2022), which broadened the definition of when a person is considered āengaged in the businessā as a dealer in firearms (other than a gunsmith or pawnbroker).Ā The Final Rule clarifies that definition. It will be published in the Federal Register and will be effective 30-days from publication.
This final rule incorporates BSCAās definitions of āpredominantly earn a profitā and āterrorism,ā and amends the regulatory definitions of āengaged in the business as a dealer other than a gunsmith or pawnbrokerā and āprincipal objective of livelihood and profitā to ensure each conforms with the BSCAās statutory changes and can be relied upon by the public.Ā
The final rule clarifies when a person is āengaged in the businessā as a dealer in firearms at wholesale or retail by:
- clarifying the definition of ādealer,ā and defining the terms āpurchase,ā āsale,ā and āsomething of valueā as they apply to dealers;
- adding definitions for the term āpersonal collection (or personal collection of firearms, or personal firearms collection),ā and for āresponsible personā;
- setting forth conduct that is presumed to constitute āengaging in the businessā of dealing in firearms, and presumed to demonstrate the intent to āpredominantly earn a profitā from the sale or disposition of firearms, absent reliable evidence to the contrary, in civil and administrative proceedings;
- clarifying that the intent to āpredominantly earn a profitā does not require the person to have received pecuniary gain, and that intent does not have to be shown when a person purchases or sells a firearm for criminal or terrorism purposes;
- clarifying the circumstances when a person would not be presumed to engaged in the business of dealing in firearms, including as an auctioneer, or when purchasing firearms for, and selling firearms from, a personal collection;
- addressing the procedures former licensees, and responsible persons acting on behalf of such licensees, must follow when they liquidate business inventory upon revocation or other termination of their license; and
- clarifying that licensees must follow the verification and recordkeeping procedures in 27 CFR 478.94and Subpart H, rather than using an ATF Form 4473 when firearms are transferred to other licensees, including transfers by a licensed sole proprietor to that personās personal collection.
Based on their own wording, it is unlikely Malinowski was making the majority of his income from selling firearms since being the executive director of a national airport pays pretty well last time we checked. (It’s ironic that the airport he was director of is the Bill and Hillary Clinton National Airport as Bill Clinton was president of the United States and head of the federal government at the time the Waco siege took place.) And despite this new rule from the ATF, it will be of no help to them in defending their actions in Little Rock. The “Engaged in the Business” rule may be part of the falsely named “Bipartisan Safer Communities Act,” but for one Little Rock family, it has already cost them a life.
the ATF new Murder Rule.
soon to be in a court room.
“soon to be in a court room.”
These folks have some observations on the issue :
The question now is, how to attack it and get injunctions against it?
“The question now is, how to attack it and get injunctions against it?”
First, someone must volunteer to be a test case, and that generally requires someone to be arrested and tried for violations.
@Sam I Am wrote “First, someone must volunteer to be a test case, and that generally requires someone to be arrested and tried for violations.”
Unfortunately, as Malinowski found out, one must SURVIVE the arrest operation in order to be tried for violations as a test case.
“ATF Final Rule On Sales: Your Questions Answered”
In this video, they are saying that “firearms for self protection are not considered part of your personal collection”. THIS means something to me. Basicly I don’t own something I own.
THAT is what should be given attention here.
NOT the idea of selling guns for earning a profit. Doing this is going to require an FFL. Everyone seems to be getting wrapped around the axle on this but it was ALREADY this way. This means nothing to me.
One cent is all the profit tyrants need to go kkk nazi on your home and family. Nothing lower on the face of the earth than crooked LE. Hopefully Arkansas will hold those whose actions resulted in terrorism and murder accountable.
While blowbags sat back and ignored Defining Gun Control by its History for a History illiterate public and instead gave bigots on this forum a pass sneaky Gun Control zealots took advantage and hung nazi around the neck of the Second Amendment…
“Doing this is going to require an FFL. Everyone seems to be getting wrapped around the axle on this but it was ALREADY this way. This means nothing to me.”
I think what is happening with the “rule”, is the wording is so bizarre that ATF can decide that selling even a single firearm, for whatever purpose, is proof of being “in the business” of selling firearms, and even that one sale, without an FFL, makes you subject to arrest and prosecution…beginning the ride through the process of proving your innocence.
1) I’m nearly deaf. My hearing aids are in their charger while I sleep.
2) I may not hear the banging on the door…if indeed their is one.
3) So I guess I’m a dead man.
ATF is absolutely wrong and murderous, but let’s have a brief hyperbole check: the raid in Little Rock wasn’t “in the middle of the night”. It was at 6 a.m., just before dawn, but a time when many people are either at work or up and getting ready.
Yes, ATF should have served the warrant in daylight by knocking on the door. Yes, ATF were in raid-boner mode. But, they didn’t raid the home “in the middle of the night”.
Words matter, and using them inaccurately doesn’t serve the truth.
6 a.m. is a time of day when decent people are normally still asleep. It isnāt even light yet in many locations during much of the year.
So yes, 6 am qualifies as the āmiddle of the night.ā
To be fair, it’s six hours from midnight, and mere minutes from the time (most) working people wake up. Let’s call it a predawn raid.
Since Mr Malinowski was Executive Director it is unlikely that he reported for work at or before 6 a.m. It wasn’t the middle of the night but it was at night and at a time totally unnecessary considering why they chose to raid in the first place. I said why, I don’t know why but my guess is that it is because they could while throwing right and wrong out the window.
Damn, “decent people” sleep in.
By 6 I’ve usually gone for a run, a swim or hit the weights and have taken a shower.
You gotta carpe all those diems.
… you’ll be some of our ages one day, when your diems have carped you. Then you’ll just be glad that you logged another x on your calender.
“By 6 Iāve usually gone for a run, a swim or hit the weights and have taken a shower.”
For *years* I was up at 3:30 AM, on the road at 4 AM, to be at work in south Tampa at 5 AM.
A 4 AM drive worked out well, as there were nobody on the roads but drunks and cops.
On the upside, the work day was over at 1 in the afternoon, and I got to avoid the rush hour back through Tampa-Brandon. No late night partying for me, as I was in bed by 8:30 PM, to do it all over again…
“youāll be some of our ages one day, when your diems have carped you.”
Perhaps. Perhaps not.
The vast majority of this kind of thing is a lifestyle issue brought about by modern, urban/suburban lifestyle. I’m not really into the idea of typing out several pages of citations on the topic at this point in time because this is The Truth About Guns, not The Truth About the Biochemical Horrors of What People Have Inflicted Upon Themselves Since 1960.
TTATBHWPHIUTS1960 just doesn’t roll off the tongue.
“A 4 AM drive worked out well, as there were nobody on the roads but drunks and cops.”
The only thing that I hated about having to be to work at 6AM with a 1.5 hour commute in front of that was the way that the police and EMS shifts worked in that area at that time.
If there was an accident, which was rare due to a lack of traffic but did occasionally happen and was always a horrorshow type accident thanks to speed and probably booze from the night before, the response time was stupidly long and you were going to sit there to watch the sun rise, even in the winter.
The ATF should be defunded and abolished. But as I said…what changed?
Yes, let’s definitely argue over stupid semantic quibbles.
kbnitpicker…Like the words that said the murdered man’s distraught wife while still in a nightgown was held in a vehicle for 4 hours?
Middle Of the Night Definition: General time (or time period) during the part of the night where most people are probably asleep.
All this talk of rules this and rules that are not what is most wrong here. The ATF murdered this man and they did from within their own “rules”. They deliberately attacked him in his home in such a way as to provide the maximum possible chance that he would come rushing out of his bedroom with a gun in his hand to defend his home and family and then be shot dead all nice and legal. And then the scum will say they followed all their “rules” and were justified to shoot him dead.
They did not knock on his door like a lawman dealing with someone who is not a dangerous bad guy, they gave him no chance, no time to be shown a piece of paper and be told it was a search warrant. No time to to realize it was some kind of cop at his door. They attacked with shock and awe in a violent home invasion to deliberately push him into trying to fight back in his own defense, because you can’t “justifiably” blow someone away who isn’t coming toward you with a weapon. And of course, they had their body armor, the advantage of violent surprise, and the advantage of knowing what their goal was, a dead “illegal gun dealer”.
Because we live in a land that has become a place where our govt. is not a servant but a master. And masters rule through fear and making sure you know that when it comes to them getting you, whenever they feel like it, they have all the advantages and you have none, in your own home.
Federal Rules on search warrants direct they MUST occur between 0600 and 2200 hours. So the BATFE hit the door at 0600 the absolute minimum earliest time to do a raid. Still in the dark and STILL while most folks are still asleep. Further, it appears that this may have been a no knock raid and that also requires clearance and certain procedures; you cannot just kick in the door cause you feel like it. As a retired 40+ year service LEO, the BATFE is an embarrassment to any reasonable LEO; and I avoided working with them like the plague.
Frankly, I have been following the ATF since 1968 GCA that launched them from NFA ’34 Tax Collectors into the jack booted monsters they are today. Kenyon Ballew; Ruby Ridge; Waco; and now Malinovski are a continuing pattern of lies, perjury, flawed warrants, and outright thuggish violence which NEVER is brought to justice. IMO they murdered an innocent citizen with no criminal record and there was no reason to serve a search warrant like this on him.
So what changed?
People sells firearms primarily for profit have ALWAYS been legally required to do it as an FFL.
Bullshit. If you sell one gun from your collection for a profit (util this rule) you don’t need an FFL. Maybe YOUR state does, but its not a federal law (until now). And for the Fucked Up Fudds who answered “so what” or “doesn’t affect me” you had better wake up. King George 3 would be proud, so what’s it going to take for you to stand up? Good thing you fucktards weren’t at Lexington.
I was reading the rule and had a different take on it. My understanding is you can continue to buy and sell from your personal collection. Even your personal EDC gun is still part of your personal collection. In the footnotes it references an example where a comply can have a collection of firearms but the security guard might have a company issued gun. The company issued gun is not part of the collection and would need to go through an FFL. The remaining collection would not if it was liquidated.
This would be important to make the functional distinction for a museum or other more formal collection than what you or I may have.
Also the distinction for personal firearms is relevant for existing FFLs that may be giving up their license (or having it stolen from them from the ATF).
I am 99.9% confident all the firearms you own are part of your personal collection regardless of how you use them assuming you are not an FFL.
There is a word ācomplyā in my comment that was meant to be āCompanyā. Damn fat fingers.
ā¦.and if my analysis is wrong, I guess I can be the first case to test the constitutionality of the new rule. Might need a go fund me account. LOL
Yeah, like a posthumous account is gonna help ?
BS that gun you bought in 19__for what $ (PROVE IT). Must be sold y
for same or lower price (ignore the devaluati of the $ since purchase date).
Thatās just it. It looks to me like everyone is having a cow over misinterpreted language. Selling a personally own firearm does not require an FFL. This isnāt something done to make a living and isnāt what Iām talking about. People are getting hung up on āfor profitā. This is playing their game as it was done intentionally. The big problem though is that none of this has any effect what so ever on criminals getting guns. Itās just made to ālookā that way. But even under that phrase, Biden himself is guilty as he profited greatly from selling guns overseas. He gets off though because he is āgiving them awayā. The ATF wont prosecute him anyway. The truth is, if anyone is guilty here itās Biden.
What requires an FFL is selling guns. But selling them does not require that. Only selling does.
I gotcha buddy. Thank you for explaining that in such simple language. So it’s OK for me to sell them, but not ok to exchange them with another human being for legal tender. See that’s what was tripping me up. I was confusing “selling” with “selling,” when they’re so obviously different things! I feel so stupid.
The big problem though is that none of this has any effect what so ever on criminals getting guns.
Well, it’s not meant to. It’s meant to create a situation that can be enforced, should the need arise, against people they don’t like.
See, regular old criminals can be rehabilitated and it’s also not their fault that they are criminals because they are the product of a flawed society which was created by the very people this kind of rule makes easy to selectively target.
The problem is society. The fact that you, in any way and in ways yet to be determined, disagree with this makes you far, far worse than street criminals who, really, are victims of you and yours.
That’s why they get two years of easy incarceration and you get a tenner of hard labor (or shot), Comrade.
That makes just about as much sense as the following (thanks George, wish you were here to see us all now):
Selling is legal
Fscking is legal
But selling fscking is illegal.
Anyone care to comment on the significant event occurring this date in 1775??? Is the the ATF the new redcoat oppressor? I’ve never seen the outrage occurring now from both sides of the coin. It’s come to a boil in ILLannoyšā¹ļø
Recouping renumeration for selecting components and correctly assembling them into a working firearm is NOT Profit, it’s “Overhead” or “R&D”. It’s highly technical expertise that does not come cheap.
I see this as an AFTE paradox. They want to close FFL dealers for the records and they want us to become FFL dealers to handle sales of our property for the records and presume tax collection. Can see where the end result going to be arresting everyone at six o’clock in the morning. If you are that lucky to be arrested at that time.
Bottom line is in reality the ATF fill interpret this law to be in their favor whenever they want to do such. The ATF, at least under this administration, will have unlimited resources to defend themselves in court and very few Americans have the resources to try and defend themselves against the ATF.
Ding, Ding, Ding! This here exactly. don’t put your hopes on the court sorting this out.
“This here exactly. donāt put your hopes on the court sorting this out.”
One must never forget that “courts” are part of government.
There needs to be a Class Action Suit brought against the ATF on behalf of gun owners. Not for financial gain, but to obtain relief from the many burdensome laws and regulations that have been set upon us since 1934. Know any good 2A attorneys that would be willing to bring such a suit?
The single biggest course of action is something for Congress to do. They had the chance during Trump’s first two years and did nothing. As a result, law suits are pretty much the only option. If by some miracle Republicans win all three branches this next time, will they even touch the ATF? Doubtful.
Prndll,
Until Republicans win 63 or more seats in the Senate, they will NOT be able to loosen/repeal laws which apply to firearm sales, ownership, possession, transfer, etc.
Remember that the United States Senate imposed a rule on themselves requiring at least 60 U.S. Senators to vote affirmatively to allow a bill to go to the Senate floor for a vote for passage.
“Remember that the United States Senate imposed a rule on themselves requiring at least 60 U.S. Senators to vote affirmatively to allow a bill to go to the Senate floor for a vote for passage.”
And, if we get a simple majority, we can change 60 votes to 50.
That’s dangerous, though, they can do the same to us in return, at a later date…
They OBVIOUSLY have the votes to send our valuable resources to other countries while destroying this one.
Prndll,
The U.S. Senate’s self-imposed rule about requiring 60 votes to send a bill to the U.S. Senate floor to vote for passage–that rule applies to everything except budget/spending bills. That is how the U.S. Senate is able to advance budget/spending bills without first getting 60 U.S. Senators onboard.
āBudget and spendingā
Interestingā¦
How many things are greenlighted for spending as part of the budget?
The ATF to disarm Americans?
Biden to arm Americas enemies?
Prndll,
“How many things are greenlighted for spending as part of the budget?
The ATF to disarm Americans?
Biden to arm Americas enemies?”
EXACTLY!!!
I also forgot to mention that Congress occasionally attaches something unrelated to budget/spending to budget/spending bills in order to pass them without being subject to the 60-vote rule.
For example, the U.S. Senate could forward a budget/spending bill with an unrelated (to budget/spending) provision to mandate concealed carry license reciprocity across all U.S. states and territories: that would only need to pass a single simple majority vote for passage on the floor of the U.S. Senate, assuming that the appropriate U.S. Senate committee advances that bill for a vote and the Senate Majority leader actually schedules a vote. (The appropriate committee could quash that bill and the Majority Leader could refuse to schedule it for vote and quash it that way as well.)
Ah. Thanks for the explanation, Clear as mud now
“Thanks for the explanation, Clear as mud now”
Just like the ‘Pistol-brace Rule’, and the ‘worksheet’ to determine legality.
