- Joined
- Jul 1, 2011
- Messages
- 67,218
- Reaction score
- 28,530
- Location
- Lower Hudson Valley, NY
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Being an "unlicensed dealer" is against the law.
No, its not.
Being an "unlicensed dealer" is against the law.
No, its not.
Yes it is.
If you're, in the business of selling firearms and you don't have a license.
That's a felony.
I'd say "poorly worded", not "misleading"
In many states, private sales are allowed at gun shows, and I think Catawba meant that guns can be sold without a form being filed or a background check, which is the important point and not whether nor the person selling the weapon (to someone who is prohibited from buying a weapon) is a dealer (licensed or unlicensed) or not.
To clarify, the problem is that something like 40% of all gun sales are completed without a background check, and this means that criminals and the mentally ill, as well as terrorists, have an easy way to acquire firearms. Furthermore, in some areas a huge majority of the murders are committed using weapons that were sold without a background check.
One does not need to be "in the business" to be a "dealer"
I think the difference in opinion is that some are limiting the definition of "dealer" to those who are "in the business" when common usage shows that the word has broader applications.
TheLaw said:(c) Dealer in firearms other than a gunsmith or a pawnbroker. 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 a 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;
And that Cat, is how you garner support for a position rather than antagonize the opposing side. (Although Sangha is pretty good at that as well)
One does not need to be "in the business" to be a "dealer"
I think the difference in opinion is that some are limiting the definition of "dealer" to those who are "in the business" when common usage shows that the word has broader applications.
The ATF has a definition for this.
It's quite illegal to be "in the business" of selling firearms, without a license.
You can't be a "dealer" of firearms, be unlicensed and it be legal.
It is by definition, illegal.
[/FONT][/COLOR]http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&rgn=div8&view=text&node=27:3.0.1.2.3.2.1.1&idno=27
"dealer" does not mean "FFL". It means "seller"
Drug "dealers" have no license either. "Dealer" is a word that is commonly used to refer to someone who sells something for profit (ex car dealer, drug dealer, arms dealer, etc)
No, its not.
Yes it is.
If you're, in the business of selling firearms and you don't have a license.
That's a felony.
If we were limited to using the legal definitions of words, you'd be 100% right
My point is that Catawba used the word "dealer" in the more common sense of the word (ie someone who sells something), and not the legal sense
Can you give an example of someone that is a dealer that is not in the business?
the law(FOPA 86') makes the distinction between a dealer and a private seller.... private seller =/= dealer.
a person who is engaged in the business of selling firearms is a firearms dealer and is required to be licensed... a person who makes an occasional sale is not required to be licensed, nor is he considered a firearms dealer.
if you sell cars for a living, you are a car dealer... if you just sold the car you own, you are not a car dealer.
It gets sticky when private sellers repeatedly "turn" privately purchased firearms for a profit. At a certain point, it does draw the attention of the ATF and could be illegal.
that's true...It gets sticky when private sellers repeatedly "turn" privately purchased firearms for a profit. At a certain point, it does draw the attention of the ATF and could be illegal.
The most common use for "dealer", is someone engaging in business.
Not someone who does it occasionally, as a hobby.
A drug "dealer" does not sell drugs as a hobby.
He/she does it as a business.
Thus his post is still incorrect.
why do you think cops , in general, support gun control?
might it have something to do with them being able to have an advantage in an armed conflict?...hmmmm?
I don't really care what cops think personally, they are a protected class of citizen... their RTKBA are not in jeopardy.
Agreed. That is the most common use
But I see no rule requiring anyone to use words according to their legal definition or the way they are most commonly used.
And plenty of people are in jail for dealing drugs even though they only sold drugs once, and never did it for a profit, nevermind a living.
Dealer | Define Dealer at Dictionary.com
There is no requirement for a "dealer" to be someone who does it for profit.
I believe that would be the gang-banger on the corner who also dabbles in drugs and hookers.
It's the attempt though.
Dealing drugs is often used as means of generating income.
Although many of those charged and convicted of dealing, were merely possessing.
The drug laws are weird in that, if you posses more than X amount, you can be charged with dealing, instead of mere possession.
Being an "unlicensed dealer" is against the law.
Can you give an example of someone that is a dealer that is not in the business?
"Linc" believes that you've moved further to the "not quite" right to fit in here.