Lost among all the headlines was the story of the ATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives) new rule proposal updating who is considered “Engaged in the Business” of selling firearms and therefore, must obtain a Federal Firearms License (FFL). While it may sound like a simple administrative update, it’s really a huge new law and with a hidden goal in mind, universal background checks to feed the national gun registry, all by administrative action. The public comment period for this new rule is closing on December 07, 2023.
Essentially, the new administrative rule is using another wild interpretation of the so-called Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA) as it’s justification. Similar to the interpretation used by the Education Department to shut off funding to schools with hunter safety and firearm programs, this is a new set of administrative rules not supported by law.
The new rule will greatly expand the list of individuals who must obtain a FFL in order to sell firearms from their personal collection. The proposed rule also tightens the rules for obtaining and keeping a FFL for traditional dealers.
A couple of highlights:
Broadens the activities that require an FFL: The proposed rule establishes presumptions concerning activities that necessitate an FFL, such as renting a display table at a gun show, labeling firearms with price tags, offering another firearm for sale after one sale, and earning a profit on sales.
New requirements for obtaining an FFL: The proposed rule modifies the requirements for obtaining an FFL, including additional background checks for applicants, enhanced scrutiny of an applicant’s business plans, and imposition of new corporate entity requirements.
New recordkeeping requirements: The proposed rule imposes new recordkeeping requirements on FFLs, including requirements to retain copies of bills of sale issued to buyers in transactions involving firearms.
The rule goes into great detail of the circumstances which would subject someone to having to get a FFL, as well as a detailed financial cost analysis of why getting a FFL is absolutely, positively NOT a burden to people wanting to sell from their collection. While there are many, Many, MANY actions which would require a FFL, it seems the main one is to make a profit on what is being sold, rejecting the premise that some things actually increase in value over time and individuals having the ability to buy and sell their own property.
Requiring individuals obtain a FFL would subject them to the full range of ATF rules and regulations for manufactures and dealers, including preapproval inspections, record keeping, background checks, and periodic unannounced audits of their premises, or homes for home-based FFLs, by the ATF and even their own state regulators.
This comes at a time when the ATF is attempting to shut down as many current FFLs as it can using draconian interpretations of minor rule violations as “willful acts”. This new rule would simply cast a much larger net for shutting down more firearm sales.
What doesn’t seem to be mentioned is there is no consideration of individuals who live in the most gun-controlled states like Massachusetts or California where state and local licensing is also required and home-based FFLs are no longer allowed. It seems individuals in these states are not a concern for the ATF since they already have universal background checks.
What is the impetus for this rule change? I have no doubt it is a backdoor means of achieving a critical gun control goal unobtainable through legislative means. Specifically, a federal law mandating universal background checks to feed the national gun registry.
By mandating private sellers must become FFLs, all sales must be conducted on a Form 4473 with a background check. While universal background checks themselves have consistently proved ineffective at crime or violence reduction, the paper trail created DOES record/register every sale to an individual. These records are now routinely collected at periodic dealer inspections and, against current law, entered into a national database. A comprehensive national gun registry is a vital element for future confiscation efforts.
There is still time to make a comment, and I do recommend you do. Will your comment be so legally and morally profound it will stop the ATF from implementing new regulations? HELL NO! The comment period is simply an annoying legal formality the government must follow, even though they’ve already made up their mind as to what they are doing. They must review each and every submission, even if it’s by the summer intern breezing through at lightning speed.
What it DOES do is assist in the lawsuit which must follow their ill-advised implementation. Every voice of dissent helps. It doesn’t have to be a long, detailed or a legalese type dissertation, just what you believe is wrong by putting this new regulation in place. It DOES need to be profanity free, as those are disregarded.
The link to the proposed rule, a mere 31 pages long, and to make a comment is below. I respectfully ask you to take a few moments and add your voice to those who are opposed to this overreaching and unjustified gun control action.
Bob
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/09/08/2023-19177/definition-of-engaged-in-the-business-as-a-dealer-in-firearms
#Oddstuffing, #Constitution, #BillOfRights, #SecondAmendment, #2A, #GunControlFails, #NoNewGunLaws, #FactsMatter, #GunsSaveLives, #GunVote, #EngagedInBusiness, #FFL, #medium, #mewe, #gab, #gettr, #truthsocial, #oddstuffing.com