PLA spools can be as cheap as $15 per kilo. There is pretty minimal waste when printing (depending on how much support is needed for the print), so the material cost is pretty low. Printing that may lowers would take a ton of time tough. Since he had no intention of using them, he could have used a reduced number of walls with minimal infill which would have helped to reduce print time, but printing all those on a single small printer would still take quite a few days.
Is it making a profit if you've done this with the ultimate goal of exposing the farcical nature of gun buybacks? I have no idea to be honest.
I don't think so. "Manufacturing" with the intent to surrender the firearms to the government doesn't fit within the meaning of "engaged in the business." "The term 'engaged in the business' means . . . as applied to a manufacturer of firearms, a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to manufacturing firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the sale or distribution of the firearms manufactured . . . ." 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(21)(A). Since he neither "sold" nor "distributed" the firearms, he cannot be "engaged in the business."Originally Posted by RevolverRob
I would be more concerned about the NY statute prohibiting possession of an unfinished frame or a ghost gun.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Any legal information I may post is general information, and is not legal advice. Such information may or may not apply to your specific situation. I am not your attorney unless an attorney-client relationship is separately and privately established.
NY should be estopped from enforcing any of their statues because the solicitation for the buyback said "no questions asked."
Not questioning your reasoning, but curious: do you think this would still apply if he was pulled over and searched while still 4 hours away from the buyback?
Also, I completely agree with your reasoning re: engaging in business. However, playing devil's advocate, would this change if he could be shown to have sold multiple dozen 3D printed receivers at 5 of the last 5 buybacks within a 6 hour drive?
It should, but it might be trickier to establish. This used to be an issue in D.C., which required firearm registration applicants to take their unregistered firearm to MPD headquarters to register it. I always advised people to send an email to MPD regarding their intent to register so they would have documentation. I often do the same thing when shooing USPSA matches in Maryland (send an email to the MD) so that I have evidence that I am travelling to a match (which is an exception there for transporting a handgun).
I don't think so (at least not in a case of first impression). At the very least the terms "sale" and "distribution" don't clearly apply to surrendering firearms to the government. I think a criminal defendant would have a strong lenity claim if the statute was going to be enforced in that manner without any type of rulemaking clarifying those terms.
This is not legal advice and no attorney-client relationship is expressed or implied by this post. (Bill, I know you know this, but I get worried about applying law to facts on a public post without a disclaimer).
All your fancy posts sure do make it seem like the quality of legal services you perform are greater than the legal services performed by other lawyers....
Isn't... that the very definition that changed four months ago?
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-...bill/2938/text
The definition that changed a few months ago was the part about making a profit. The intent is to make it easier to prosecute people who regularly sell from their “personal collection” at gun shows who are in fact engaging in business and should obtain FFL’s. The requirements of sale or disposition do not appear changed in a manner that would include surrendering the guns to the government.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Any legal information I may post is general information, and is not legal advice. Such information may or may not apply to your specific situation. I am not your attorney unless an attorney-client relationship is separately and privately established.
Reply With Quote