Question of the Day: Are You a Gun Dealer?

Gun show (courtesy

Life just got a little more complicated for those of us who sell the occasional firearm. The White House released a “fact sheet” on the president’s soon-to-be executively-ordered gun control moves last night. One of which features a crackdown on the virtually non-existent “gun show loophole” by more tightly defining who’s considered a “gun dealer.” As notes .  . .

(Attorney General) Lynch insisted Monday that the new guidance on the gun show loophole sets “clear, definitive standards” for anyone who wants to sell firearms. However, the new guidance does not include a specific number of guns that must be sold to qualify as a dealer, since existing law does not specify a number.

However, court rulings have set a precedent that says a person could sell as few as one or two guns and still be considered a dealer, depending on the circumstances. For instance, Lynch explained, if an individual sells a gun clearly for profit, or if they buy and sell a gun kept in its original packaging, they may be considered a dealer.

Only in the upper echelons of government does a nebulous, capricously-applied, non-specific definition constitute a “clear, definitive standard.” Don’t expect any real clarification, either, as that would tie the hands of the ATF in enforcement, and they prefer their regulations fungible and arbitrary.

Still, if you’ve got a heater you want to sell, for whatever reason, you’re going to have to dip a toe in those swirling waters and hope you fly under the radar. Are you a gun dealer?


  1. avatar JSIII says:

    ” or if they buy and sell a gun kept in its original packaging, they may be considered a dealer.”

    So if I buy a very special edition handgun, keep it mint in my safe because I love pretty things, then sell it 10 years down the line because I need more room in my safe I am now a gun dealer?


    1. avatar James says:

      Yep. Whatever it takes to make you a felon. That’s the sole point of the vague definition of in the businesd.

      1. avatar Mk10108 says:


      2. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:


      3. avatar IllinoisShooter says:

        and then again I keep thinking this is a nation of laws… Like I dont know, the US Code:

        18 U.S. Code § 921 (a)(21)(C) defines “engaged in the business” as:

        “a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms, but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms”

        1. avatar Alex Peterson says:

          This seems to answer the question.

        2. avatar TXGal says:

          Gee nation’s top Attoney doesn’t know the existing law on what consitutes difference between hobby and for profit dealer – how about help her out and email the stature info to her? Nah, she already knows it, just another ploy to keep more guns out of circulation, scare the sheep into never selling or buying a gun cause you can’t ever sell it.

        3. avatar Paul says:

          Glad you found this. Our local newspaper said pretty much the same thing — the soft criteria would be (at a gun show) is there a table, a credit card machine, multiple guns being sold, etc. This code citation is very clear, as opposed to the nonsense that was spouted at the new conference.

        4. avatar Mike Somers says:

          So what we have here is 2016’s version of the hemp tax stamp. (you need one,but can’t have one)
          I suggest every gun owner apply for an ffl, let’s see how they handle 100 million plus applications,their going to need the 200 extra batf agents.

      4. avatar Kyle says:

        been the plan for decades

      5. avatar salty says:

        need to be careful making everyday joe a felon, they need to fear the man who has nothing left to lose….

    2. avatar Jim Jones says:

      They are completely PUNKING EVERYONE. They are making completely innacurate statements. THEY DID NOT CHANGE THE CURRENT RULES. All that they’ve done is scaring people into thinking that they’re going to do something. Read the rules that they just released:

      Occasional sales from your personal collection DO NOT REQUIRE background checks:

      Under federal law, a person engaged in the business of dealing in firearms is a per-son who “devotes time, attention and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms.”

      Under federal law, conducting business “with the principal objective of livelihood and profit” means that “the intent underlying the sale or disposition of firearms is predominantly one of obtaining livelihood and pecuniary gain, as opposed to other intents, such as improving or liquidating a personal firearms collection.”

      Consistent with this approach, federal law explicitly exempts persons “who make occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms.”

      So occasional private sales are perfectly legal. If you used to buy a table at gun shows to sell firearms, you probably should obtain an FFL. If you want to sell your Glock 17 to Joe Schmoe, it is still legal to do so. If they think you’re a person “in the business”, they still have to build a court case and devote man hours to it in order to gain a conviction. There aren’t enough enforcers or hours in a day to go after private sales, and they wouldn’t be illegal anyways. They are using Edward Bernays propaganda to make you think that something has changed. Do NOT listen to these idiots.

      1. avatar Jim Jones says:

        From the same document:

        “While a collector or hobbyist may use the internet and other communication technology to sell a firearm without a license (provided that they comply with all other federal and state laws and regulations), those engaged in the business of dealing in firearms who utilize the internet or other technologies must obtain a license, just as a traditional dealer whose business is run out of a traditional brick and mortar store.”

        If you’re just selling one of your through Armslist, you’re fine. This will not be the demise of armslist.

        1. avatar Chris poche says:

          Armslist isn’t a forum for selling. It is a classified ad no different than a newspaper classified ad. It is simply a listing of items available for sale grouped by area or type. There is no where on that site for you to enter credit card information to physically purchase a firearm through their website.

        2. avatar Teufel Hunde says:

          One of the vagaries of the EO remarks is that there was no definition of “use” applied to the internet. In other areas “use” has been as thin as responding to a question from a possible buyer before or after the actual transaction. I’m pretty sure posting on Armslist would be called “use,” but having seen the ATF Guidelines posted earlier, that’s probably just one of several factors that would be applied.

      2. avatar Sian says:

        The seemingly deliberate vague language is an issue that should be addressed.

      3. avatar Paul says:

        Thank you for copying the Fox News citation. The ATF document and especially their examples are very clear, even if there is no bright line. It really is the “if it quacks like a duck” test. Looks like most of us are not going to be involved in this. I suspect that B.O. is mostly after people who “manufacture” AR’s in their garage out of random parts, and sell them out of the trunks of their cars, even if there is no intent to sell to gangstas, jihadis, etc. I personally have no problem with them doing it; it really is no different from the people at craft fairs who make belts and wood toys. I understand the confusion and danger if you are a guy who occasionally builds and sells to friends. To me that is selling out of a personal collection. Just don’t be stupid about it like some of the Armslist ads with unmatched parts listed and the giveaway line “fired 3 times for function test only.” If you build in volume, it is hard to argue that you are not “in the business”.

      4. avatar geoffb5 says:

        “If you used to buy a table at gun shows to sell firearms, you probably should obtain an FFL.”

        Many people who “buy a table” or two at a gun show, do so to buy and sell for their own private collection of guns and other gun/military related items, don’t have an FFL. And as I understand the current ATF rules they couldn’t get one because they are not considered as being a business.

        A fine Catch 22 could be developing. You have to have an FFL to sell a few guns at a gun show but can’t get an FFL because you don’t qualify as a business under a different section of the regulations.

        1. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

          This is exactly why the ATF wouldn’t renew my FFL 20 ish years ago. Because I was not engaged to make a profit and I couldn’t predict how many sales I would make in the coming 3 years.

        2. avatar Lawrence says:

          That was the first thing I thought of… so you want everyone who sells guns, including internet and personal sales, to have an FFL… but, when I looked into getting an FFL just because I was tired of paying transfer fees I found I can’t get an FFL because I don’t have a “brick and mortar store front” for the BATFE to inspect. For a moment I was hopeful they were going to relax this rule and take us back to the days of anyone willing to register could be an FFL. I guess not… too bad I’d gladly register so guns could be shipped straight to me. I wouldn’t mind having access to the background check system either.

      5. avatar Big Bill says:

        Shhh! Your upsetting all the chicken littles who cried that this is end of online gun sales as we know it!!!!

        My God much ignorance has been seen over the past two days.

        1. avatar neiowa says:

          Thats for setting all to rest Ms Lynch. Good to have the word from on high.

    3. avatar Richard C. says:

      from ATF document

      Scott has been collecting high-end firearms for years. In the six months before his
      son is about to enter college, Scott sells most of his collection in a series of transactions
      at gun shows, on the Internet, and to family and friends to provide funds to
      pay his son’s college expenses. Scott does not have to be licensed, because he is
      liquidating part of a personal collection.

      1. avatar Sian says:

        And what if in the process, Scott makes some very favorable trades, and sells THOSE guns for a profit in the same time period?

        this isn’t even unusual.

  2. avatar Matthew says:

    What if I have my local FFL run the background check, do I still need a license?

    1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

      No, then you are submitting to de facto registration, which is a good part of what they want. For now.

      1. avatar Todd G says:

        We’ll see. That’s not actually what they said.

        An FFL running a courtesy (with fee for the trouble) NICS check isn’t the seller of the firearm. AFAIK, they (generally) don’t add it to their books then record it as a business sale. Those who are FFLs please correct this if it’s wrong.

        So selling a gat may mean either consigning it to an FFL store or randomly running into sum dude that wants to buy it, without any ‘advertising’ like GB, Armslist, FB, your local range’s Buy/Sell board, etc.

        Todd G
        Not that one, another one.

        1. avatar Todd G says:

          To clarify, I mean walk-up checks where both the buyer and seller are there, not incoming transfer shipments.

        2. avatar CBI says:

          One FFL’s answer: Depends on which “books” you’re talking about.

          To do the NICS check, the firearm would be entered into the “Acquisitions and Dispositions” book, a 4473 would be filled out, and the FBI NICS would be contacted to obtain a “proceed”. The firearm would then be transfered to the new owner, with the appropriate annotations in the A&D book and on the 4473. “De facto registration” is basically correct. This is one of the measures Obama reemphasized awhile back. So, the firearm *is* added to those books.

          However, it would not (normally) be added to the financial books as a purchase (cost-of-goods-sold) and sale (with sales tax, if applicable). The only income would be the transfer fee: the FFL would not become the “owner” of the firearm normally.

          The gotcha: once it’s entered into the A&D book, it can not be returned to the original owner (say, if the purchaser was “denied”) without the original owner passing a NICS background check. Loverly, eh?

        3. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

          But regardless of whose name(s) go in the bound book, the names do go through the NICS system if I understand correctly. Yes, it’s illegal for them to keep that info. And they have repeatedly demonstrated that they do it anyway. If you have ever passed a BG check purchasing a gun, you are a registered gun owner with the Feds. I’m certainly on that list.

        4. avatar ColoradoKid says:

          FFLs in Colorado have been doing this since CO law changed in 2013. It’s a personal transfer. It never hits the financials (except for the transfer fee), just the A&D book. Problem is that a lot of CO FFLs are refusing to do personal transfers for fear of transferring a stolen firearm. The BGC is done on the buyer, not the seller, and no way to check 100% if the gun is stolen or used in a crime. For FFLs who do personal transfers the new law has created a new revenue stream. In a lot of cases I make more on the transfer than selling from inventory. My total fee (including BGC) is $40. Some dealers charge way more.

    2. avatar Robert says:

      The proposed “rules” (unconstitutional orders) are not about whether the gun itself was transferred via FFL, it’s that if you are regularly selling guns then *you* need an FFL. IE, regularly selling guns under the conditions Osama describes is a no-no if you are not an FFL. Doing the transfers via a FFL doesn’t negate that you would need an FFL yourself if you sell guns as described.

  3. avatar Removed_californian says:

    Heard a sound byte of ya RF. thought it was kinda cool.

    On topic, listening to talk radio here in the people’s republik, the callers don’t really seem to understand what this all means. Here we already have UBC’s and essentially no NFA items so no one really understands why a person would use a trust to by firearms. There’s a distinct lack of knowledge here. And it’s sickening.

    1. avatar James69 says:

      Ah, the “Gun Trust” loophole…..

    2. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

      California has more NFA registered items than any other state, except Texas and Virginia.

      1. avatar Removed_californian says:

        Do we have that many AOWs? Never even realized that. I know we aren’t legally allowed to have sbrs, suppressors, sbs, etc.

        1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

          There are several categories of NFA items; machine guns, silencers, any other weapons (AOW), etc. I was just going by total counts across all types. In specific categories, CA is actually first, in others much lower.

          Here’s the ATF source data from March 2014, most recent I could find. Scroll down to Exhibit 8.

    3. avatar Kyle says:

      That lack of knowledge includes me. I didn’t understand a thing you wrote. Too many acronyms.

  4. avatar Boyd says:

    Well I don’t keep a gun in its original packaging I usually break down the box and either burn it or throw it away after I get a case for it or put it in the safe. As far as selling to make a profit if I buy a gun it’s because I’m going to want to keep it for quite a while so I can’t say I intend to make a profit off of it.

    1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

      “When they came for the original box keepers, I said nothing, because I don’t keep the original box…..”

    2. avatar Curtis in IL says:

      Most handguns nowadays come with a nice, plastic case, specifically molded or filled with die-cut foam to accept the gun, magazines, etc. that it contains.

      They work well for transporting the gun legally, and as far as I know, most people keep them for that purpose.

      1. avatar Glock Owner says:

        “Foam cut specifically for the firearm in the case? What’s that?”

