Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ancesthntr
Prior to 1968 people did this all the time."

Prior to the 13th amendment people had slaves. Your point?

"what is dishonest about wanting to save some money by cutting out the middleman?

What's dishonest about it? Applying for a federal license to buy and sell guns when you have have absolutely no intention whatsoever to buy and sell guns (merely to obtain them for yourself at a discounted price) is dishonest.

I do not understand how you can't see this. I see how you're trying to weasel around it. I see that real clear.

76 posted on 02/09/2007 11:35:05 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]


To: robertpaulsen
Prior to the 13th amendment people had slaves. Your point?

There's quite a bit of difference between changing the Constitution on the one hand, and changing the law on the other, particularly because many people (including many Constitutional scholars) believe that many portions of the GCA are unconstitutional (whereas some people merely disagreed with the 13th Amendment...but that issue had been settled in 1865). Additionally, the mere sale or transfer of firearms, in and of itself, harms no one - something that cannot be said of slavery.

As for the acquisition of an FFL - the item, in and of itself, is violative of the Constitution. Further, and more to the point, how do you ***know*** that all of those "kitchen table" dealers had no intention of selling guns? Many of them actually did, although they didn't have their stores behind a plate glass window on Main Street with regular hours. Who are you, or the Feds for that matter, to tell people precisely how to conduct their business? Maybe someone wanted to buy lots of guns, use them for a while, and then be able to sell them to people in various parts of the country? Doing so without a license was and is illegal (though, again, I believe the whole concept of the FFL is itself unconstitutional), so these people paid their fees and submitted to background checks. What's the problem?

97 posted on 02/09/2007 12:34:21 PM PST by Ancesthntr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]

To: robertpaulsen

That's exactly what the Type 03 FFL is for, and is perfectly accepted - even encouraged - in the industry.

The Type 01 just removed the age & oddity restrictions, and removed concerns about what constitutes "dealing".

Relax, man. There's nothing devious about it.


116 posted on 02/09/2007 1:09:46 PM PST by ctdonath2 (The color blue tastes like the square root of 0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]

To: robertpaulsen; Ancesthntr
Prior to 1968 people did this all the time."

Prior to the 13th amendment people had slaves. Your point?

Simple. The Thirteenth Amendment increased human freedom, while the CGA '68 diminished it. Individual human freedom is supposed to be one of the primary things this country is about. That was the point, and it's an extremely simple point to grasp...

142 posted on 02/09/2007 2:23:45 PM PST by tarheelswamprat (So what if I'm not rich? So what if I'm not one of the beautiful people? At least I'm not smart...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson