Unbelievable VPC hypocrisy--Help ensure VPC's shambolic FFL renewal is DENIED

Status
Not open for further replies.
I was giving this some thought and while the immediate reaction is to cry foul about how VPC actions run afoul of the current regulations, would it be better to take a shot at the regulations and how they are too restrictive and we should return to the regulations that would allow anyone who’s not a felon get an ffl?
 
I also emailed Bob Goodlatte (R-VA-6th District) and Sen. Webb since I go to school down here
 
Emails sent to my representatives who signed the brief with a slightly altered text as rkh wrote.

Sen. Mike Crapo
Sen. Larry Craig
Rep. Bill Sali

I will be getting letter and email responses whenever they send them.
 
I spoke with the BATFE this morning. The lady at the DC office looked it up, paused, and said, "let me transfer you to the National office."

I spoke with a receptionist there who was very nice. I told her what I knew and asked when the last inspection of Mr. Sugarmann's business was. Turns out it was 02/14/2002. I asked her why there hadn't been a more recent one, and she said that a) it WAS odd, and b) she didn't know.

I'm awaiting a call back from her superior, Sharon Brooks.

All voicemail boxes at the VPC are full, and they are not answering their phones.
 
that link to huffpo doesn't go anywhere. Did they delete it, or am I missing something?
 
His nonprofit organization is listed as the business address for his FFL.
That's pretty involved.
Especially as that address may (currently being investigated) not be zoned for business.
Consider also: the local CLEO must be notified that a firearms business is operated at that location. That makes the local CLEO at least questionable in this increasingly dubious operation.

That's NOT involved. I have several organizations that use my office address. That's because I donate office space, labor, resources etc. to one charity, own more than one business, and receive mail for a few clients who do not have an office and for whom I provide management services. I'm considering getting an FFL and using the same location. The charity would have no involvement with the FFL but would share the same address.

I'm not defending the guy in question. I simply stated that I don't see how the nonprofit organization has violated any rules. It's a separate entity.
 
I just received an reply from Sen. Feingold. I was expecting a vague, ambiguous reply, but I think this sets a new low.

Dear Mr. Licht,

Thank you for contacting me. I appreciate hearing your thoughts on issues of importance to you.

Since 1993, I have received hundreds of thousands of calls, letters and e-mails from the people of Wisconsin. I have also met with many Wisconsin residents in the state and in Washington, D.C., to discuss a wide variety of important issues. Also, I continue to hold listening sessions in each of Wisconsin's 72 counties every year. It is the valuable comments and suggestions that Wisconsinites provide that enable me to better serve our state.

Thanks again for contacting me. I hope you will not hesitate to alert me to your views about any issue of concern to you in the future.


Sincerely,

Russell D. Feingold
United States Senator
 
keeleon

Howdy. I haven't had any problem with the link. I just tried it again. A OK.

Still haven't heard a peep in response to this Sugarman issue, although Kelli is starting to come a little unglued. We're all "sick", again.

Yawn. :rolleyes:

Oh, I sent Tucker Carlson (MSNBC) an email about Sugarman, including a link to this thread. Tucker is totally against any form of gun control.
 
I just filed an IRS form 3949-A reporting VPC's tax fraud.

That should get the IRS' attention.
We'll see how the bean counters handle Sugarmann's operation of a firearms business
from the VPC's "charitable" tax exempt headquarters.

In addition to the scenario that a previous poster brought up, many charitable organizations have sales businesses associated with them to fund the organization. In many regards, having an FFL is little different than having a sales tax permit and town business license- it's only a license to buy and sell guns.
 
charitable organizations can legally have a for-profit segment, as long as it pays its taxes.
 
Which further begs the question: why does the head of that particular organization have an FFL not linked to that organization? With the BATFE long cracking down on anyone who has an FFL without an actual brick-and-mortar posted-hours for-profit business, why would someone devoted to opposing such business have exactly such a license without such a business in the one city which has practically no demand & allowance for such business?

As explained earlier in this thread, he has the FFL to get onto the ATF's mailing list for the same reason that THR members subscribe to the Brady Campaign's email list - to know the enemy.

You guys are trying to have it both ways. You argue that his FFL is invalid because he doesn't sell guns and that his tax-exempt status is invalid because of the profit he makes selling guns. The first is clearly true; the second is clearly not.
 
His tax exempt status is invalid because the VPC is an "action organization" and tries to "influence legislation" as one of it's main activities.
 
I just received an reply from Sen. Feingold. I was expecting a vague, ambiguous reply, but I think this sets a new low

Yeah,I think this gets the gold for ambiguousness without a serious contender in sight.
And just when we were starting to think there was hope for Russ.
 
A Quick Word About THR............

...............and all of you. Due to your contributions here, THR has been invaluable in our internet fight for "truth, justice, and the American way";), against the anti-rights crowd. THR is like a bottomless well of factual, verifiable information, firearms knowledge, and opinions from both sides of the aisle.

THR is our sledge-hammer.

Thanks
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top