doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com All Gunsmith's and Members of ACGG are now Felons

I was talking to a friend, he said that back in 1968 they sold the gun control act as everyone could apply for an FFL and if you were in the business of selling guns you HAD to have an FFL. Now, it has changed to "if you have an FFL you HAVE to be a business.".

There's two schools of thought on that Stan. One is, if 'they' have the idea to interview, then it will be. The other is if you read it somewhere, then it will be.

I wonder why it's so easy to start a pot retail business in some places, and it's so difficult to be in other businesses. I wonder why it's so easy to have a part time business in some fields, and not others. I wonder if there're directives from higher up to pretend to preserve rights, but make it so distasteful that it's lost.

[quote=PhysDoc]I was talking to a friend, he said that back in 1968 they sold the gun control act as everyone could apply for an FFL and if you were in the business of selling guns you HAD to have an FFL. Now, it has changed to "if you have an FFL you HAVE to be a business.". [/quote

I can't say I remember the FFL as being universal for sure but I am sure of something else. Regulations which at the time may appear innocuous can be twisted and used against you just as FFL licensing is used against occasional firearms sellers today. Those "regulations" in that letter which some want to believe only apply to those working on military firearms can be re-interpreted to mean something quite different in an instant. You can believe me and Trump for that matter that if H. Clinton get elected EVERY effort to reduce and eventually eliminate the private ownership of firearms will be put in place as quickly as possible.
And despite the media hysteria Trump never said or even implied that firearms owners would try to physically harm Clinton. It just more of the democratic B.S propagated by their media allies.
Jim

Quoted for accuracy.

There are literally dozens of smart, un-elected people poring over those regulations, trying to figure out how to bend them to do their will....eliminate private gun ownership.

To think otherwise is to both misunderstand the antis and to misunderstand your political system.

Craig, it sure isn't an accident, nor coincidence.

Some people are more likely to be intimidated by the men in the black suits and ties, too. There are good agents, and there are those who will try to intimidate you. The one who found me in the soybean field was a good guy. We had a pot of coffee together at my kitchen table that afternoon.

A friend had a little different experience. He had purchased some night vision equipment, I think it was a PVS-7, from a seller on eBay. One day the FBI shows up at my friend's business to tell him that his purchase had been stolen by the seller from the government. No proof, no documentation, just their say so. They told him to produce the scope, that they were confiscating it. He refused, and stood his ground. He told them the only way they were getting it was if they produced the money he had paid for it. They postured about for a few minutes, trying to intimidate him, then left. He's never heard another word about it, several years later.

It doesn't pay to try and be a badazz, but it doesn't pay to necessarily comply with everything that comes out of their mouths, either. The trick is to be informed, and know your rights.

Which brings me back to my original point ....... there is not the first question on the application for a FFL that asks anything concerning number of guns to be sold, as far as that making it a valid application, or not. They can examine your logbook at any time and see for themselves, but I do not believe they can legally use that finding (number sold) against you as far as denying you a renewal.

SRH

Ayn Rand said: �The hallmark of authoritarian systems is the creation of innumerable, indecipherable laws. Such systems make everyone an un-indicted felon and allow for the exercise of arbitrary government power via selective prosecution.�

For the doubters who say this isn't anything for gunsmiths to worry about, see the following link and article.
why would the senate have to send a letter to the govt agency responsible for this if it didn't affect gunsmiths??
https://www.gunsamerica.com/l/D5D082EF-E...ayDigest_86.htm

I'm bringing Brian's post and link back to the top for the people here who actually think there is no threat to our gun rights. Here's one of them:



Please note that once again, the threat to our Constitutional Rights has come from Liberal Left Democrats, and that it is Conservative Republican Congressmen who have penned the letter of protest to the State Dept. about the ITAR DDTC regulations which would affect gunsmiths.

About 4 1/2 million NRA members are shouldering the burden for another 40 million gun owners who often do little or nothing to help preserve our rights. Even worse, there are those right here who have announced their intent to support Hillary Clinton even though her extreme anti gun positions are well known. Proof that you can't fix stupid.

Americans and Canadians favour gun control, including background checks. Gun control is far down the list of concerns of electorates. Those who consider gun control a public issue more important than the economy, national safety and security, access to healthcare etc have legitimate concerns. It doesn't give them the right to impugn the integrity of the citizenship and intelligence of majorities if they don't think as they do.