Rustmeister points to Josh Sugarman calling out gun bloggers for publishing the information on his federal firearms license:
“The bloggers put my phone number out there, and people have been calling to ask how much I’ll charge to transfer guns,” Sugarman says.
Come on Josh! It’s a good business opportunity. It’ll certainly work out far better for you than what you’ve been doing. Look at who your competition is. You already have a far more widely recognized name than those other guys. We’ll even be happy to do some free bloggy marketing for you. We can hook you up.
In fact, as a professional software and web developer who already has work setting up gun dealers on the web, I would gladly donate my time to build Josh a web site where he could sell his wares.
My question is if he has not been selling firearms, how can he keep his license?
I would assume as long as he pays the license fees.
I thought the ATF shut down people years ago who had FFLs as part-time “kitchen table” dealers who had them for acquisition rather than sales purposes. If they weren’t selling guns from a storefront or as a means of steady income, they lost the license. If I understand it correctly, that crackdown on such dealers reduced the number of FFLs in circulation dramatically.
So can someone explain to me why Josh Sugarmann is special? You wouldn’t hold an FFL01 for a “research project” unless he’s repairing guns for the anti-gunners as a going concern. You don’t need an FFL at all for personal gun making (outside of Title 2 weapons) or personal gunsmithing.
(D.C. Police Chief Cathy Lanier recently told WTOP there were 36,000 handguns registered in the city before the gun ban and police don’t know where most of them are.)
For some reason I find that hilarious…
My FFL holder stays busy on word of mouth alone. I would think Josh would appreciate the help.
Baby.
JoAT: I find the confusion in LE circles, um, heartening.
Just think of the untapped market and money he could make! Hell of a lucrative business, these days in DC…