        1. avatar TravisP says:

          A Walther thing

        2. avatar Skeptical_Realist says:

          Sig does it too.

  5. avatar Defiant Deity says:

    All politicians lie and obama is the pinnacle of that, but there is at least one person giving us a glimmer of hope out there. Trump has stated he would roll back all obamas EO’s on the second amendment immediately. Now if he will do it or not is debatable but at least there is someone out there sticking up for us. I liked Ted Cruz but not a word from him, in fact he instead tells the people in Oregon they don’t have the right to do what they are doing. He lost my support.

  6. avatar Silver says:

    It’s the same nebulous, meaningless, open ended definition the ATF has always had. This changes nothing. I highly doubt they have the resources to start tracking randomguy14 on Armslist who’s trying to sell an old shotgun once a year.

    Smoke and mirrors. The illusion of doing something.

    1. avatar geoffb5 says:

      They don’t have to be doing anything more as long as they can convince people that they might drop the hammer on you for selling any number of guns. Keeping things vague while going public with statements that are designed to strike fear, confusion, and legal murkiness is a strategy. One the IRS and EPA also follow.

    2. avatar neiowa says:

      Unless/until “they” want to. Same as the current PR BS that ICE is preparing to deport a few Central American single mothers and their offspring. This after the moslem eunich and his coven have allow millions to invade over the last few years. Believe NOTHING these fools say.

  7. avatar Ryan says:

    Ok so i may be ignorant of how this works but if I buy a firearm from Budsgun shop will they have to do a background check before they send it to my local FFL to perform another background check?? I have only ever purchased muzzleloader type guns in the past from Buds and they get delivered to my front door.

    1. avatar Silver says:

      They send it to your FFL, who does the check. It’d be like buying it from your local store, except it was shipped in and already paid for.

    2. avatar TXGal says:

      On line gun shops don’t do NICs ever. They ship to your designated FFL, When gun arrives at the FFL location an employee will call to let you know item has arrived for you to come pick it up, the NICs is done at time. All FFLs I’ve dealt with will let you open case to make sure it’s item you ordered and no damage from shipping company

    3. avatar Anon in CT says:

      When one FFL sends to another FFL, no background check is required.

  8. avatar Chip Bennett says:

    There is a very simple criterion – simple to define, though perhaps more complex to prove: does one purchase firearms for the sole purpose of reselling them? If so, then one is a dealer of firearms.

    1. avatar Silver says:

      But how can they possibly prove that or enforce it? “I bought it to go hunting, but then decided not to hunt, so I sold it.” There, reasonable doubt.

      1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

        But how can they possibly prove that or enforce it?

        I suppose that’s the government’s problem, especially since they decided to stick their nose into a lawful transaction between private individuals, involving a right constitutionally protected against government infringement.

      2. avatar Bob says:

        Yes, but if you do it 15 times in a month, you might be a gun dealer.

        I think this is like the Jeff Foxworthy test for redneckedness.

      3. avatar Jordan says:

        Awwww. Bless your little heart. You still think the criminal justice system is “innocent until proven guilty.” That is such a cute notion.

        I agree with you in principle but I also know that “you can beat the rap but you can’t beat the ride.” In practice, the Feds will hammer Uncle George for selling his collection because he is low hanging fruit without the resources to mount an effective defense that can be easily scared into a plea deal. Predators all act the same regardless of whether they walk on 2 legs or 4 (or more or less).

    2. avatar Katy says:

      That would be a fairer standard to me.

      Let’s say I’m the guy I saw at Academy last night, who can’t stop gushing over the Curve. It would be unfair to punish him for taking it to the range for the first time, realizing it’s a piece of pa’tak, and selling to some other sucker who buys it for more than list because Taurus is the current fad.

      I also have issues with how they would look at me. The shotgun box is long gone, but everything that came with the Glock and the 10/22 (takedown) is in the house. Heck – the “case” for the 22 was the transport bag. Do my pack rat tendencies mean that I’ll be considered a dealer?

      1. avatar Owen says:

        That’s me too. I rarely throw away the packaging of many things. I always worry that I’ll need the original packaging for warranty returns.

  9. avatar Good2Go says:

    This is unfortunate for me especially, as I am planning a year long road trip and want to sell most of my arsenal, including an AR10, AR300bo pistol, 12gauge, Rem597, 2xG&G522’s, Sig 2022, Walther PPS, S&W442 and Charter Arms 44sp. I am trying to decide what is the best weapon to load in the RV, as I will be avoiding the East Coast( grew up there) but I may go into California. What gun would you guys carry on an RV road trip?

