IndianaResident
Expert
- Sep 3, 2010
- 1,439
- 48
Stopping into a gun store today, and walked away with disconcerting information, tempered by some healthy skepticism. This particular FFL holder also happens to hold a manufacturer license. I'll tell you what I was told first, then follow on with my thought processes.
Letter 1, pg 1
Letter 1, pg 2
Letter 2, pg 1
Letter 2, pg 2
Further, the word engraving of pistol is simply misinformation, or a comfort for those that need it. This particular fact I could not confirm officially from any source, but found many, many internet guru's claiming it was for comfort and to increase profits by charging more for pistol marked lowers. In support of this argument I found many example of individuals creating unmarked AR-pistols that were later turned into SBRs (by adding proper receiver extension and stock), and that having pistol mark on an SBR was both silly and inaccurate.
Points 3 and 4 are my biggest questions. I do not believe either one, but cannot disprove either, so am turning to my compatriots here to help.
I do want to weigh in with an example of private party sellers at gun shows who do not get fined or arrested, and whom I see at repeat shows, which seem to disagree with #3. The FFL holder gave an example of an individual who bought a shotgun and sold a rifle and was a arrested at the a prior 1500.
#4 I have no information on other than I just bought a gaggle of stripped lowers and am therefore curious for more verifiable Word?
#5 is the one I happen to agree with, in that buying and selling firearms to make a profit, without being an FFL holder, sounds illegal due to the likelihood of straw purchases. However, it is also capitalism, or at least free market, and I suspect there may more more gray area to it than I am currently aware of.
I want to reference the aforementioned gunshow arrest. Though we don't know any details about it, the FFL holder said that individual was charged with "Selling with Intent to make a Profit". It seems to me that as long as someone is not buying the gun from an FFL, and asks the proper questions (felon, IN resident, age) they should be able to turn around and sell the gun as soon as they please, for as much as they please. Is Slick Joe committing a crime (legal, not moral) when he buys an immaculate 1912 1911 for $100 from Backwoods Bubba, then sells it for for a small fortune an hour later? How about a week, month, or year later?
Even from an FFL, how is this information selected? Is there a time a gun must be held before it is no longer considered "selling for profit" or a straw purchase, rather than just not liking that particular weapon, or wanting something new?
I'm hoping for discussion, but would really like to see information backed by other sources. I have plenty of unsupported opinion in me already
Obligatory disclaimers:
I'm not looking to discuss how FFL holders are not automatic repositories of encyclopedic levels of accurate information, nor to compare them to ATF or LEO's who may or may not know every nuance of the law.
I'm also not posting this to call out a particular shop, everybody makes mistakes (or doesn't, as the jury will decide)
I'm not looking for a lecture of being informed, gullible, or who to get advice from, and I am especially not looking for a thread full of "what should be" and "2nd amendment say..."
I agree, but I want to talk about what is, not what should be.
Phew...here goes everything. Submit New Thread.
I set about to research the first two myself, and disproved them to myself already. I called Rock River and Spike's, and both said they only sell stripped lowers that are neither pistols nor rifles until they are built such initially, by attaching a stock or rifled barrel action. Stripped lowers should be transferred as "other" on the 4473 to avoid having it labeled as either until you decide to build. I was able to find other ATF letters online agreeing with this. (but obviously cannot actually guarantee their authenticity. I am not discussing the portion of the 2nd letter that discusses the irrelevance of a stock in establishing a rifle)1) AR lower receivers are, by serial number given to the ATF, pistol or rifle lowers
2) AR pistol lowers must be engraved with "pistol"
3) FTF sales are limited to 1 per 24 hour period
4) AR-15 builds are limited to 1 per year
5) Sale with intent to profit is a crime
Letter 1, pg 1
Letter 1, pg 2
Letter 2, pg 1
Letter 2, pg 2
Further, the word engraving of pistol is simply misinformation, or a comfort for those that need it. This particular fact I could not confirm officially from any source, but found many, many internet guru's claiming it was for comfort and to increase profits by charging more for pistol marked lowers. In support of this argument I found many example of individuals creating unmarked AR-pistols that were later turned into SBRs (by adding proper receiver extension and stock), and that having pistol mark on an SBR was both silly and inaccurate.
Points 3 and 4 are my biggest questions. I do not believe either one, but cannot disprove either, so am turning to my compatriots here to help.
I do want to weigh in with an example of private party sellers at gun shows who do not get fined or arrested, and whom I see at repeat shows, which seem to disagree with #3. The FFL holder gave an example of an individual who bought a shotgun and sold a rifle and was a arrested at the a prior 1500.
#4 I have no information on other than I just bought a gaggle of stripped lowers and am therefore curious for more verifiable Word?
#5 is the one I happen to agree with, in that buying and selling firearms to make a profit, without being an FFL holder, sounds illegal due to the likelihood of straw purchases. However, it is also capitalism, or at least free market, and I suspect there may more more gray area to it than I am currently aware of.
I want to reference the aforementioned gunshow arrest. Though we don't know any details about it, the FFL holder said that individual was charged with "Selling with Intent to make a Profit". It seems to me that as long as someone is not buying the gun from an FFL, and asks the proper questions (felon, IN resident, age) they should be able to turn around and sell the gun as soon as they please, for as much as they please. Is Slick Joe committing a crime (legal, not moral) when he buys an immaculate 1912 1911 for $100 from Backwoods Bubba, then sells it for for a small fortune an hour later? How about a week, month, or year later?
Even from an FFL, how is this information selected? Is there a time a gun must be held before it is no longer considered "selling for profit" or a straw purchase, rather than just not liking that particular weapon, or wanting something new?
I'm hoping for discussion, but would really like to see information backed by other sources. I have plenty of unsupported opinion in me already
Obligatory disclaimers:
I'm not looking to discuss how FFL holders are not automatic repositories of encyclopedic levels of accurate information, nor to compare them to ATF or LEO's who may or may not know every nuance of the law.
I'm also not posting this to call out a particular shop, everybody makes mistakes (or doesn't, as the jury will decide)
I'm not looking for a lecture of being informed, gullible, or who to get advice from, and I am especially not looking for a thread full of "what should be" and "2nd amendment say..."
I agree, but I want to talk about what is, not what should be.
Phew...here goes everything. Submit New Thread.
Last edited: