Moles

[Many Klatch]

I reckon that if I traded the powder for a 6 pack or two of beer then it wouldn't be the same as selling and it would be legal then.

Many Klatch

 

[cowpoke1955]

You can't barter! The government can't tax you then. As others have said, if you're going to something illegal, do it with a friend. Who wants a stranger for a cell mate :rotf: .

 

[paulvallandigham]

As usual, there are more than one question being asked in this one.

There is nothing illegal about several friends pooling their money to place an order for powder, and taking advantage of the quantity discount in price by buying the powder in case lots. Of course, the powder has to be shipped to one location, but that may be the deliveree, who may or may not even be a buyer. As long as the deliveree is not " in the business of selling powder" , ((s)he is not required to be licensed.

What happens if someone wants powder but doesn't get his money to the fellow who ordered it, before the shipment is ordered, or arrives? Again, as long as he has made a committment to buy the powder, and is not otherwise prohibited from owning powder, collecting the money at the time of delivery does not make you a Dealer. You are only recouping money that you, or someone else advanced so that the order could be timely placed.

Should you Sell Powder to a friend or stranger?

NO. And don't think the person they use is going to be a stranger. UNLESS YOU ARE A LICENSED EXPLOSIVE DEALER, WITH LICENSES FROM ATFE, AND YOUR STATE, DON'T SELL POWDER TO ANYONE.

I have a couple of former clients who were arrested, indicted, and prosecuted for possessing explosives, when a " Friend " asked them to make up some firecrackers for his family's 4th of July gathering. The " Friend" had been arrested on drug charges, and to help his own problems, he told the DEA he knew some guys who were making their own fireworks, that were as loud or louder than anything he had ever heard at a fireworks display.

My former clients had been to a trade fair in Wisconsin, where vendors were selling instructions, and the chemicals to make large fireworks. NO one told them they needed a Federal license, and a state license to produce the stuff.

These guys were farm kids growing up in a town of less than 300 people. The family farm property was extensive, and miles from any homes. When they were kids, before 1968, and citizens could buy freely dynamite, their father used to " make noise" on the 4th by lighting off sticks of dynamite in one of his ditches. The stuff they made for their " friend " was about the equivalent to an M-80 firecracker. They bought the chemicals needed over the internet, from one of the dealers that met at the show. Its not illegal to own the chemicals. Its Only illegal to mix them together to make an explosive, unless you are licensed. They bought the chemicals for their own use, to reprise those old 4th of July family celebrations when their Father and Mother were alive, by making their own " Boomers". They exploded them out in the country, and nobody cared. They were responsible, and safe.

Even the Federal Judge was angry at the prosecution in the case, as he believed the law was being misused to prosecute people who were not dangerous criminals. He gave the one brother the minimum sentence the Federal Sentencing Guidelines allows, but it resulted in the man losing his rights to own or possess a firearm.

Are ATFE agents setting people up at shows, and demonstrations? Probably. We had the problem of agents of the Ill. State Police, and the Chicago Police Dept. CAGE taskforce coming downstate to try to set up dealers at gunshows. I was asked to advise.

Apparently, the agent would make a legitimate purchase of a gun or ammo from a dealer, using a " Fake " FOID card( required by the State of Illinois for residents to buy, own and possess guns and ammo, and components.)

Later the same agent would wait until the dealer was busy, come up, pretend to be in a hurry, put money on the table for a box of shells, tell the dealer, " You know me, I bought that ______ from you this morning. I am in a hurry. Keep the change", and leave before the dealer could check his FOID card AGAIN!

If the dealer didn't stop him, the dealer was arrested for this technical violation.

( One dealer was arrested. I don't know if he was convicted. I have a hard time believing any prosecutor would have the courage to take such a case in front of a jury downstate! That is your ultimate defense, BTW. DEMAND A JURY TRIAL, if you believe you are being prosecuted for a technical violation. Juries are not thrilled to find otherwise decent people being prosecuted for paper violations. The public wants Status offense laws to be used to get BAD people off the streets, not catch the good folks.)

My advise to the dealers, ( I knew several at the time) was to put the word out about this scam, and that they should yell loudly for anyone throwing money at them, and walking away with some of their merchandise,

"STOP! THIEF!"

and that the gun show owner and his security should stop and arrest the man, regardless of who he claims to be, for Theft, and confiscate his FOID card. Then turn it over to police if they determine the man is not the person named on the card, or that he falsely obtained the ID card. ( A Felony, BTW.)

