Supreme Court rules on 'straw purchaser' law

Your Star said:

Good ruling. This is too easy of a way to bypass the laws of purchasing a gun.

Click to expand...

Your Star said:

Good ruling. This is too easy of a way to bypass the laws of purchasing a gun.

Click to expand...

Arbo said:

Yeah, great ruling… how many families will now be broken apart as they send a parent/spouse off to jail because they bought a gun for their significant other (that was legally allowed to own a gun) … But I guess putting the other spouse and kids on government assistance is a good way to keep the level of government dependency on the rise.

Click to expand...

Arbo said:

Yeah, great ruling… how many families will now be broken apart as they send a parent/spouse off to jail because they bought a gun for their significant other (that was legally allowed to own a gun) … But I guess putting the other spouse and kids on government assistance is a good way to keep the level of government dependency on the rise.

Click to expand...

TurtleDude said:

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

Click to expand...

Your Star said:

I think the government should have this power. We can't have mentally ill people getting guns this way.

Click to expand...

Your Star said:

I think the government should have this power. We can't have mentally ill people getting guns this way.

Click to expand...

Jango said:

Until the 2nd Amendment is amended to reflect mental illness = no guns, it will forever be unconstitutional.

Click to expand...

ttwtt78640 said:

As I understand the law, it is illegal for me to accept money from you and then buy you a gun from a FFL. But if I buy a gun, even from a FFL, using my own funds, then I can later gift or sell that gun (which is then my personal property) whenever I wish to.

Click to expand...

TurtleDude said:

correct

Click to expand...

Arbo said:

Until the government want's to put you in jail, so they say you always intended to buy the gun for someone else.

Click to expand...

TurtleDude said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

Click to expand...

a351 said:

:lol: Surely your dissent will land a great blow to the court's credibility.

Click to expand...

Your Star said:

Good ruling. This is too easy of a way to bypass the laws of purchasing a gun.

Click to expand...

TurtleDude said:

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

Click to expand...

Your Star said:

I think the government should have this power. We can't have mentally ill people getting guns this way.

Click to expand...

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

Click to expand...

....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

Click to expand...

....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*

Click to expand...

ernst barkmann said:

by the federal government...yes!

Click to expand...

American said:

There's only one level of govt to an exteme leftist that matters, state govt only gets in the way. :roll:

Click to expand...

Deuce said:

What I mean is that the 2nd amendment does not invalidate any and all gun control laws. Background checks are constitutionally valid.

Click to expand...

1750Texan said:

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.

Click to expand...

CRUE CAB said:

So what happens in Chicago is relevant to the rest of the nation and our laws should reflect that?

Click to expand...

HenryChinaski said:

Are you serious?

Click to expand...

CRUE CAB said:

Very.

Click to expand...