"They're not coming for your guns"

[Moose242]

This, from the ATF is still current:

[svauto-erotic855]

The ATF went on a roll in the 80's charging people with being an unlicensed dealer. The results of that were that many people (myself included) got their FFLs and the ATF then freaked out because there were too many FFLs for them to keep track of so they backed off on the prosecutions and things have been pretty steady since then. Obama just threw a wrench into the works and I bet that only a very few at the ATF are happy about it.

[juiceweezl]

You know the rules did not change at all right? The EO literally changed nothing.

It has always been a crime to buy and sell guns for a profit without an FFL (well, since 1968).

Yes, I know, but again, it doesn't clearly define what 'in the business' means. A judge can interpret it to fit someone's needs. The examples listed say someone 'regularly' attends a gun show. Don't think for a second that if the market price surged to $1K plus for a basic, $400 AR-15 that someone with 5 extra rifles at home wouldn't decide to sell them because they can make $600. Are they going to rebuy more at the $1K price? No. Will they do this regularly? Not at this time, but they could easily drag you in, take you to court, and find someone to say you're in the business despite it being a 1 time deal.

[Moose242]

The burden of proof is on the prosecutor, as it always has been. They have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you bought a firearm with the specific intent to flip it for a profit to convict. You practically have to announce it.

If a random guy happens to have 5 extra AR15s for whatever reason and then sold them because he simply didn't want them and would rather have the cash, that is legal. If he happens to make a profit, that doesn't matter.

However if said gentlemen was on DFWMustangs bragging about how he built AR15s to sell when the next scare hits, he might get a door knock.

[juiceweezl]

The burden of proof is on the prosecutor, as it always has been. They have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you bought a firearm with the specific intent to flip it for a profit to convict. You practically have to announce it.

If a random guy happens to have 5 extra AR15s for whatever reason and then sold them because he simply didn't want them and would rather have the cash, that is legal. If he happens to make a profit, that doesn't matter.

However if said gentlemen was on DFWMustangs bragging about how he built AR15s to sell when the next scare hits, he might get a door knock.

We know this, but who will have to pay lawyer fees to prove innocence? We're talking about our current federal government.

In the end, I and many others have nothing to worry about. I'm not selling firearms and have no plans to do so. I do not like the attack against my right to do so though nor do I like the fact that they fail to follow the laws already in place.

[svauto-erotic855]

The burden of proof is on the prosecutor, as it always has been. They have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you bought a firearm with the specific intent to flip it for a profit to convict. You practically have to announce it.

You obviously have never seen how the ATF and US attorney's office handle a prosecution. One of the first things that they do is seize every single bank account and financial asset that they can find right before they get around to filing a civil forfeiture on your home and every car that you own. They then with a straight face tell the judge that you are not allowed a court appointed attorney because you can afford one on your own based on all the money that they have taken from you and they just know that you have more hidden and the judge will rule in their favor even though you are still sitting in a jail somewhere. They then have a PSI written up that recommends you doing a few hundred years in prison and that time will double if you refuse to accept responsibility (plead guilty) and they will not even tell you what you are charged with until after they force you to enter a plea. The deck is so stack against you in a federal court that they should not even pretend that they haven't already found you guilty and should just drag you in front of a judge for the sentencing because that is basically what they do already.


Edit: The ATF had Leatherman Tools do a run of custom engraved multi tools to be given out to their agents as gifts that said "Allways Think Forfeiture" on the sides.

[Moose242]

O...k...

[ELVIS]

O...k...

haha! you doing alright man??

god bless.

[svauto-erotic855]

O...k...

My point is that they never even put themselves into the position of having to prove your guilt. They simply grind you under with the process and that process is stacked completely in their favor. If you do stand firm you will find yourself going to trial while being represented by a public defender who will refuse to mount a defense of any sort and who will do everything that they can do to back stab and undermine you.

[GhostTX]

Here's an interesting twist:

AMERICANS CRITICAL OF GOVERNMENT CAN LOSE GUN RIGHTS DUE TO EXECUTIVE ORDER
Psychologists could diagnose conservatives, libertarians with "Oppositional Defiant Disorder in adults"

*The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: Fifth Edition (DSM-5), which the American Psychiatric Association uses for psychiatric diagnosis, defines “oppositional defiant disorder” as a “recurrent pattern of negativistic, defiant, disobedient, and hostile behavior toward authority figures” which typically begins at a young age but can survive into adulthood.
“[Adults with Oppositional Defiant Disorder] feel misunderstood and disliked, hemmed in and pushed around,” according to Russell Barkley, Ph.D.. “Some feel like mavericks or rebels.”

In other words, an Obama-supporting psychologist could potentially diagnose conservatives and libertarians with “Oppositional Defiant Disorder” due to their criticism of authority, particularly the federal government, and then report them to the FBI as too “mentally unfit” to purchase a gun.

http://www.infowars.com/americans-critical-of-government-can-lose-gun-rights-due-to-executive-order

[matts5.0]

Here's an interesting twist:


http://www.infowars.com/americans-cr...xecutive-order

Alex jones, automatically false.

O...k...

SVO, automatically dilusionally incorrect


Right?!

[Moose242]

Alex jones, automatically false.

Correct

SVO, automatically dilusionally incorrect


Right?!

Naw, he's intuitive sometimes.

[Gasser64]

I'd like to hear how they enforce this.

I have a few friends who basically are Joe, from example number 2. And not even because they're looking to make money. They want to own a particular gun for awhile, play with it, have fun with it, and sell it. Sometimes for a very short time. Then they're on to the next one/s. And yeah, often times they make money. These people could easily be labeled as Joe. Hell there are probably plenty of you here that would qualify.

I mean without registration, Joe could simply be "liquidating a personal collection"

[ceyko]

The burden of proof is on the prosecutor,

Lawyers ain't cheap, that help encourage most to be a little extra paranoid and cautious. 5-20K in lawyer fees puts a real hurting on the average Joe's savings account.

A common DUI case runs around 5K in lawyer fees, I maybe underestimating the cost on just being accused of something like is being talked about here. You can be charged all day long if even remotely suspected. Yes, they have to prove it along the way but meanwhile the accused's wallet is feed some lawyer to make sure some you don't screw up on some technicality.

I really wish you could easily defend yourself in court without a representative. Again though, the average Joe is going to be outclassed by most lawyers/prosecutors.

[SS Junk]

O...k...

I find it fascinating the one who screams broken arrow and flees the country like a bitch is now downplaying these attempted power grabs.