It’s deliberate, and they like it that way.
I think crap like this is how they will fight ‘Bruen’ down the line, by forcing expensive litigation to strangle and erode our rights…
Yup.
It’s all delay until they can take the SCOTUS. Then they’re coming straight for your throat.
And GOPers will do nothing about it. In fact, they’ll keep reelecting a large portion of the people doing this to them.
There’s a delicious irony when someone tells me that their state values freedom just days after that state’s entire House caucus voted directly against the 4A.
This looks like another one of those non-change changes. I swear, the “gun show loophole”, which never actually existed, has been “closed” by executive order at least half a dozen times in the last 20 years.
Murder someone defending their home and then try to gloss over it with some idiotic lame brain ruling.
I did not see a shovel enclosed with the rule. WOW, another intrusive measure into our lives. This time our right to conduct rightful commerce. In order to do so we have to licensed, keep records, run background checks, and be available for ATF audits. A back door audit as all of our firearms will have to be inventoried.
“The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act…”
Don’t forget to thank Rubio, Cornyn and Rick Scott (co-sponsor) for this.
And remember, when it comes to the predatory bird, vote [wing]!
Rubio was pushing for amnesty for illegals pre-Trump era. He should never be trusted. The other two popped up on the radar later. Cornynās on his way out. I donāt see anyone successfully taking Rubio or Scott in a primary.
If Trumpās elected, he should appoint both as administrators, and let DeSantis appoint some decent people to the Senate.
“I donāt see anyone successfully taking Rubio or Scott in a primary.”
A fairly ruthless condemnation of the GOP’s voting base, but given historical experience, probably very accurate.
“If Trumpās elected, he should appoint both as administrators, and let DeSantis appoint some decent people to the Senate.”
Now, that’s some outside the GOP-box thinking. The kind of thing I like to see.
From that point, one might ask if there’s a further step that could be taken to rug-pull such people and effectively remove them from the party. (There is, but Conservatives won’t stand for such a “purge” until things get much worse. Archipelago worse. It’s too late levels of worse.)
It is, at least to me, absofuckinglutely hilarious that Trump is, objectively, a 2005-ish moderate. This fact is directly related to the root reason that I probably often seem overly pessimistic (odd, since I’m not).
Look how far the Left has dragged the country in just 20 years. And look how many “Conservatives” have gone along with it, offering no real resistance because incremental changes mixed with normalcy in other areas creates a potent misdirection. We’re to the point that such people believe, at least one would think based on their actions, that moderate positions from not-so-long-ago are wildly extreme.
Ah, but all those battles we’re winning and all those dragons slain! Lulz!
Nesting mixed with strategic siloing is such a PITA to try to explain to the myopic.
Snakeingrass Ribio would be a good ambassador to Haiti
The best kept secret in the world is that Trump is actually a moderate. People are too emotional and/or dense to notice.
…a good ambassador to Haiti
That’s a terrible thing to inflict on the people of Haiti.
Might I offer the suggestion that we make him Ambassador to Hell?
People are too emotional…
By design. Need I rehash several pages on how all human information processing is downstream from emotional response because that’s how our brain is built?
Hijacking that system is quite effective.
Isn’t this tactic called “A Chilling Effect” or something? A 460 page “clarification” that is clearly designed to basically scare people into avoiding private transfers.
Yes it is, and it does work on many people to get the ball rolling.
It’s a mixture of a “chilling effect” with a Soviet style law code that contains something like Article 58.
For those who are not “chilled” into inaction, there is a sufficiently “interpretable” set of rules where they can find a violation from pretty much anyone if they choose to look hard enough.
While he didn’t explicitly say so, this is what Lavrentiy Baria was referencing when he said “Show me the man, I’ll show you the [political] crime”. If you behave in a way that brings their gaze upon you, they 100% will find something unless they have a reason not to.
The Soviet legal term for this was “expediency”.
It’s bad when they have air tight regulations because us little peons always find “loopholes” to game. It’s good however when they have loose, ambiguous regulations open to interpretation because then THEY can game it against us.
Government is the enemy of the people. Always has been. Always will be.
NEW ANTI-GUN MYTH SUPPORTING “ARMS BAN” LAWS DEBUNKED: SCOTUS WAS CLEAR!
Anti-gun judges and governments frequently misread the Bruen decision in an attempt to elevate disputes about the “in common use” test to the “plain text” level of the Heller/Bruen interpretative methodology for interpreting the 2nd Amendment. Mark Smith Four Boxes Diner explodes this myth and explains why this is important to our right to possess AR-15s and magazines holding over 10 rounds.
Can you think of any Constitutional Right, other than your Second Amendment Right, where you suddenly lose it merely because you crossed a state line? Washington Gun Law President, William Kirk, discusses that exact issue and how, if you’re traveling to California, you will NEVER be able to lawfully carry, unless you are a California resident. Hoffman v. Bonta.
Ghost Gun Law Bans Computers!
EXCLUSIVE: CPL holder jailed for assault gives his side of the story.
The above video is the guy in this TTAG article > https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/michigan-cpl-holder-in-hot-water-over-brandishing-incident-in-grocery-store/
Ah me. If wishes were fishes………..Those of you who think nothing has changed need to re-read this “rule” from the standpoint of the Feds, and look at why they provided 1300+ pages of supporting data and legal opinions to justify it. Read the footnotes and explanations. It is clear that if you sell one (1) gun at a “profit” AND offer to sell another (at any price) to that individual, then you have engaged in business EVEN IF IT IS FROM YOUR COLLECTION. That’s what Biden and the DOJ wanted and that’s what they got. We are entering the 1920s prohibition era again, only with guns being the article in trade, not booze.
“It will save lives.”
?
Please read the 126 page ruling here:
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/19/2024-07838/definition-of-engaged-in-the-business-as-a-dealer-in-firearms
You don’t even need to sell a gun for CASH $$ or for “profit.” Just trading a gun for “goods or services” makes you a dealer. Advertising one gun on the internet makes you a dealer. Having a merchant account to accept payment like Venmo makes you a dealer. Their new ruling is so broadly defined they can charge you for just about anything. Even if you THINK or ENTERTAIN an offer about selling your rifle while on your African safari, in Africa to your African guide is a felony.
Let’s be honest about this…
They will have to pry it out of my cold dead hands!
anyway.
SEE: MY comment yesterday in this thread! And folks think an uncivil war is poppycock. $100 billion & not a dime to protecting the borderšā¹ļø
I get $100 less in food stamps now.
Sanctions work.
The rule lost me at “predominantly make a profit..”
I do not intend to lose money on anything I sell. Some exceptions. LOL.
I’m a fiend.
So the person they killed is making over $200K at his job and takes his weekends to promote crime in America by buying, selling, and collecting firearms?
Right.
We are in trouble.
Another lettered Agency that was never included in our Constitution and therefore needs to be shut down and eliminated with prejudice
“āThis regulation is a historic step in the Justice Departmentās fight against gun violence. It will save lives.ā Fight against gun violence….against or for gun violence??? Left a message to get Malinowski’s thoughts….No response yet…..
“The very rule the ATF has used to justify their storming of the manās house in the middle of the night is just now being issued…..” That’s bassakwards…..Malinowski’s EXECUTION was purposed to justify Diddlebug’s new gun control fetish rule, give a “You were warned” emphasis, and put the fear of Big Government in We The Little Peeps……pre-WWII Germany style.
“…reviewing the hundreds of thousands of public comments, which overwhelmingly favored the rule announced today.” Uh, can we get a recount on that? Sounds like the 2020 Presidential election counting system on steroids.
Tyranny coming to a door in front of your house soon….be patient, they haven’t forgotten you, they will get to you.
Break in my home and my wife and I will greet you with deadly force! We are both Military trained and don’t miss!
Geoff “Yes, deb really is THAT stupid”
“Thatās dangerous, though, they can do the same to us in return, at a later dateā¦”
Not sure “they” need some action on “our” side to provide impetus for “them” to do anything.