Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: VSP: Already providing UBCs?

  1. #1
    Regular Member Repeater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,519

    VSP: Already providing UBCs?

    This statement from a Captain in the VSP is disturbing:

    Va. gun show arrests rise to record, but denial-to-arrest rate slips
    Virginia State Police arrested more people than ever in 2015 for illegally attempting to buy firearms at Virginia gun shows, but the percentage of customers denied approval through background checks who then were arrested slightly decreased, curbing a three-year upward trend.

    Troopers monitoring 75 gun shows across the state last year arrested 91 people, the most on record, for offenses related to being someone prohibited from possessing a firearm, newly released figures show. That’s a 54 percent increase over 2014 and the most since 71 people were arrested in 2013.

    ...

    Obama’s order does not specify a specific threshold number of firearms that triggers the licensure requirement, but U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch has been quoted in news accounts that it could be as few as one or two, “depending upon the circumstances under which the person sells the gun.”

    It wasn’t immediately clear when that measure would go into effect and how it would be enforced at Virginia gun shows.

    State police Capt. Thomas Turner, commander of the agency’s Criminal Justice Information Systems, which includes the Virginia Firearms Transaction Center, said the department has not yet analyzed Obama’s directive or received orders on how to implement it.

    Turner said he personally interpreted the order to include vendors without a federal firearms license who are “at every gun show” and selling perhaps one or two firearms.

    The vendor is “actually in the business and selling some type of firearm at just about every gun show,” Turner said. “That’s the way I interpreted it, but we’re going to have to wait and see.”
    Sounds like the VSP is chomping at the bit to screen everybody.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    O'bummers order does not apply to locals or citizens.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Sounds more like VSP is following up more on denials, just like we have always wondered why they were not.

    Also that they are eager to pigeon-hole private sellers as being in the business of selling regardless of what the current definition of "being in the business of" actually means.

    There is an IRS ruling defining "in the business of" which requires both a good faith effort to and actually showing a profit, no matter how small. Folks culling their "arsenals" would, of course, like to receive a good price on what they are disposing of, but I fear it's going to take a court case with appeals at least to the Court of Appeals or the Federal District Court of Appeals to get a decent precedent.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,171
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Sounds more like VSP is following up more on denials, just like we have always wondered why they were not.

    Also that they are eager to pigeon-hole private sellers as being in the business of selling regardless of what the current definition of "being in the business of" actually means.

    There is an IRS ruling defining "in the business of" which requires both a good faith effort to and actually showing a profit, no matter how small. Folks culling their "arsenals" would, of course, like to receive a good price on what they are disposing of, but I fear it's going to take a court case with appeals at least to the Court of Appeals or the Federal District Court of Appeals to get a decent precedent.stay safe.
    Especially if the original charge is brought in Henrico.

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by va_tazdad View Post
    Especially if the original charge is brought in Henrico.
    What does this have to do with VSP trying to widen the definition of "dealer" and "in the business of selling firearms"?

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  6. #6
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,735
    Existing law requires only federally licensed dealers to conduct background checks for gun purchasers, but they constitute the large majority of sellers — police estimate 90 percent or more — at gun shows. State police said they do not track the number of private sellers or vendors at such events.
    The state has no authority to track any federal program and for that matter interfere with private sales.

    Of 91 arrests 63 were DV, felony and outstanding warrants leaving 28 arrests for what we don't know why. Of the 28 how many of those were convicted of whatever?

    The article makes clear there is no gun show problem.....

    Also, the VSP were not just standing there monitoring each FFLs. These arrests were FFLs turning the BG in.
    Last edited by color of law; 01-13-2016 at 08:52 AM.

  7. #7
    Accomplished Advocate color of law's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,735
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Sounds more like VSP is following up more on denials, just like we have always wondered why they were not.

    Also that they are eager to pigeon-hole private sellers as being in the business of selling regardless of what the current definition of "being in the business of" actually means.

    There is an IRS ruling defining "in the business of" which requires both a good faith effort to and actually showing a profit, no matter how small. Folks culling their "arsenals" would, of course, like to receive a good price on what they are disposing of, but I fear it's going to take a court case with appeals at least to the Court of Appeals or the Federal District Court of Appeals to get a decent precedent.

    stay safe.
    As for IRS I suggest you read 26 CFR 1.183-2. Out of thousands that claim they are "in the business of" the IRS denies them that status. It is not easy to be in the business of. The IRS will determine you are involved in a hobby and deny you every deduction you claim on your return.

    The definition that will be used is under Title 18.
    18 USC 921 Definitions
    (a)
    (11) The term ‘‘dealer’’ means (A) any person engaged in the business of selling firearms at wholesale or retail, (B) any person engaged in the business of repairing firearms or of making or fitting special barrels, stocks, or trigger mechanisms to firearms, or (C) any person who is a pawnbroker. The term ‘‘licensed dealer’’ means any dealer who is licensed under the provisions of this chapter.

    (21) The term ‘‘engaged in the business’’ means—
    (C) as applied to a dealer in firearms, as defined in section 921(a)(11)(A), 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 term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales, ex-changes, 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;
    (D) as applied to a dealer in firearms, as defined in section 921(a)(11)(B), a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to engaging in such activity as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit, but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional repairs of firearms, or who occasionally fits special barrels, stocks, or trigger mechanisms to firearms;
    Regular course of business is the magic term. If your 8 to 5 job is not dealing in guns you are not in the trade or business.

    Obama is just smoke and mirrors.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •