I98ster said:
Im the OP on this thread. Although the ultimate intent was for my friend to ultimately own the pistol, his relative maintained possession of the pistol UNTIL the proper paperwork could be filled out in NY.
The way he sees it (and I tend to agree), is that the relative purchased and possessed it legally, and then when the paperwork was complete in NY and was sent via FFL, that to was a legal transaction.
In fact, the way I see it, every step of the way was legal. It cannot be determined from a legal standpoint the mindset of the relative for the original purchase. All steps in the process were legal. The relative knew that he was going to transfer it legally, so my friends arguement was that it was NOT a straw purchase.
What say you???
I say it was a straw purchaser. And the mindset of the relative has been clearly established by your statements. Your friend was in a state where he could not legally purchase a handgun, so he asked a relative to make the purchase for him.
End of discussion. Straw purchase.
Your friend could have given the shop the money (or a down payment), returned to NY to complete the paperwork, then had his NY FFL send a copy of his license to the shop in NC and everything would have been squeaky clean.
Out of curiosity, did the relative in NC make the purchase with his own money, or did your friend provide the funds to buy the firearm?
I98ster said:
However, what I am interested in is if given this exact situation, can anyone get in trouble? Remeber, the gun was purchased legal and transfered to NY legal. A straw purchase is illegal. That means someone can be in trouble with the law if they perform such an act. Since the relative purchased it legal and transfered it to my friend legally, nobody can be in trouble. So, how is this a straw purchase?
You have it backwards. You are arguing that the purchase was legal, therefore it was not a straw purchase and therefore it wasn't illegal. The facts are, the purchase was NOT legal, because the NC relative was NOT purchasing the gun for himself he was purchasing it for someone who could not legally buy it in NC. So your premise that "the gun was purchased legal" is factually incorrect.
I98ster said:
Playing devils advocate again, what is the difference between the relative buying it for himself, having a change of heart 15 minutes later, and selling it to someone who can lawfully own a pistol versus what actually happened here?
There are two differences.
First, if the NC relative buys the gun for himself, he is not perjuring himself when he checks "Yes" on the 4473 saying he is the actual purchaser.
Second, the NC relative is not buying the gun for someone else, so it isn't a straw purchase.
Again, just for clarity -- when the initial purchase was made in NC, whose money was handed to the gun shop? The answer to this doesn't ultimately affect the legality of the overall transaction, but it would be indicative of "intent." Did the NC relative buy the gun with his own money and then sell it to your friend in NY, or did the NY friend provide the funds for the initial purchase?