Straw Purchase question.

[Batesmotel]

How is this a straw purchase?

My 30 year old daughter picks out a gun. She can legally own a gun. She will be the owner and will take possession of the gun. She will do all the paperwork. Background check is instant because she has a CCW permit.

I will pay for it on my credit card. I can also legally own guns. I’m only paying for her gun. It is a gift to her.

The shop says they can’t sell her the gun because she isn’t paying for it. It a straw purchase because I’m paying. 

WTH? Is that legally a straw purchase?

[Huaco Kid]

That's a good question.   I don't know.

Hand her the cash,  and let her buy the gun.

[railfancwb]

Might have to start over at a different shop, as this one might now deem everything an attempted straw purchase. 

[LostinTexas]

Ran into similar with LostWife. She picked out a pistol, I was going to buy since it saves paperwork with my HL. Nope. wouldn't do it. She had to fill out everything in her name.

OK, fine. She did, and I payed for it with a CC with my name on it, that wasn't a problem. She has a CC with the same number on it, and just her name if they would have made a fuss.

FWIW, her background nearly beat the send message back. Guy hit send and immediately said "Wow".

Well, I guess we did exactly what you were trying to do.

[tous]

22 minutes ago, Batesmotel said:

How is this a straw purchase?

My 30 year old daughter picks out a gun. She can legally own a gun. She will be the owner and will take possession of the gun. She will do all the paperwork. Background check is instant because she has a CCW permit.

I will pay for it on my credit card. I can also legally own guns. I’m only paying for her gun. It is a gift to her.

The shop says they can sell her the gun because she isn’t paying for it. It a straw purchase because I’m paying. 

WTH? Is that legally a straw purchase?

It is not a straw purchase.

A straw purchase, and the actual law as written (18 U.S.C 922 (a)(6))  is so broad and unclear as to mean anything the hippie Marxists say t does, is when a person that can legally own a firearm purchases said firearm for another that cannot legally own a firearm.

The Supreme Court expanded the definition of a straw purchase  in Abranski v US  in 2014, thus defining your situation as a straw purchase.

The gun store was within the law, since 2014, to deny the purchase as described, but again, not a straw purchase.

Remember, when Eric Holder wanted thousands of firearms purchased illegally to go to the Mexican cartels, the law didn't apply. 

 

 

 

[tous]

Along the same subject and with constant paranoia since 1994, the purpose of the National Instant Check System (NICS) was never about denying the sale of firearms to those that are deemed dangerous, it was always about creating a national registry of gun owners as one step toward confiscation.  That is why the fascists demand an end to the so-called gun show loophole -- you may not buy a firearm without Big Brother's permission.

Also keep in mind, and I have been waiting since 1994, that one day soon, no one will pass the NICS background check, thus, no new sales of firearms will be permitted -- ever again.

We know that the FBI is illegally keeping the NICS records; the de facto national registry

And we also know that the Supreme Court is no protector of the Constitution; just another political action committee.

They will get my firearms when they pry them from my cold, dead hands, amid a pile of spent brass.

Yeah, I'm old and I remember freedom.

 

Edited to add: if any government officials read this post and deem me a domestic terrorist, it isn't Eric's fault; now dispatch the FBI Gestapo, I'll be waiting.

 

[Inyo Tim]

2 hours ago, Batesmotel said:

How is this a straw purchase?

 

 

 I did exactly this for my niece. She wanted to attend law enforcement classes at a community college and she needed a pistol. Her and I went to a gun shop and I picked out a G19, paid for it and she did all the paperwork. No problem doing it; this was in California.

[tous]

7 minutes ago, Inyo Tim said:

 I did exactly this for my niece. She wanted to attend law enforcement classes at a community college and she needed a pistol. Her and I went to a gun shop and I picked out a G19, paid for it and she did all the paperwork. No problem doing it; this was in California.

Before or after 2014?

 

[Inyo Tim]

1 minute ago, tous said:

Before or after 2014?

 

Before. I'm not up on new gun laws. A few years ago I wanted to replace a pistol borrowed from my brother in law that was stolen. I just got a gift certificate from the gun shop and mailed it to him. That went OK.

[tous]

Just my opinion, and I am not a lawyer, the Supreme Court decision in 2014  in Abranski v United States  made such a purchase as you describe for your niece a violation of the straw purchase law.

Yet another example of: it isn't what the law means, it's always what the government wants the law to mean.

Good for your niece.

[Silentpoet]

38 minutes ago, tous said:

Just my opinion, and I am not a lawyer, the Supreme Court decision in 2014  in Abranski v United States  made such a purchase as you describe for your niece a violation of the straw purchase law.

Yet another example of: it isn't what the law means, it's always what the government wants the law to mean.

Good for your niece.

Would that apply in a post Bruen decision environment?

[tous]

I am not a lawyer so this is my opinion only, but I have read far too many DoD contracts, so I am somewhat familiar with lawyer gobbledygook.

The two cases are not related.

Abranski v United States  was specifically about the straw purchase statute.

New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen  was about the onerous requirements that New York state imposed on those state citizen's right to firearm ownership, public carrying  and self-defense.

Abranski was a hippie Marxist travesty intended to restrict constitutional rights.  It succeeded.

Bruen was a victory on paper only.  Just after the decision was published, New York state created dozens of new laws restricting gun ownership and the right of self-defense out of thin air.

They employ the 'strike down the law on appeal one at a time and we'll just make another one for them to appeal' strategy.

Remember, these appeals take years and unless  a superior or appellate court issues an injunction, the restrictive laws stand.

 

Good question.

 

[gwalchmai]

10 hours ago, Batesmotel said:

How is this a straw purchase?

My 30 year old daughter picks out a gun. She can legally own a gun. She will be the owner and will take possession of the gun. She will do all the paperwork. Background check is instant because she has a CCW permit.

I will pay for it on my credit card. I can also legally own guns. I’m only paying for her gun. It is a gift to her.

The shop says they can sell her the gun because she isn’t paying for it. It a straw purchase because I’m paying. 

WTH? Is that legally a straw purchase?

No. It is not. Find another shop. Better yet, buy used from another gun owner. 

[Ricordo]

Prevention is worth a pound of cure, Batesmotel.

Fwiw, I find it difficult to predict what BATFE will do in a particular situation. https://www.nrablog.com/articles/2016/7/buying-and-selling-firearms-part-6-straw-purchases/

Simplest way would be to gift her the money, and then she can do whatever she wants to do with it. Like buying a firearm and filling out the form. Make sure she pays the fees, also. Receipts explain a lot of stuff.

Technically, my opinion is that as initially proposed by you, it would not be a straw purchase. But it is Brandon's BATFE we are talking about.

[ChuteTheMall]

12 hours ago, Batesmotel said:

How is this a straw purchase?

 

[Inyo Tim]

19 hours ago, tous said:

Good for your niece.

She's been with the sheriff's dept. for near 30 years and is in a run-off for county sheriff this Nov. Hope she wins.

[Batesmotel]

I was just going to send her the money and let her do it all. But the gun fits my wife also. So I bought it. Different store. Used my military discount too. It’s mine, in my safe and they can shoot it whenever they want.

[Batesmotel]

SXP Trap Compact 

[Batesmotel]

They said one more gun this year and I get free marriage counseling. 

[railfancwb]

12 hours ago, Ricordo said:

Prevention is worth a pound of cure, Batesmotel.

Fwiw, I find it difficult to predict what BATFE will do in a particular situation. https://www.nrablog.com/articles/2016/7/buying-and-selling-firearms-part-6-straw-purchases/

Simplest way would be to gift her the money, and then she can do whatever she wants to do with it. Like buying a firearm and filling out the form. Make sure she pays the fees, also. Receipts explain a lot of stuff.

Technically, my opinion is that as initially proposed by you, it would not be a straw purchase. But it is Brandon's BATFE we are talking about.

Looked up Form 4473. Really changed since I last filled out one. 

[tous]

Regarding question k of the Form 4473, Are you an alien illegally in the United States?

I seem to recall another Supreme Court decision whereas an actual illegal alien (invader) answered no, was discovered to be an actual illegal alien and charged with a felony.

The case revolved around said invader's Fifth Amendment rights and sure enough the court ruled that to answer the question honestly violated his right against self-incrimination. 

Thus, since one does not have to answer any of the questions truthfully (like Hunter Biden, the drug addict) that form has no purpose other than generating yet more government files on us.

Despite the warning on the form, if you lie and are caught lying, no harm, no foul, keep the firearm and we'll just indict the gun shop; they should have known better than to sell a liar a gun.

The questions about domestic violence charges (felony or misdemeanor) were added back in the 1990s if I recall; note well that that one need not be convicted of domestic violence or staking, there mere indictment or accusation disqualifies one.

Note that the form has not been revised to include SEX:  M  F  Other  or Preferred Pronouns:     

Yet.

Isn't government wonderful? 

 

 

[Inyo Tim]

34 minutes ago, tous said:

, the mere indictment or accusation disqualifies one

I wasn't aware of this. Seems like this would have been struck down. 

[tous]

Look at question h: are you subject to a court order restraining you from harassing, stalking or threatening your child or an intimate partner or child of such partner?

A temporary restraining order is not an indictment nor a conviction and just about any court will issue them for any reason.

Plus, if a father spanks a misbehaving child or just threatens to -- guilty  as accused, no guns for you.

On to question i: have you ever been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence?

Note that said misdemeanor might be a minor crime, akin to trespassing, but if a domestic partner is involved, no guns for you -- ever again.

 

[LostinTexas]

22 minutes ago, tous said:

Look at question h: are you subject to a court order restraining you from harassing, stalking or threatening your child or an intimate partner or child of such partner?

A temporary restraining order is not an indictment nor a conviction and just about any court will issue them for any reason.

Plus, if a father spanks a misbehaving child or just threatens to -- guilty  as accused, no guns for you.

On to question i: have you ever been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence?

Note that said misdemeanor might be a minor crime, akin to trespassing, but if a domestic partner is involved, no guns for you -- ever again.

 

Odd the things that follow you for ever for nothing, or just a little of.

In Texas, Disorderly Conduct, a class C misdemeanor (think traffic ticket level) will disqualify you for ever for a handgun license.  A lot of people were spending a lot of money to have those expunged.

IIRC, a lot of police officers lost jobs over the "Domestic violence" accusation, when it was enacted. Can't own a gun, see ya. I agree with that one, but dayum.

I know of a few that were also let go over being convicted of DC when kids. The rational was if unable to legally carry in the state, then you weren't legal to carry in an official capacity.

Of all the BS things, most I agree with, that wasn't one of them. Police hand out disorderly conduct like party favors and there was never a reasoning to fight such a low level accusation. Pay a small fine and get on with life, till '95 anyway. I'm sure most never realized that was with you for ever.

[tous]

One entry has me puzzled:  what is the difference between latino and hispanic?

Quick, name another amendment to the Constitution that guarantees rights for the citizen that requires government permission to exercise.

I'll wait over here for your answer.

Form 4473 will soon be revised to include :  did you vote for Donald Trump?

Have you ever been to a Trump rally?

Have you ever failed to use a person's preferred pronoun?

Have you ever posted a mean meme in any on-line forum?