The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 5, 2013, 01:22 AM   #1
lamarw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2010
Location: Lake Martin, AL
Posts: 1,897
Unreported Income

This is just a guess on my part since it is so prevalent in our current society. I could also use the example of cutting and deliverying firewood. Is this possliby the reason some gun sellers do not want to go through a background check procedure? There will be a tracable income record?

Is there so much untaxed reveune on some seller's parts that will have them garner sells to any private party without a Federal Firearms License? If so, these sellers should have a FFL

I am sorry guys, but I worked to dang many years of my life and paid income taxes to feel sorry for some broker looking for a loop hole to hide their income.

If so, I think this goes way beyound gun control and more to tax evasion.

Why in the heck jeopardise my firearm rights with your illegal tax evasion scheme?
lamarw is online now  
Old February 5, 2013, 01:28 AM   #2
BarryLee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 29, 2010
Location: The ATL (OTP)
Posts: 2,791
Quote:
Why in the heck jeopardise my firearm rights with your illegal tax evasion scheme?
I suppose that could be a little bit of it. However, the big thing is the major inconvenience and expense for law abiding citizens and the fact the criminals will just ignore the system. The only way to even come close to making it work is to have a national registry of all firearms and I know we don’t want that.
__________________
A major source of objection to a free economy is precisely that it ... gives people what they want instead of what a particular group thinks they ought to want. Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
- Milton Friedman
BarryLee is offline  
Old February 5, 2013, 02:32 AM   #3
NWPilgrim
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 29, 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 2,153
Not reporting income has nothing to do with wanting to keep firearms transaction between individuals private, that is not reporting to the govt.

For one thing, background checks do not prevent crime and some reports state there have nearly zero prosecutions for failed background checks. So the entire premise of background checks somehow making anyone safer is a fallacy. Criminals usually steal guns or trade for guns amongst themselves so they would never be affected by background checks. This was true even before background checks were mandated for FFLs. Do you really think a criminal wants to pay full retail for a gun he is likely to throw away after his next use?

Secondly, background checks cost money. They are run through your state's law enforcement branch and cost at least $10 each time. Not a huge amount but it is $10 flushed down the toilet for no good purpose.

Background checks are a burden to the law-abiding, have no effect on safety, and create a tempting data source for govt to abuse its role and retain that data in lieu of an outright registry.
__________________
"The ultimate authority ... resides in the people alone. ... The advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation ... forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition."
- James Madison
NWPilgrim is offline  
Old February 5, 2013, 10:42 AM   #4
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Unreported income for dealers? Seriously, lamarw....

An FFL dealer does not have the legal option NOT to conduct the check. He is required to use the 4473 and NICS.

A private seller, so far as I know, does not need to report the sale of personal property that is not used as part of a business. For the most part, I suspect private sellers often as not sell at a loss, in any case.

Edit: Speaking of "jeopardizing my rights," I have noticed a general pattern that this go-around, shooters who like EBRs and higher capacity magazines are looking at background checks as a sacrifice fly to protect their own interests.

We need to stand together as gun owners and refuse a renewed AWB, capacity ban, and background checks.
MLeake is offline  
Old February 5, 2013, 10:59 AM   #5
Vanya
Staff
 
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 4,029
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLeake
Edit: Speaking of "jeopardizing my rights," I have noticed a general pattern that this go-around, shooters who like EBRs and higher capacity magazines are looking at background checks as a sacrifice fly to protect their own interests.

We need to stand together as gun owners and refuse a renewed AWB, capacity ban, and background checks.
A very good point. In the long run, a strategy of "divide and conquer" always wins, but only if people allow themselves to be divided from one another.

"We must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately." (Benjamin Franklin did say this, and he was right.)
__________________
"Once the writer in every individual comes to life (and that time is not far off), we are in for an age of universal deafness and lack of understanding."
(Milan Kundera, Book of Laughter and Forgetting, 1980)
Vanya is offline  
Old February 5, 2013, 11:26 AM   #6
hogdogs
Staff In Memoriam
 
Join Date: October 31, 2007
Location: Western Florida panhandle
Posts: 11,069
Not at all an issue for me as buyer or seller... I am of the ilk that prefers to have less hoops to jump thru and money to spend as well as not minding owning a few arms that are just like my TV set... NOT REGISTERED...

Brent
hogdogs is offline  
Old February 5, 2013, 12:29 PM   #7
Frank Ettin
Staff
 
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 6,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLeake
...A private seller, so far as I know, does not need to report the sale of personal property that is not used as part of a business. For the most part, I suspect private sellers often as not sell at a loss, in any case...
Selling at a loss is one thing. But it you sell something at a profit, that profit can still be taxable income.

It's probably true that casual sales of personal property at a profit don't get reported, and in general the amounts involved are probably trivial enough not to attract any attention.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper
Frank Ettin is offline  
Old February 5, 2013, 12:33 PM   #8
hogdogs
Staff In Memoriam
 
Join Date: October 31, 2007
Location: Western Florida panhandle
Posts: 11,069
Isn't there a minimum price of sale that must be met before reporting is even required???

And isn't this, between private parties, on a "per transaction" type schedule???

Brent
hogdogs is offline  
Old February 5, 2013, 12:35 PM   #9
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Frank Ettin, I suspect you are right, but I can't remember the last thing I sold at a profit.
MLeake is offline  
Old February 5, 2013, 12:53 PM   #10
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,630
It runs deeper than the matter of income. If I want to give a gun as a gift, I'd have to do the check. If I inherit, pass down, or loan a gun, I'd also have to do the check.

The opposition is to a measure that's overbearing and ineffective.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old February 5, 2013, 04:35 PM   #11
lcpiper
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 15, 2011
Posts: 1,405
I still stand by my earliest comments.

1st This is not what the Federal Government is empowered to do.
2nd They don't work anyway.
3rd They can't work without becoming a registration process.
and ....

4th The effort trying to shove this down our throats, and us trying to fight it, is just getting in the way of figuring out what the cause of the actual problem is.
__________________
Colt M1911, AR-15 | S&W Model 19, Model 27| SIG P238 | Berreta 85B Cheetah | Ruger Blackhawk .357MAG, Bearcat "Shopkeeper" .22LR| Remington Marine Magnum SP 12GA., Model 700 SPS .223
lcpiper is offline  
Old February 5, 2013, 05:40 PM   #12
Webleymkv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 9,945
My reasons for opposing Universal Background Checks have nothing to do with money. The majority of the time that I sell a firearm, I do so on consignment through an FFL and thus pay a commission equal to or greater than the income or capital gains tax that I'd be charged on the profit anyway. I do this because I feel that it's my personal responsibility to do everything I reasonably can to ensure that I don't sell a firearm to a prohibited person and consigning through an FFL is usually the easiest way to do this.

That being said, attempting to legislate personal responsibility almost never works well. Said legislation is usually either toothless and unenforceable (a straw purchase, for example, can be an incredibly difficult thing to prove) or the measures needed to make it enforceable are so repressive as to become unintended consequences in and of themselves.

In the case of Universal Background Checks, there is simply no way to make such a system work without registration of guns, gun owners, or both. While Universal Background Checks on its face might not seem so unreasonable, registration is a Pandora's box in and of itself. Probably the most obvious example of why registration is a bad idea is the recent debacle with The Journal News in New York. A database of lawful gun owners simply makes it all the easier for unscrupulous journalists to identify and attempt to intimidate them.

The second, and most compelling, reason that registration is a bad idea is that it facilitates gun confiscation by over zealous officials in a time of disaster such as what we saw in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005. While that measure was later ruled illegal and several states and the federal gov't later took legislative action to ensure it would not be repeated, it still took many people years to recover their property if ever recovered at all. In spite of the subsequent court rulings and laws, if some bureaucrat decides to ignore the law and try this again, a person's only recourse will be through the courts and that cannot help them when cops and/or soldiers are demanding their firearms right then and there.

Finally, I resent the notion that I should somehow be held responsible for the illegal actions of someone else. If we actually punished crime and treated mental illness appropriately, background checks in general would be unnecessary. I for one am not asking how we can keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the dangerously mentally ill because the answer to that question seems pretty obvious to me. The real question we should be asking is why, if someone is too dangerous to be trusted with a firearm due to a crime they committed or a mental illness, are we letting such a person back into society at all? While I certainly wouldn't trust a convicted murderer or rapist with a firearm, I wouldn't trust such a person with an automobile, knife, can of gasoline, or aggressive dog either. Such people have proven themselves either unable or unwilling to function in a civilized society and the only way to effectively eliminate the danger they represent is to remove them from society through incarceration or, if the crime is severe enough, capital punishment.
__________________
Smith, and Wesson, and Me. -H. Callahan
Well waddaya know, one buwwet weft! -E. Fudd
All bad precedents begin as justifiable measures. -J. Caesar
Webleymkv is offline  
Old February 6, 2013, 10:16 PM   #13
Levant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 5, 2008
Posts: 182
Quote:
If so, I think this goes way beyound gun control and more to tax evasion.

Why in the heck jeopardise my firearm rights with your illegal tax evasion scheme?
Interesting viewpoint. Use tax laws to control guns. You have a real future ahead of you in the gun control lobby.

A private sale background check, presumably, wouldn't tell anything about who the seller is, only the buyer. And, if it is like current FFL checks, wouldn't tell what kind of gun the buyer bought and it doesn't tell what he paid for it.
Levant is offline  
Old February 7, 2013, 07:22 PM   #14
Uncle Buck
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 21, 2009
Location: West Central Missouri
Posts: 2,565
I am not understanding how a background check relates to income. I do not believe they have to record the amount it sold for anywhere on the form nor do they have to report it to the NICS folks.
__________________
Inside Every Bright Idea Is The 50% Probability Of A Disaster Waiting To Happen.
Uncle Buck is offline  
Old February 8, 2013, 06:58 AM   #15
Hal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 1998
Location: Ohio USA
Posts: 7,445
Quote:
4th The effort trying to shove this down our throats, and us trying to fight it, is just getting in the way of figuring out what the cause of the actual problem is
Amen....

I have grandchildren in elementry school.
I want them safe just as bad as the most diehard anti gun person want's their kids safe.

All this crap over blaming the guns instead of looking for the why doen't do anything to address the root cause.
Hal is offline  
Old February 8, 2013, 07:13 AM   #16
1911Tuner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 17, 2004
Location: NC Piedmont/Foothills
Posts: 605
re:

Quote:
in general the amounts involved are probably trivial enough not to attract any attention.
This. The IRS isn't going to pursue you if you happen to get lucky and make 50 bucks on a gun that you bought 5 years ago, if it's even discovered.

As Hyman Roth noted: "He's small potatoes."
__________________
If your front porch collapses and kills more than three dogs...You just might be a redneck
1911Tuner is offline  
Old February 8, 2013, 07:20 AM   #17
Kreyzhorse
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2006
Location: NKY
Posts: 11,518
Quote:
If so, I think this goes way beyound gun control and more to tax evasion.
I understand your thought process, but the current climate has nothing to do with tax evasion. The current climate is simply people who do not want you to own guns using Sandy Hook as a spring board to attempt to take then.
__________________
"He who laughs last, laughs dead." Homer Simpson
Kreyzhorse is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.11173 seconds with 9 queries