    1. avatar dph says:

      “RV” gun? Any gun that will fit in the hidden compartment under the bed is an “RV” gun as far as I can tell.

    2. avatar James69 says:

      I have a 12ga stoeger coachgun I keep in mine and it’s VP approved!

    3. avatar notalima says:

      I think there is a 180 day period before it goes into effect.

  10. avatar Pascal says:

    I could be wrong, but is that not the definition for FFL-03 today?


    “However, court rulings have set a precedent that says a person could sell as few as one or two guns and still be considered a dealer, depending on the circumstances”

    Anyone know which “court rulings” they are talking about? My Google-fu fails to find something related to guns.

  11. avatar Joe R. says:

    Question of the Day: Are You a Gun Dealer?


    Question of the Day: Are You a FING DICTATOR? Do you know one? Do you know how they have typically faired in history?


    T H E _ P R O B L E M _ I S _ P A R T _ O F _ Y O U ! ! !
    P E R M A N E N T L Y

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      Question of the Day: Are You a Gun Dealer?

      The only proper response should be “F’s-it to ya?”.

      If the president and the ATF want to regulate the transfer of arms in the U.S. that’s THROTTLING, and it’s infringement and beyond their paygrade and authority.

  12. avatar BLAMMO says:

    Only in the upper echelons of government does a nebulous, capricously-applied, non-specific definition constitute a “clear, definitive standard.”

    … Are you a gun dealer?

    Okay, in that case, I’m going with “No”.

  13. avatar js says:

    More gum flappery.

    Best part– Obama wants to enforce the gun laws, just like the NRA has been telling him to do for years!!!

    Love that his thinking has evolved in that way.

  14. avatar Art out West says:

    Does selling a car make you a car dealer? Does having a garage sale make you an “antiques dealer”? Does selling a dozen eggs make you a “poultry products dealer”? Does selling your house for a profit (especially if you list it on Craigslist) make you a “real estate dealer”?

    1. avatar Pascal says:

      Sadly, and it has been well documented over at, in some states selling eggs, milk or even tomatoes that have not been inspected can get you fined or throw into jail for not being licensed to do so.

      1. avatar Five says:

        Exactly the reason to push back against this crap.

      2. avatar notalima says:

        And God forfend you collect rain water on your own property…

        1. avatar Jordan says:

          That one actually depends on your state. I am designing my house that I am going to build with a rain water collection system and in my research, I found that Texas actually provides property tax breaks for doing so. Other states however, (mostly blue) would crucify you for doing this. (don’t know exactly which ones.

    2. avatar Richard C. says:

      also directly from the ATF document.

      David enjoys hunting and has a large variety of hunting rifles. He likes to have the
      newest models with the most current features. To pay for his new rifles, a few times a
      year David sells his older weapons to fellow hunters for a profit. David does not need
      to be licensed because he is engaging in occasional sales for enhancement of his
      personal collection.

    3. avatar JSJ says:

      Does selling a car make you a car dealer?
      In my state, selling more than 5 vehicles/year makes you a dealer, subject to licensing. Or purchasing just one with the intent of re-selling it. I much prefer a clear line over “try it and find out”

  15. avatar Ralph says:

    Today I’m a gun dealer. Yesterday I was the gun lobby. I don’t know what I am anymore!

    But I do know who and what King Hussein is, and I find him to be repulsive.

    1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

      Ralph, they will throw as many labels our way as they can. It’s throwing s#it on a wall to see what sticks.

    2. avatar Avid Reader says:

      Ralph, if your ex-wife is like mine, any one that asks her will be told what you are in no uncertain terms. . .

    3. avatar Accur81 says:

      If you’re a good attorney, than you’re not a gun dealer.

    4. avatar BLAMMO says:

      Being a member of the NRA, I thought I was a terrorist.

    5. avatar Mr Pierogie says:

      I don’t know what I am anymore!

      A soon-to-be felon, courtesy of the US government. Duh!

  16. avatar Gman says:

    I keep the original packaging for all of my gun purchases. It increases the resale value. And after all, aren’t all purchases of durable goods an investment? I certainly don’t buy things to destroy and throw away. I use them. I take care of them. And if I chose to sell them, I expect a reasonable return on my investment. Does this make be a dealer?

