Page 22 of 29 FirstFirst ... 122021222324 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 220 of 288

Thread: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law

  1. #211
    Sage
    Arbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    07-12-16 @ 01:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,395
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'Straw Purchaser' Law.....

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    correct
    Until the government want's to put you in jail, so they say you always intended to buy the gun for someone else.

    But that would never happen, because government has never abused it's power to go after people it didn't like for some reason.
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  2. #212
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,606

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'Straw Purchaser' Law.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Arbo View Post
    Until the government want's to put you in jail, so they say you always intended to buy the gun for someone else.
    that would require the person you gifted the gun to to say he actually paid you to buy it and he's gonna be in trouble in some states as well



  3. #213
    Sage
    Arbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    07-12-16 @ 01:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    10,395
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'Straw Purchaser' Law.....

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    that would require the person you gifted the gun to to say he actually paid you to buy it and he's gonna be in trouble in some states as well
    Based on the below text (from the ATF dated 2005) it then seems the supreme court ruling didn't do ANYTHING, and the whole thing never should have wasted a minute of any courts time.

    15. STRAW PURCHASES

    Questions have arisen concerning the lawfulness of firearms purchases from licensees by persons who use a “straw purchaser” (another person) to acquire the firearms. Specifically, the actual buyer uses the straw purchaser to execute the Form 4473 purporting to show that the straw purchaser is the actual purchaser of the firearm. In some instances, a straw purchaser is used because the actual purchaser is prohibited from acquiring the firearm. That is to say, the actual purchaser is a felon or is within one of the other prohibited categories of persons who may not lawfully acquire firearms or is a resident of a State other than that in which the licensee’s business premises is located.

    Because of his or her disability, the person uses a straw purchaser who is not prohibited from purchasing a firearm from the licensee. In other instances, neither the straw purchaser nor the actual purchaser is prohibited from acquiring the firearm.

    In both instances, the straw purchaser violates Federal law by making false statements on Form 4473 to the licensee with respect to the identity of the actual purchaser of the firearm, as well as the actual purchaser’s residence address and date of birth. The actual purchaser who utilized the straw purchaser to acquire a firearm has unlawfully aided and abetted or caused the making of the false statements. The licensee selling the firearm under these circumstances also violates Federal law if the licensee is aware of the false statements on the form. It is immaterial that the actual purchaser and the straw purchaser are residents of the State in which the licensee’s business premises is located, are not prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms, and could have lawfully purchased firearms from the licensee.

    An example of an illegal straw purchase is as follows: Mr. Smith asks Mr. Jones to purchase a firearm for Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith gives Mr. Jones the money for the firearm. If Mr. Jones fills out Form 4473, he violates the law by falsely stating that he is the actual buyer of the firearm. Mr. Smith also violates the law because he has unlawfully aided and abetted or caused the making of false statements on the form.

    Where a person purchases a firearm with the intent of making a gift of the firearm to another person, the person making the purchase is indeed the true purchaser. There is no straw purchaser in these instances. In the above example, if Mr. Jones had bought a firearm with his own money to give to Mr. Smith as a birthday present, Mr. Jones could lawfully have completed Form 4473.

    The use of gift certificates would also not fall within the category of straw purchases. The person redeeming the gift certificate would be the actual purchaser of the firearm and would be properly reflected as such in the dealer’s records.
    "nah i think the way cons want to turn this into a political issue is funny though" - Philly Boss

  4. #214
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law

    Quote Originally Posted by a351 View Post
    Surely your dissent will land a great blow to the court's credibility.
    Is that what you think?
    That's nice.

    Btw, who is going to inform them of such?
    I ask because apparently you didn't see that I wasn't addressing them.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  5. #215
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law….

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    Good ruling. This is too easy of a way to bypass the laws of purchasing a gun.
    Laws which are blatantly unconstitutional in the first place. The only legitimate gun law in this nation is the Second Amendment. Why is it OK for government to “bypass” the highest law of the land, in order to enact and enforce laws which violate this highest law, but not OK for us, the rightful masters of this nation, to “bypass” these illegal and unconstitutional laws that the government has no authority to enact or enforce against us?
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  6. #216
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law….

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    there are three threads on this issue-I noted that the 5 were probably right though I do not believe the federal government properly has this power but since it has been seized by the feral government it was a correct decision

    HOWEVER, the law needs to be changed to punish only transfers to prohibited persons
    No.

    The law needs to be changed to harshly punish public servants who refuse to obey the Constitution. Nothing less than twenty years, consecutive, per violation, with no possibility of parole or other early release.

    Death would be OK with me for any repeat offender.
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  7. #217
    Electrician
    Bob Blaylock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North 38°28′ West 121°26′
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,745

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law….

    Quote Originally Posted by Your Star View Post
    I think the government should have this power. We can't have mentally ill people getting guns this way.
    Then write your elected misrepresentatives, and ask them to initiate the process of ratifying a new amendment to the Constitution to supersede the Second Amendment, and to authorize government to infringe on the people's right to keep and bear arms in whatever manner you think government ought to be able to do.

    Until that is successfully completed—as long as the Second Amendment stands—government has no legitimate authority to infringe in any way upon this right, and every public servant who willingly has any part in doing so is a criminal, no better than the lowest of robbers..
    The five great lies of the Left Wrong:
    We can be Godless and free. • “Social justice” through forced redistribution of wealth. • Silencing religious opinions counts as “diversity”. • Freedom without moral and personal responsibility. • Civilization can survive the intentional undermining of the family.

  8. #218
    Sidewalk Inspector
    Utility Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,099

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law….

    ROANOKE, Va. — A dark twisted story is coming to light from a federal search warrant filed July 6 in Roanoke. It's a story about a former Roanoke Police Officer who robbed banks and plotted to kill other officers.

    Twenty-six year old Bruce James Abramski, Jr of Callaway, is in custody charged with bank robbery.

    Abramski finished the Police Academy in January of 2007. By December he was being investigated by his own police department. Roanoke City Police focused on then officer Abramski after cash from a police call went missing. Other Roanoke officers describe Abramski's temper as a "light switch" subject to abrupt changes.

    He had recently purchased more than $2000.00 worth of firearms and told someone he had "nothing to lose" and wanted to kill Franklin County deputies but first had a list of Roanoke City police officers he wanted to "take out."

    Abramski confided to a former co-worker that he was the subject of a murder investigation and two bank robberies in Franklin County where he was living in the unfinished basement of his father's home. Abramski admitted his wife had left him, his house was in foreclosure and his car had been repossessed.... Ex-cop with arsenal planned to kill Roanoke police officers - WDBJ7
    ....Abramski, 26, of Callaway, was charged this summer with the Nov. 12, 2009, holdup of Franklin Community Bank in Rocky Mount. Investigators said that in June, Abramski had told a friend he planned to kill an assortment of law enforcement officers and himself, and Franklin County judges said these threats justified keeping Abramski locked up until he could be tried.

    In October, the bank robbery charges were dropped as Franklin County Commonwealth's Attorney Cliff Hapgood said he had not received important evidence from federal authorities. Abramski was freed, then locked up again this month after a federal indictment charged him with lying on federal forms connected to his purchase of a handgun he later transferred to his uncle. Part of the gun case is that when Abramski bought the gun in November, he got a law enforcement discount of about $140, despite having not worked for the Roanoke police since December 2007

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Ashley Neese said Abramski is the chief suspect in an ongoing investigation of the Franklin Community Bank robbery, but said she was not ready to share evidence from that probe. Conrad said that without evidence or charges, he would not consider the bank robbery in making a bond decision...... Ex-cop Abramski to be freed in bail appeal
    ....The federal search warrant portrays the bank robbery and Abramski's remarks -- including his plans to kill seven Franklin County sheriff's deputies and "a list of Roanoke city police officers" -- against a backdrop of financial and personal desperation.

    According to the document, Abramski talked to his former partner, Roanoke Officer Dustin Moricle, on June 25 and told him that his wife had left him, his house was in foreclosure and his car had been repossessed. He'd been a Roanoke police officer from July 2006 to December 2007 but lost his job after an investigation of money that went missing during a police call. His unemployment benefits ran out in September 2008, the warrant said.

    "I've got nothing to lose," the warrant quotes Abramski as saying.

    Abramski had called Franklin County authorities on June 22 to report that he'd shot at someone he found breaking into his stepmother's car and who he suspected was stalking her. Abramski insisted he'd hit the intruder with at least two of the five shots he fired, the search warrant said.

    McGuire said Wednesday that no evidence was found that anyone was hurt in the incident.

    The warrant said Abramski told his former partner that deputies mocked him when they came to his father and stepmother's home, where Abramski was living in the basement, and that he was going to kill them. But first, Abramski said, he was going to "take out" a list of Roanoke officers.

    Abramski told Moricle that the shootings would occur within two weeks and that he would contact Moricle by telephone to let him know the attacks were coming.

    "This is probably the last time you are going to see me," Abramski told Moricle, according to the warrant..... Ex-police officer planned massacre of SW Va. city/county officials *PHOTO*
    Interesting set of circumstances.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    There were, by most estimates, 500 Nazis in Charlottesville. One of them went homicidal. Not all Nazis are violent extremists. You are trying to rationalize your hatred and it's simply not rational.
    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    as I noted, its better that 10 nutjobs get guns than one good person be wrongly disarmed.

  9. #219
    Tavern Bartender
    Constitutionalist
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,271

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    by the federal government...yes!
    There's only one level of govt to an exteme leftist that matters, state govt only gets in the way.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  10. #220
    Guru
    1750Texan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Southcental Texas
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 02:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,569

    Re: Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    There's only one level of govt to an exteme leftist that matters, state govt only gets in the way.
    A liberal understands that a state is no different than the federal government...it is government.

    Secondly a liberal understands that state sovereignty was forfited when the state freely entered into the union of states with a federal government...and signed into a National Constitution.

    When you have a federal and Supreme Court that can over-rule a state's actions...there is no superiority of the state.


Page 22 of 29 FirstFirst ... 122021222324 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •