Straw purchase??

[JohnKSa]

...but I respectfully stand by my position that saying the only situation that constitutes a straw purchase is a purchase from an FFL and involving falsifying answers on the Form 4473 is to ignore other types of prohibited transfers...

It's not ignoring them, it's just saying that they are prohibited under a different law.

The fact that you can't be ticketed for speeding if you run a red light doesn't mean that anyone is ignoring the violation of running the red light. It just means that running a red light is not a speeding violation. So even though you can't be ticketed for speeding when you run a red light you CAN be (and will be if observed by an LEO) ticketed for running a red light when you run a red light.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

If I am a prohibited person in a state where face-to-face sales are legal, I can find some private party selling a firearm and I can buy it directly from him, using my own money, and just lie to him and tell him I am not prohibited. Not a straw purchase, but highly unlawful nonetheless.

Or ... I can send my wife/mother/girlfriend/brother over to make the buy for me, using my money. As soon as my wife/mother/girlfriend/brother gets home with the firearm, he/she hands it to me. No 4473, no making of false statements under oath. The original purchase was illegal (I think) because my wife/mother/girlfriend/brother used MY money to make the buy, even though he/she isn't a prohibited person. Subsequently transferring the firearm to me is certainly illegal. Are you all SERIOUSLY saying this isn't a straw purchase?

And then we might have the exact same scenario as directly above, except that I am NOT a prohibited person. Maybe I'm ill, or busy, so I send my wife/mother/girlfriend/brother over with MY money to make the buy for me. Private seller, no 4473 involved. He/she isn't prohibited, I am not prohibited, but he/she used MY money to buy the firearm for me -- not as a gift to me, but acting in my stead using my money. I respectfully submit that if you call your local BATFE field office and ask, they'll tell you this is a straw purchase.

 

[JohnKSa]

Not a straw purchase, but highly unlawful nonetheless.

Correct and correct. It's unlawful because you are disqualified from owning the firearm. The seller will not be culpable unless he has reason to believe you are disqualified, but you will be in violation of the law.

The original purchase was illegal (I think) because my wife/mother/girlfriend/brother used MY money to make the buy, even though he/she isn't a prohibited person.

The original purchase was not illegal because no laws were broken.

Subsequently transferring the firearm to me is certainly illegal.

That is correct.

Are you all SERIOUSLY saying this isn't a straw purchase?

If the purchaser didn't fill out a 4473 stating that they are the actual purchaser then they haven't broken any laws until they transfer the firearm to you illegally. That transfer is illegal because they know you are a disqualified person.

I respectfully submit that if you call your local BATFE field office and ask, they'll tell you this is a straw purchase.

Unless the gun was purchased from an FFL or the transaction took place across state lines, or the firearm is one that is specially regulated (NFA item) or the purchaser is a disqualified person then the BATF will tell you that they have no jurisdiction because they enforce federal laws and there were no federal laws broken.

A thing is illegal because there are laws against it. A law enforcement organization enforces laws that pertain to its jurisdiction.

If a firearm transaction takes place between a non-dealer seller and a non-dealer purchaser both residing in the same state and the firearm is a legal firearm not specially regulated by federal law and if the purchaser is a qualified person then there are no federal laws broken and therefore the BATF doesn't have jurisdiction.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...I can send my wife/mother/girlfriend/brother over to make the buy for me, using my money. As soon as my wife/mother/girlfriend/brother gets home with the firearm, he/she hands it to me. No 4473, no making of false statements under oath. The original purchase was illegal (I think) because my wife/mother/girlfriend/brother used MY money to make the buy, even though he/she isn't a prohibited person. Subsequently transferring the firearm to me is certainly illegal. Are you all SERIOUSLY saying this isn't a straw purchase?...

It is not a straw purchase as BATF has defined a straw purchase for the public in material published by BATF for public information.

The original purchase might be a violation of 18 USC 922(h) if case law and/or the circumstances would support a finding that the wife/mother/girlfriend/brother was in the employ of the prohibited person for the purposes of acquiring the gun. If not, it's not clear that the original purchase would otherwise violate federal law, at least if everyone is a resident of the same State. In general, the GCA/Brady Bill does not regulate transactions between residents of the same State. If you think it does otherwise violate federal law, please specify the statute violated (don't just call it a straw purchase).

The transfer to the prohibited person would be a violation of federal law, specifically a violation of 18 USC 922(d) and possibly also conspiracy to violate 18 USC 922(g).

It may also violate state law, depending on the State. It doesn't have to be a straw purchase to be illegal.

...And then we might have the exact same scenario as directly above, except that I am NOT a prohibited person. Maybe I'm ill, or busy, so I send my wife/mother/girlfriend/brother over with MY money to make the buy for me. Private seller, no 4473 involved. He/she isn't prohibited, I am not prohibited, but he/she used MY money to buy the firearm for me -- not as a gift to me, but acting in my stead using my money. I respectfully submit that if you call your local BATFE field office and ask, they'll tell you this is a straw purchase...

Whatever some clerk at a BATF office might say on the telephone, the transaction would not be a straw purchase as BATF has defined a straw purchase for the public in material published by BATF for public information.

And do you contend that the described transaction would violate federal law? If so, exactly what provision of federal law has been violated (don't just call it a straw purchase)?

 

[Mr Lucky]

If I am a prohibited person in a state where face-to-face sales are legal, I can find some private party selling a firearm and I can buy it directly from him, using my own money, and just lie to him and tell him I am not prohibited. Not a straw purchase, but highly unlawful nonetheless.

Correct, The seller is not breaking the law since he does not know or have reason to believe the buyer is prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms under Federal Law. [18 U.S.C. 922(a)(3) and (5) 922(d) 27 CFR 478.29 and 478.30] The Buyer if prohibited from receiving or possessing a firearm by any State or Federal law would be in violation of Federal and any applicable State law. [18 U.S.C. 922(g), 27 CFR 478.32] This is not a straw purchase but still illegal activity.

Or ... I can send my wife/mother/girlfriend/brother over to make the buy for me, using my money. As soon as my wife/mother/girlfriend/brother gets home with the firearm, he/she hands it to me. No 4473, no making of false statements under oath. The original purchase was illegal (I think) because my wife/mother/girlfriend/brother used MY money to make the buy, even though he/she isn't a prohibited person. Subsequently transferring the firearm to me is certainly illegal. Are you all SERIOUSLY saying this isn't a straw purchase?

The true owner of the firearm is the person who fills out part A of ATF form 4473 and signs it. The firearm serial number and the NICS background check is made using that persons identification. The fact the You give a person money does not constitute a crime. The person could deposit it in the bank or do what they wish with the money. The true purchaser can also loan "his" firearm to you to use for an undetermined amount of time if you are not prohibited from receiving or possessing a firearm. The true purchaser retains ownership of the firearm so this is not an example of a "straw purchase."

And then we might have the exact same scenario as directly above, except that I am NOT a prohibited person. Maybe I'm ill, or busy, so I send my wife/mother/girlfriend/brother over with MY money to make the buy for me. Private seller, no 4473 involved. He/she isn't prohibited, I am not prohibited, but he/she used MY money to buy the firearm for me -- not as a gift to me, but acting in my stead using my money. I respectfully submit that if you call your local BATFE field office and ask, they'll tell you this is a straw purchase.

Again, the person legally buying the firearm is the true purchaser and owner of the firearm. As long as the true purchaser retains ownership of the firearm this would not be a straw purchase. A private transfer or loan of the firearm at an unspecified later date would not be illegal provided that each party involved in the private transfer are not prohibited from receiving or possessing a firearm. This also would not be an example of a "straw purchase."

 

[Aguila Blanca]

...And then we might have the exact same scenario as directly above, except that I am NOT a prohibited person. Maybe I'm ill, or busy, so I send my wife/mother/girlfriend/brother over with MY money to make the buy for me. Private seller, no 4473 involved. He/she isn't prohibited, I am not prohibited, but he/she used MY money to buy the firearm for me -- not as a gift to me, but acting in my stead using my money. I respectfully submit that if you call your local BATFE field office and ask, they'll tell you this is a straw purchase...

Whatever some clerk at a BATF office might say on the telephone, the transaction would not be a straw purchase as BATF has defined a straw purchase for the public in material published by BATF for public information.

And do you contend that the described transaction would violate federal law? If so, exactly what provision of federal law has been violated (don't just call it a straw purchase)?

That's the problem. I can't find any law that prohibits it, but I know for a fact that any FFL who sees Person A looking at a gun with great interest, then Person B reaches into his pocket/her purse for a roll of cash and says "We'll take it" will end the transaction right there. The BATFE has certainly convinced the FFLs that it's illegal.

There have been multiple instances reported on various gun boards wherein husbands and wives have been tossed out of gun shops because the hubby, as the resident expert, did most of the tire kicking in picking out a gun for the wife, then when the wife wanted to buy it the FFL decided it was a straw purchase (there's that term again) and refused to deal with them.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...I can't find any law that prohibits it, but I know for a fact that any FFL who sees Person A looking at a gun with great interest, then Person B reaches into his pocket/her purse for a roll of cash and says "We'll take it" will end the transaction right there...

...There have been multiple instances reported on various gun boards wherein husbands and wives have been tossed out of gun shops...

Sure -- FFLs and gun shops -- where 4473s get filled out. Your hypothetical was about a private sale -- no FFL or gun shop. There are all sorts of ways the BATF can make life miserable for a federally licensed dealer who participates in a skanky deal if the BATF can show he knew or had reason to believe that something wasn't kosher.

 

[Mr Lucky]

That's the problem. I can't find any law that prohibits it, but I know for a fact that any FFL who sees Person A looking at a gun with great interest, then Person B reaches into his pocket/her purse for a roll of cash and says "We'll take it" will end the transaction right there. The BATFE has certainly convinced the FFLs that it's illegal.

Not true. You have some misconception about what is and is not legal.

1. An FFL can refuse business to anyone at their sole discretion for any reason provided it is not in violation of their Constitutional civil rights.

2. Where the money comes from is not a legal issue and does not constitute an illegal purchase. A person could buy a firearm by cash from another persons wallet, purse or credit card. Often married people have joint checking accounts and a single credit card account with two or more names on the cards.

3. What counts is who is buying the gun. The person who fills out ATF form 4473, presents their identification, signs form 4473, has his background check run by the FFL is the TRUE purchaser and owner of the firearm.

 

[JohnKSa]

That's the problem. I can't find any law that prohibits it, but I know for a fact that any FFL who sees Person A looking at a gun with great interest, then Person B reaches into his pocket/her purse for a roll of cash and says "We'll take it" will end the transaction right there. The BATFE has certainly convinced the FFLs that it's illegal.

It IS illegal for the FFL and for those who choose to purchase from an FFL.

The licensing scheme was pure genius by the antigunners. They couldn't simply extend federal juridiction because they wanted to, but they COULD create a new group of people who were, BY CHOICE, bound to follow the new laws. Because an FFL has CHOSEN to have a federally issued license he is bound by laws that do not apply to people who do not have the license. He is also exempted from some other laws as well but that's another story.

An FFL can't sell handgun ammunition to someone under 21. You can as long as your state laws don't prohibit it.

An FFL can't sell a handgun to someone under 21. You can as long as your state laws don't prohibit it.

An FFL can't sell a firearm without having someone fill out a 4473. You can as long as your state laws don't prohibit it.

Because you aren't bound by the law requiring a 4473 for all transactions like an FFL IS, you can legally buy and sell firearms from non-dealers with no 4473 involved. Since you don't have to use 4473s for some of your purchases, in those cases you also aren't bound by any of the laws that apply specifically to filling out a 4473.

Since the infraction we are discussing is specifically defined as answering a particular question on a 4473 with false information then you can not be charged with violating that law if you engage in a transaction that does not require/involve a 4473. You may certainly be charged with other infractions if you violate other laws, but that's a separate issue.

 

[Mr Lucky]

Quote:
That's the problem. I can't find any law that prohibits it, but I know for a fact that any FFL who sees Person A looking at a gun with great interest, then Person B reaches into his pocket/her purse for a roll of cash and says "We'll take it" will end the transaction right there. The BATFE has certainly convinced the FFLs that it's illegal.

It IS illegal for the FFL and for those who choose to purchase from an FFL.

This is absolutely NOT true. See item 2. of my post above.

The operative words in the quote above are "We'll take it"
With the exception of NFA class III items purchased by a corporation, all small arms regulated by Federal law under the GCA can only have ONE owner. That is the person who fills out ATF form 4473, identifies himself to the FFL and has his background checked by NISC or a POA in certain states. The source of the money to pay for the gun is completely immaterial.