    1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

      As long as you support the leftist agenda and donate to the Democratic Party, no you are not a dealer. If you are a conservative or deviate from The Current Truth as dictated by the leftist authoritarian elite, then you are a dealer and should be put in prison.

      1. avatar Gman says:

        I’m good then. I registered as a Democrat so I get to vote against them twice.

  17. avatar Shwiggie says:

    If I want to sell a gun to someone I know who’s on the up-and-up, I will.

  18. avatar Steve says:

    New game: You might be a gun dealer if…

    …. You bought a nice Python 2 years ago, but sold it last week because you’re not interested in owning guns that are too valueable to shoot.

    1. avatar Gman says:

      You’re definitely a gun dealer if you sold that Python for a profit!!!

  19. avatar Mack Bolan says:

    OK so …If lets say I’m selling a Colt Python. I sell you the cylinder for $3500 new in the box. Then I sell you the frame, new in a burlap sack separately for 5 dollars.

    Now what?

  20. avatar Brian says:

    I may be giving the ATF too much credit, but I read “may” as “might” instead of “shall.”

    I think the wording of original packaging is very unclear. There’s a big difference between the original plastic box your Glock comes in, and selling an unused gun that’s still in a plastic sleeve with a blank warrabty reg card and all the NRA flyers a day after you bought it. In concert with other factors, it could be construed as intent, but alone it would be meaningless.

    Again, I’m probably giving them too much credit.

  21. avatar IllinoisShooter says:

    I saw a STEAL OF A DEAL on Mossberg 500s once. Brand new, black. Awesome. Guy was going out of business. So I bought 4! guy gave me a deal for all 4 at $225 each, when they were $425 on the tag. Figuring I could sell one or two, or trade and basically get myself a “free” shotgun and some cash.

    Sold one to my buddy for $350 Uh oh… Profit.
    Traded one for a used Glock to another guy.
    Eventually sold the last one for $350 on armslist when I was clearing out the gun room. (again,,,, profit).

    Now. I made an actual $250 or so, but with the one I kept its just about a wash, and a little value in the Glock trade. Guess I am a dealer right?

    1. avatar Steve says:

      Three strikes for you:
      Profit, Internet, and Original Packaging.
      You are a gun dealer, cubed….

    2. avatar ATF says:

      If you bought a gun with the intent to sell it you committed a crime already.

      So you just admitted to 3 felony, nice.

  22. avatar Teufel Hunde says:

    Way I see it, Obama/Lynch created two problems with this, because if you’re a firearms dealer, you’re required to have an FFL, no? Lynch said that a single sale in the original packaging conferred dealer status, so if you sell a gun in the original packaging, it’s a dealer sale, and without an FFL, which the ambitious arse-licking AUSA will stretch up to terrorism. //sarc
    Or maybe not //sarc. I’d like to see the facts on a prosecution where a single sale was deemed “in the business” based on original packaging and nothing else.
    The next shoe to drop will be an ATF full court press to a maximum sentence for some poor unlucky git to make us collectively suck in our breath and shake at the knees.

    1. avatar Chris says:

      If it’s does have to do with orgingal packaging bs why not just sell the firearm for what ever price and then sell a plastic case for a separate $1 transaction?

  23. avatar GuyFromV says:

    I just heard RF on the damn radio, CBS hourly news in my car during Rush about the loophole crap and yes…I “LOL’d”.

    1. avatar Mk10108 says:


  24. avatar Hannibal says:

    Nope. And since I can be sure of never making a profit off any gun I figure I’m safe.

  25. avatar Five says:

    What cramp. I seriously doubt I’m the only one who keeps the original packaging for their firearms.

    Stuff like this, a law meaning what-ever the enforcer wants it to mean is the crap that defines a banana republic.

    1. avatar Old Ben turning in grave says:

      “Stuff like this, a law meaning what-ever the enforcer wants it to mean is the crap that defines a banana republic.”

      Give this man a cigar. That’s it in a nut shell. Chip away at rule of law, to be replaced with rule of authority.

  26. avatar Rabbi says:

    This leaves the definition of what constitutes a dealer in the hands of the ATF. Given their history of changing decisions and definitions of common words at will, this will not end well.

    1. avatar Accur81 says:

      That’s exactly what I was thinking. Maybe I should burn some gun boxes so I’m not accused of intent to be a dealer. Just to be safe, I’ll sell everything at a loss, too. Why should I pursue happiness when the government wants it more?

  27. avatar PeterK says:

    If I choose to sell a gun for a different reason but still want to maximize my profit am I a dealer?

    I mean I shouldn’t be, but could I be construed to be? This is a troublesome trend.

  28. avatar James69 says:

    I’ve been buying and selling since before I was “old enough” to legaly do so. So am I “grandfathered” in? I was lucky enough to be raised in Alabama where guns are normaly seen and used for hunting. It’s a hobby of sorts for me. Buy something, play with it for awhile and trade or sell it and repeat. 1/3 of my arsenal are actual hunting arms the other 1/3 are CCW. the other 1/3 are SHTF or range toys..

  29. avatar Sammy^ says:

    When does this policy take affect? I’m not clear on how this new government works. Is it in force as soon as He Who Shall Be Obeyed verbalizes it, or do they need some paperwork to strip people of freedoms??? Do tears make it extra special??? Is he really trying to close the Constitutional Loop Hole to own guns?

  30. avatar notalima says:

    I often keep original boxes, etc. for years, and (most) often get a FA shipped to my FFL cheaper than I can get it locally (sometimes by quite a bit). Sometimes I decide after a bit that I don’t want it anymore and sell it to fund more ballistic joy. Sometimes at more than I bought it for. Sometimes this is more than 2 in a year.

    So, going to jail now, or is the lack of intent enough? This is seriously stupid. if I make a ‘profit’ it is because local shops charge an arm and a leg in markup and I can still sell my ‘used’ FA for more than I bought it for, now I’m a criminal because I kept the original box? This is worse than ‘you shouldered it’ on arm braces.

  31. avatar tmm says:

    This is heading too far into The Lives of Others territory…

  32. avatar Rimfire says:

    So you go to the annual (elk, deer, turkey etc) banquet and you win a shiny new rifle, special edition, in the box. But, you would rather hunt with your old trusty gun and people are rushing up to you to buy that new gun all evening at the banquet. Someone you know offers you the right price, but you seriously can’t sell your own property?? Thank you Dictator Hussein…

  33. avatar Rimfire says:

    We’ve been “Lynched”, it should have been them.

  34. avatar Kyle says:

    So then basically Obama has instituted universal background checks, just without a way to enforce it, but where it now becomes a crapshoot in that if you want to sell a gun, the person you sell it to could be an undercover cop seeking to bust you…?

  35. avatar Higgs says:

    I hope this backfires on the progressives. Every time they try to limit access to guns we have new people purchase there first.

    The attempt to expand the definition of Gun Dealer to include person to person transactions has a couple of big problems. Yes you can argue 2nd amendment, that’s obvious.

    I am more interested in seeing this challenged on the basis of it being an intrastate transaction. As such the Federal government should have NO regulatory or statutory authority. Infringement on intrastate commerce has been a issues for years. We might have just been handed an issue with enough support to seriously push back and force the FEDs into its defined role of interstate commerce regulation only.

  36. avatar PK says:

    Apparently I am. Who knew? I’ll consider getting an FFL if and only if they don’t require business premises still, which they do, as I only sell at gun shows. I can’t check a box on the application for an 01FFL that I won’t be operating out of a storefront, so they obviously don’t want me to have a license.

    Pity, since I sell so many guns.

  37. avatar BDub says:

    This bookends nicely with Brady – get rid of Kitchen Table FFLs by requiring brick and mortar and then define everyone without an FFL as a dealer anyways. They are trying to have their cake and eat it too, it seems.

  38. avatar Kendahl says:

    This is the reverse to what some people do to help pay for their hobbies. If you can operate your hobby like a business, the IRS will let you deduct your “business” expenses from your ordinary income when you file your income tax return. The way to show that you are in business is to do things that a real business would. One example is advertising. Suppose, at matches, you put up a sign that reads “Joe’s Guns – Buy, Sell, Trade” and hand out business cards. All your costs associated with the match are tax deductible. If you occasionally make a contact that results in a purchase or a sale, all the better. Another way is to charge sales tax and forward the tax to the state and/or city. One firm rule is that you must show at least a small profit in two out of five years. You can lose your ass the other three years. Your “business” need not be profitable over the long term. Since it involves buying and selling firearms, you would need an FFL. That would actually help you with the IRS.

    I read about an old guy who wandered around a gun show with a couple of old military rifles and a “For Sale” sign around his neck. I can’t believe he would be considered a dealer unless he did this repeatedly with different rifles. On the other hand, a member of my gun club attends shows regularly and both buys and sells when it’s to his advantage. I would consider him to be a dealer and, I believe, he does have an FFL.

  39. avatar Almost Esq. says:

    I suspect there will be a legal challenge of the current executive orders regarding private transfers. This sounds like applying the statute in a vague and arbitrary way. Proving that to a court though with luck of the draw judges presiding could be hard though. Worth filing the brief though…

  40. avatar Ralph says:

    Okay, I get it. You might be a gun dealer if: You sell a gun. You sell a box. You sell a gun in a box. You sell a box of guns. You have business cards that you carry in a box. You’re against box control.

  41. avatar tirod says:

    Cmon guys it’s no different than telling us we can’t place a Brace against our shoulder.

    They will only enforce where an investigation leads them with the ability to place charges. Hiring a few more agents means? They have it hard enough to keep up with bad guys. How to sort out who is selling off their collection and who is selling guns as a business is going to be hard with a snapshot look at a gun show table. How do you tell who is who?

    A prosecutor only has so many people he can bring to court – they prioritize their workload and charge those who need to be kept out of society. One who would continuously charge gun hobbyists for selling without a license would be accused of letting murderers and rapists go free. They won’t do that – reelections are tough when they look soft on hard crime.

    Who has been prosecuted for holding a brace to their shoulder?

    This is not about “you’re a dealer, get an FFL,” it’s about all the EO conspiracy theorists now being shot out of the saddle – there is NO door to door confiscation, there is NO mandatory turn-in, there is NO buyback, there is NO AWB ban, there is NO Federal help for CA or NY to register “assault rifle owners” – most of who never did.

    Nope, what we have is a carefully orchestrated, tearful admission he can’t do squat.

    Gun control has taken a major defeat.

    1. avatar Darren B says:

      Precisely. As bad as it seems just reading the EO’s, it’s much ado about nothing, the result of which will be even more gun sales across the nation consisting of many more first time gun owners. Consider the ongoing defiance in New York and Connecticut and how results of the Oregon background check law.

  42. avatar crzapy says:

    The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.

    Ayn Rand

    Seems to me that the government is looking to create some criminals.

  43. avatar bmh says:

    Why are any of you taking any of this seriously? Even if Obama had decreed something change, which he didn’t, it still wouldn’t be valid. He’s not a legislator. He can’t do crap.

    Carry on folks.

  44. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    OK-I am a dealer-just not a GUN dealer. Antiques and such. This is as real as Obamas’ tears. Cover your tracks-especially on the “profit”. I bought a painting for $15-sold it for $32000. I see this backfiring on Bury Obama big-time. Have fun!

  45. avatar Darren B says:

    They can’t possibly monitor every single gun owner who sells a gun to his neighbor/best friend/brother-in-law. Consider the NY SAFE Act and how ineffective it turned out to be. Hopefully, these EO’s will simply anger the firearm owning population that much more into being ever more defiant, rendering these “orders” irrelevant and unworkable. Think of the resources it would actually take to track down every single gun owner. Simply overwhelm the system, so to speak, by being more active buying/selling guns and don’t worry about it. Most of these EO’s just restate existing law anyway, thus amounting to nothing. As another commenter just stated: Carry on.

  46. avatar Guidoc says:

    So if I buy a new gun that is festooned with adhesive stickers by the manufacturer and I remove those stickers and resell the gun in the original box, would this count as not being original packaging?

  47. avatar Nathan Fellows says:

    I like to build ARs, shoot them a while, and sell them to finance the next build. Wash, rinse, repeat. Doubtless that will make me an arch criminal until someone gets into the white house and restores civil government.

  48. avatar Wally1 says:

    This will be a test case for the courts. I wonder if the ATF giving guns to the Mexican drug cartels makes them a international firearms dealer?
    Just like I-594 statute that was passed in Washington state, it really means nothing. Local L.E. will not enforce it, they see it for what it is, an attempted end run around the 2nd amendment… Maybe we could have a sanctuary city where we don’t enforce gun laws. Kind of like San Francisco where they don’t enforce immigration laws.

    By the way, I bought a new washer and dryer and sold my old set, I don’t think that makes me an appliance retailer, or does it. 🙂

  49. avatar Jath says:

    Simple solution. Just make your future undocumented private gun sales last week when it was legal.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email