Not even the Ill. State Police have the authority under statute to use forged Identification and FOID cards.There is no statutory exception for Law enforcement officers under the Forgery statute. Now, prosecutors don't like prosecuting LEOs, so don't hold your breath waiting for that indictment. It does result in charges against the person they wanted to set up and arrest being dropped, however.

Once the dealers learned from me that they were not helpless to protect themselves, that they could do something( and took my suggestion on what to do), that local law enforcement( almost always present at gun shows, either in uniform, or in plain clothes, as many of the dealers are LE officers, themselves.) would back the dealers, as they had and have no love lost over Federal Agents, the word went around like wildfire. I even heard that my advise was published in someone's newsletter, that went to all dealers, and gun show owners. I got thanks from Dealers I didn't even know when I went to the next few gun shows with a name tag noting the organization I was representing at the time.

To my knowledge, that kind of sting is considered " blown ", and the agencies are no longer doing it.

I suspect that since this particular scam is being openly discussed on this forum, that it will also cease to be used. I hope so.

I don't know anyone in this sport who wants his powder winding up being used by some Nut, subversive, or foreign agent, as a bomb, to hurt and kill fellow Americans. I am sure that is also true of farmers, who buy and store huge quantities of Amonium Nitrate fertilizers, and the Nurseries, and Farm store dealers who sell it to the general public and dealers. I am sure that this is the same feeling gasoline station and fuel oil station owners feel about their products being used as an explosive. They are not in the business of selling explosives.

None of us fell off a turnip truck this morning. We all know how to make bombs, if we need to, and we live in a free country where we accept that risk, believing that criminals and enemies have a much larger problem in figuring out how to keep their activities a secret from other Americans who would report them to authorities in a heartbeat.

The Security of this country CANNOT rely on government agents poking around and watching everyone. We don't want to afford enough government agents to make that possible. We would not be free as a people if we did allow the government to spend our tax dollars hiring all those agents.

Instead, we all understand that our security is a flip side of our freedoms, that freedom comes at a high price, that we are our own government, and have to take responsibility every day, to watch out for ourselves, and each other. We are, as Lincoln said, a Government OF the people, By the people, and FOR the people.

This is the same issue involved in asking citizens to carry firearms for their own protection and to protect the community. There are old world thinkers who believe this is an invitation to total anarchy, and disaster, and are horrified at the thought that the person next to them might be carrying a gun. There are others, thankfully, who believe this is a God Given right, and responsibility, protected from restriction by the Second Amendment to our Constitution.

I don't believe that the 1968 Gun Control Act has prevented any bombing in this country, nor has it reduced availability of guns to criminals. It is a bad joke and a cruel hoax on the non-gun owning public, who were told that they would be safer now that the Federal laws prohibited people from buying guns, ammo, and explosives through the mails. When Reagan signed the law repealing the 68 Act's prohibitions against Ammo sales, and requirements for record keeping of ammo sales, the Chicken Little crowd could be heard squawking all over the MainStream Media, and surely crime was going to occur all over our country and blood would be flowing in the gutters of our streets.

Nothing happened. The Chicken Little crowd does Not understand the issue, or the American People. They are foreigners in their thinking in their own country.

They didn't understand criminals, who don't walk into retail gun shops to buy their ammo any more than they buy guns from retail shops. Why pay retail when you can steal a gun, or " borrow" a gun when you need it to rob someone? And why pay retail for ammo, when you have no intention of practicing, and only need enough ammo to load the gun you have? There was before, and remains, a large enough " Black Market " for ammo and guns that criminals have never worried about government restrictions on possessing or buying firearms.

Criminals don't frequent gun shows. There are always too many cops present. Criminals are not worried about being arrested for the crimes they are PLANNING TO COMMIT tomorrow, or in the future: No, they are worried about being arrested for the crimes they did last NIGHT!

I have several former clients who occasionally call me to check to see if there is an outstanding warrant for them. The last time it happened, some man in a suit visited his home and left his card. If it was a summons for a civil suit, he didn't care. But if it was a warrant, he wanted to know how much money he needed to post bond before he dealt with it. He was greatly relieved that there were no warrants, or civil suits pending against him. He later called to tell me that it was an investigator, but that the guy was doing a background check on a neighbor my guy didn't know.
I had a cautionary talk with him, of course, about getting out of the business, so he didn't have to worry about visits from police officers at all times of the day and night. He told me I was right, of course, but then told me he was getting too old for the business, and it was time for him to retire. He was already working legitimately for a contractor, so he really didn't need the other problems.

I hope this information helps, here. If I were going to act as the deliveree of a case of powder for a group of buyers, I would maintain a list of people who had given me money, or who owed me money for the powder. My club insists on the money being paid up front, or you don't get powder. I think that is a good rule to follow. That way, you have cancelled checks verifying that the guy who gets the powder paid for it, and you merely acted as the receiver of the shipment, as his agent. Of course, the cost of the powder may be a bit more, or less than what you asked them to pay, so You need to decide up front how you are going to collect or return the difference. Don't be making a profit from a "sale", to avoid being charged with sales tax violations, or even income tax violations!

The law is suppose to be tool we use to govern ourselves, not a ****ytrap for the unwary. If you think a law hems you in, ask me, as part of my training is in how to work with the law, and around it, in some cases, to allow people to engage in legal activities. I don't have a solution for every legal problem. There are some BAD LAWS written out there. But, I even surprise myself sometimes when I help someone live with a law that they thought denied them the right to do something they had always done.

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

Thanks for posting that Paul, good information and advice.
:thumbsup:

 

[renovato]

Selling your guns is completely legal in the states I do shows in. However, a lot of folks at the shows buy guns at estate sales, auctions, classified ads, etc., and resell them at the shows without an FFL. This is illegal but very hard to prove they were bought specifically for the purpose of resale. However if the ATF witnesses you buy a gun then turn right around and resell it, they can arrest you for dealing in firearms without a license.

Usually they use a cheap gun such as an SKS for $75-80 and later on someone else comes around trying to buy it for $250-300. If greed prevails, the dealer goes out the door in handcuffs. I've see it happen. If a level head prevails, you end up with a nice piece for your collection, or to sell a few shows later, legally.

I guess that's the parallel I was trying to draw with my original post. I'm sure it's probably legal to split an order of black powder with buddies, or to sell some to a friend at cost, or whatever. But if they can prove that you have bought "with the intention to resell without a license", there could be trouble. I don't put it past the ATF to do that since they're doing something very similar at gun shows.

 

[Claude Mathis]

There is nothing illegal about several friends pooling their money to place an order for powder, and taking advantage of the quantity discount in price by buying the powder in case lots. Of course, the powder has to be shipped to one location, but that may be the deliveree, who may or may not even be a buyer. As long as the deliveree is not " in the business of selling powder" , ((s)he is not required to be licensed.

What happens if someone wants powder but doesn't get his money to the fellow who ordered it, before the shipment is ordered, or arrives? Again, as long as he has made a committment to buy the powder, and is not otherwise prohibited from owning powder, collecting the money at the time of delivery does not make you a Dealer. You are only recouping money that you, or someone else advanced so that the order could be timely placed.

Should you Sell Powder to a friend or stranger?

NO.

Okay, so hypothetically... I order 25 lbs. of powder. Six months later, my friend says he needs a couple pounds. I remind him that we "made an agreement" 6 months ago to go in on some powder. He says, "Oh yeah, I think I remember that now - I forgot to give you the money". I collect the money for the two pounds he forgot he agreed to buy 6 months ago. It's all perfectly legal, right? Hypothetically. :haha:

 

[laufer]

...
By this time a large crowd of upset people are gathering around the two. A guy is on his hidden phone calling the local newspaper. 5 people are taking pictures of the incident on their period cameras. 147 people are taking pictures on their non-period digital cameras...
...

:rotf: :rotf:

 

[ApprenticeBuilder]

Yes, Thanks Paul

My club insists on the money being paid up front, or you don't get powder.

This is how our club does it as well.

 

[bucktales]

Okay, so hypothetically... I order 25 lbs. of powder. Six months later, my friend says he needs a couple pounds. I remind him that we "made an agreement" 6 months ago to go in on some powder. He says, "Oh yeah, I think I remember that now - I forgot to give you the money". I collect the money for the two pounds he forgot he agreed to buy 6 months ago. It's all perfectly legal, right? Hypothetically. :haha:

That made me think of another "What If ?" scenario.
Supposin you place a bulk order of powder for that same group of shooting buddies. You pay with your credit card with your name on the invoice and shipping address. You then get the powder and distribute it to your shooting buddies and they pay you, would that be a cause for distress with the feds?
Would that make the guy who placed the order a "distributor" ?
I realize a lot of folks and club members do that to save money,but I can see how all this can get messy when it comes down to hair splitting and who puts what kind of spin on it.