Here is a good example: We sell firearms on-line. We accept credit cards from any individual with a valid and verifiable credit card. By law we can not ship a firearm directly to a non licensee.

We send the firearm to the on-line buyer's preferred FFL (C&R's excepted). We require a copy of the FFL's license certificate and verify it before we ship.

Once the firearm arrives at the FFL, A Person comes to the FFL for an over the counter transaction. At this time That person's identification is checked, ATF Form 4473 Part A is completed by that person in the presence of the FFL or his trained employee. An NICS background check is then made. If NICS returns a "proceed," That person becomes the "true" and legal owner. NO money except for a transfer fee is paid by the purchaser since it has already been paid for by credit card to the original FFL dealer.

You could have your hands full of packages and ask your kid or you spouse or friend to carry the gun out of the store and it would still not be an illegal transaction or a "straw purchase" on the part of the FFL or the "true" owner.

What the "true" owner does with the gun at a later time IS subject to applicable Federal and state laws.

 

[JohnKSa]

This is absolutely NOT true. See item 2. of my post above.

Until your post, no one was talking about someone donating cash to another person so that person could then purchase a firearm for himself--the topic was person A wanting a firearm and person B buying it in place of person A and for person A, presumably (although not necessarily) because person A is a disqualified person.

Yes, if I want a gun and someone decides to give me the money to buy it for myself that's fine as long as I fill out the 4473 (if it's a purchase from an FFL).

My response was based on the assumption that we were still discussing straw purchases and filling out 4473 forms.

 

[Mr Lucky]

Quote:
This is absolutely NOT true. See item 2. of my post above.

Until your post, no one was talking about someone donating cash to another person so that person could then purchase a firearm for himself--the topic was person A wanting a firearm and person B buying it in place of person A and for person A, presumably (although not necessarily) because person A is a disqualified person.

Yes, if I want a gun and someone decides to give me the money to buy it for myself that's fine as long as I fill out the 4473 (if it's a purchase from an FFL).

My response was based on the assumption that we were still discussing straw purchases and filling out 4473 forms.
__________________

John,
my response began with post 25. later with 33 and 45.
all of my responses are directly related to what does and what does not constitute a straw purchase.

No one has mentioned donating cash. I believe you are twisting things a bit.

My last comment was in response to your reply, the first sentence of post 49. It does not seem like you are reading these posts before replying.

I stand by my answers and believe you simply replied with a partially wrong answer.

 

[JohnKSa]

No one has mentioned donating cash.

I didn't think so either. Maybe I misunderstood Aguila Blanca's comment but I took it to mean that the second person was making the purchase in place of the first, not that the first person was making the purchase with money from the second. That's why I didn't understand why you made these comments.

The source of the money to pay for the gun is completely immaterial.

A person could buy a firearm by cash from another persons wallet, purse or credit card.

 

[Mr Lucky]

No one has mentioned donating cash.

I didn't think so either. Maybe I misunderstood Aguila Blanca's comment but I took it to mean that the second person was making the purchase in place of the first, not that the first person was making the purchase with money from the second. That's why I didn't understand why you made these comments.

Quote:
The source of the money to pay for the gun is completely immaterial.

Quote:
A person could buy a firearm by cash from another persons wallet, purse or credit card.

John,
I appreciate you taking the time to have a second look.

 

[orangello]

Wow! I think i may be even more confused after reading all of that. I can certainly see why somebody might feel that current ATF requirements don't match up with the whole "shall not be infringed" deal. :barf:

 

[divil]

It's really not as complicated as we're making it.

To summarize for the OP:

1. Never buy on someone else's behalf from an FFL. Never be the "someone else" in this scenario either, since then you would be "aiding and abetting".
   
2. It's OK to buy on someone else's behalf in a private sale - as long as all the normal requirements for a private sale, both state and federal, are met. When the time comes to actually give the firearm to the "someone else", the normal rules of transfer apply (they are the same as the rules that applied when you actually received the firearm from the seller)

Let the ATF and the media call whatever they want whatever they want - just be honest on form 4473 and never play any part in getting a gun into someone else's hands if they're prohibited.