Gun owners’ private information leaked by California Attorney General

Re:Gun owners’ private information leaked by California Atto... by SmellTheGlove on Tuesday June 28, 2022 @06:28PM (#31913914)

If you’re buying guns for resale, you may need an FFL. In the example you provided of buying a 10k rifle because you know some collector will pay 12k for it, I would think an FFL 01 is appropriate.

It may not be a straw purchase, but it’s also not primarily for your collection. The threshold of “business” or “dealing” seem intentionally vague by the ATF, but what you described can be interpreted as illegal without an FFL. My two cents anyway.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gun owners’ private information leaked by California Atto... by GauntletWizard on Tuesday June 28, 2022 @07:34PM (#31914487)

Absolutely; there's a serious gray area that's fairly easily resolved by paying a FFL licensed dealer to facilitate both transfers. But it's absolutely not the case that a private citizen can't buy with the intent to resell. It is absolutely illegal to use someone else's money to buy a gun and immediately give it to them. Between that, there's a nice wide gradient.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Gun owners’ private information leaked by California Atto... by collegeburner on Wednesday June 29, 2022 @12:59PM (#31922817)

If u have a FFL it's not a "loophole" bc then the 4473 is still mandatory.

[ Parent | on HN ]