 

[Zonie]

You might re-read paulvallandigham's post.
I thought he covered that scenario there when he said:
"...There is nothing illegal about several friends pooling their money to place an order for powder, and taking advantage of the quantity discount in price by buying the powder in case lots. Of course, the powder has to be shipped to one location, but that may be the deliveree, who may or may not even be a buyer. As long as the deliveree is not " in the business of selling powder" , ((s)he is not required to be licensed..."

 

[bucktales]

I read that, but my point is how it can be interpreted and who can put the "distributor in the business of" tag on it.

As previously posted, be careful. Especially with a changing political climate.

 

[roundball]

You might re-read paulvallandigham's post.
I thought he covered that scenario there when he said:
"...There is nothing illegal about several friends pooling their money to place an order for powder, and taking advantage of the quantity discount in price by buying the powder in case lots. Of course, the powder has to be shipped to one location, but that may be the deliveree, who may or may not even be a buyer. As long as the deliveree is not " in the business of selling powder" , ((s)he is not required to be licensed..."

Really just speculation...unless there's an ATF mole on the forum heavily steeped in ATF regs, no one else here can speak with any certainty at all on any of this Federal...particularly when dealing with products the Feds classify as explosives, considering the world we live in today.
Until I see it plainly written in the ATF regs, I'll consider it unlawful for me to sell a can to somebody else.

 

[colmoultrie]

I've read a lot of your posts on the forum, Paul, but this is probably the most informative and interesting I've run across. Thank you.
:hatsoff:

 

[paulvallandigham]

Keep your written list. Hypothetically speaking. :wink:

 

[paulvallandigham]

Same answer I have given to Claude. Keep your written list, Hypothetically speaking. And, get the money from them first, Then order. No money, No powder. You are not a distributor or dealers, meting out each person's share of the order, and completing your responsibility to a principal as his agent. You are only acting as his agent, to receive the order in his place. The giving of money to pay for the powder is how an agency relationship is created between the actual buyer and you. YOu may not knowingly act as an agent for someone who cannot legally purchase or possess the powder himself. In some states, there are separate State Law requirements that need to be satisfied when acquiring powder, or ammo for another person. In my state, Illinois, for instance, an Illinois resident must have a valid Firearms Owner's Identification Card in his possession to possess powder, ammo, and guns, of any type. I understand that Massachusetts is similar in its state laws. Other states only require that you get a permit to purchase a firearm, like New York, and, I believe, Michigan, as regards handguns. I am sure that residents of those states will correct me if my understandings are incorrect.

There is nothing in the law that prohibits using agents, employees, etc. to receive shipments and good on your behalf. The law of Agency has NOT been suspended by the Congress. If it wanted to do so, It could have written the laws to be that strict. The fact that Congress did not prohibit receiving powder through an agent indicates it was NOT the legislative Intent of the Congress to do so. That is a " Rule of Construction " adopted by our Courts over many years to give the plain meaning to laws passed by the Legislative Branch.

 

[mykeal]

Other states only require that you get a permit to purchase a firearm, like New York, and, I believe, Michigan, as regards handguns. I am sure that residents of those states will correct me if my understandings are incorrect.

Paul,

Not quite sure how you meant that. Michigan does require a purchase permit for a modern handgun, but there are no restrictions (except for age) on the purchase of black powder beyond the Federal regulations. There are bulk storage requirements contained in the construction codes.

 

[Old Charlie]

I put nothing past the ATF Just look at the Randy Weaver case. The mole begged Randy to saw the barrel off a shotgun. He said no. That should have been the end of it, but the guy kept begging him, until he gave in and cut it.
To me that is entrapment. When weaver said no he was trying to obey the law.
Then the dirty *******s kill his wife and son. The SOB that pulled the trigger should have been tried for murder.
The government can do anything they want to you. So be very careful who you put in charge of your government. remember the democraps were in power when this travesty took place.
Old Charlie

 

[Stophel]

Lon Horiuchi is still at large.

They are going to do what they want to do. Law or no law.

 

[Eric/WV]

In my opinion, if a BATF agent approached you and offered to buy the powder....he would be guilty of "entrapment". It is unlawful for a law enforcement officer to plant the "criminal idea" in one's mind. It would be different if you approached him and tried to sell him some powder without him asking first.

 

[longshot47]

In my opinion, if a BATF agent approached you and offered to buy the powder....he would be guilty of "entrapment". It is unlawful for a law enforcement officer to plant the "criminal idea" in one's mind. It would be different if you approached him and tried to sell him some powder without him asking first.

Eric is on point to the original question. One must be 'pre-disposed' to commit the crime, or you [enforcement] enter the land of entrapment. Thats not to say you [target] could'nt be charged, but on a level field you should, by law, prevail.