Another new "rule" incoming? No more private sales without a ffl involved?

[DDadams]

I knew the day would come, but I really hoped it wouldn't be this soon.

I hope I'm misunderstanding this or that indiana state law will still allow us our rights but I'm definitely no lawyer.



Link added per request.

 

[Mgderf]

"Let's go Brandon"

 

[Mgderf]

New "rule change" is going to have the same weight of law as the unconstitutional pistol brace rule that was just sent back to the lower courts.
Or the frames and receiver rules that were recently vacated.
This is literally linguini on the wall.
It is the flailings and tantrums of a spoiled and petulant child who can't get his way.

 

[Rookie]

Another unenforceable law. Can you say civil disobedience?

 

[Sigblitz]

I'm going to need another shill.

 

[Mgderf]

Another unenforceable law. Can you say civil disobedience?

I just heard that the estimated compliance rate (high estimation) for pistol brace registration was a whopping 8% of "estimated brace owners".

 

[DDadams]

I just heard that the estimated compliance rate (high estimation) for pistol brace registration was a whopping 8% of "estimated brace owners".

It has to be way, way less than that. There were 255,000 applications submitted for that one.

 

[Route 45]

I just heard that the estimated compliance rate (high estimation) for pistol brace registration was a whopping 8% of "estimated brace owners".

Registration rates can be estimated, but it is literally impossible to estimate compliance. Taking the brace off and putting it in a box in the mini-barn in the backyard is compliance. Removing the brace and selling the pistol as a pistol is compliance. (I've seen quite an uptick in unbraced pistols in my local gun shop)

I'm guessing that most people who even know about this nonsense either sold their pistol to avoid the hassle, put a 16" upper on it (the vast majority are likely AR pistols), or removed the brace and keep it stored separately from the pistol.

"I'm hiding a braced pistol in my safe" isn't exactly the Boston Tea party.

 

[dmarsh8]

Guns reproduce. Who says they were bought/sold?

 

[JAL]

Guns reproduce. Who says they were bought/sold?

Especially if they're stored together unchaperoned. Opened the safe one day and the population inside had doubled.

 

[bobzilla]

It has to be way, way less than that. There were 255,000 applications submitted for that one.

The estimated 10 million puts it at about 3%,

 

[bobzilla]

Guns reproduce. Who says they were bought/sold?

I mean they apparently already kill people on their own so why not.

 

[chipbennett]

IANAL

The administrative state can't create rules that would assert authority outside of their explicit, statutory authority. This would be one such instance. One must be "engaged in the business" to fall under federal FFL statutes. No federal statutes authorize regulation of private sales of firearms such that such sales would require going through an FFL.

 

[armalitesheepdog]

When it come to news via YouTube I always look at it as click bait. These channels are producing content to "get paid" Some are honest some just want the clicks....Grain of salt required

 

[bwframe]

When it come to news via YouTube I always look at it as click bait. These channels are producing content to "get paid" Some are honest some just want the clicks....Grain of salt required

IMHO, there are some real idiots that are rich via YouTube monetization. We have all seen terrible examples of "guntubers." It's disturbing that a fair number of them have huge followings.

 

[Destro]

The biggest catch with these UBCs is that FFLs aren't (rightfully) compelled to conduct background checks for private sales under the law.

They can, and many do typically for a small fee, but there is no function in law that compels them to.

 

[Cameramonkey]

The biggest catch with these UBCs is that FFLs aren't (rightfully) compelled to conduct background checks for private sales under the law.

They can, and many do typically for a small fee, but there is no function in law that compels them to.

And some will do it but screw you over. I think its Indiana Gun Club that charges a premium for doing a transfer for any gun they sell that you buy from someone else. I think it was like $25 if its not something they can get, but $50 or $75 if you just chose not to buy from them.

 

[Ark]

IANAL

The administrative state can't create rules that would assert authority outside of their explicit, statutory authority. This would be one such instance. One must be "engaged in the business" to fall under federal FFL statutes. No federal statutes authorize regulation of private sales of firearms such that such sales would require going through an FFL.

Yes. So they're going to change the definition of "engaged in the business" to include everyone who sells a firearm, and prosecute accordingly.

Doesn't matter if it goes down in court. The intervening years will terrorize people out of engaging in private sales. Just like you can't find anyone selling bump stocks today.

 

[chipbennett]

Yes. So they're going to change the definition of "engaged in the business" to include everyone who sells a firearm, and prosecute accordingly.

Doesn't matter if it goes down in court. The intervening years will terrorize people out of engaging in private sales. Just like you can't find anyone selling bump stocks today.

"Engaged in the business" has a statutory definition. (See also: the "bipartisan gun control legislation" passed recently that Todd Young supported/defended his vote for. That legislation modified the statutory definition of "engaged in the business" - but nowhere near to this extent, and in fact, still precluded individual private sales.)

The ATF attempting to redefine statutory definitions is why their rule regarding defining a brace as a "machine gun" failed. The same will happen here, if they try the same tactic.

 

[Cozy439]

Especially if they're stored together unchaperoned. MY WIFE Opened the safe one day and the population inside had doubled.

IFIFY