Straw-buyer update

imported post

If you recall the case of the guy straw-buying for the other guy who eventually shot the two Milwaukee Leo, here is the latest:

http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/80971787.html

imported post

"Manning asked for 10 years in prison and urged U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman to send a message to other potential straw buyers - people with clean records who buy guns for felons or others not allowed to purchase one."

This is not the definition of a straw purchaser. This is better:

straw buyer - person who buys a gun but is not the true purchaser

imported post

apjonas wrote:

"Manning asked for 10 years in prison and urged U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman to send a message to other potential straw buyers - people with clean records who buy guns for felons or others not allowed to purchase one."

This is not the definition of a straw purchaser. This is better:

straw buyer - person who buys a gun but is not the true purchaser

Click to expand...

The quoted "definition" is the relevant one and a good working definition for practical applications. You will be prosecuted if you buy one for a prohibited person and are caught. You will not be prosecuted if you buy one as a gift or for a relative or even friend as a matter of convenience...

imported post

Interceptor_Knight wrote:

apjonas wrote:

"Manning asked for 10 years in prison and urged U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman to send a message to other potential straw buyers - people with clean records who buy guns for felons or others not allowed to purchase one."

This is not the definition of a straw purchaser. This is better:

straw buyer - person who buys a gun but is not the true purchaser

Click to expand...

The quoted "definition" is the relevant one and a good working definition for practical applications. You will be prosecuted if you buy one for a prohibited person and are caught. You will not be prosecuted if you buy one as a gift or for a relative or even friend as a matter of convenience...

Click to expand...

You are not a straw purchaser if you buy for the purpose of giving as a bona fide gift. And I never claimed such. You are a straw purchaser if you buy for a friend as a "matter of convenience" - whether the friend is the Pope or Usama bin Laden. If you want to entrust your freedom to prosecutorial discretion - have at it.

imported post

apjonas wrote:

You are not a straw purchaser if you buy for the purpose of giving as a bona fide gift. And I never claimed such. You are a straw purchaser if you buy for a friend as a "matter of convenience" - whether the friend is the Pope or Usama bin Laden. If you want to entrust your freedom to prosecutorial discretion - have at it.

Click to expand...

Negative..... I am always the actual purchaser in strict compliance with the law and as noted on the 4473.

What I do with it in WI afterwards is no one's business or concern unless I knowingly transfer it to a prohibited person...

imported post

Interceptor_Knight wrote:

apjonas wrote:

You are not a straw purchaser if you buy for the purpose of giving as a bona fide gift. And I never claimed such. You are a straw purchaser if you buy for a friend as a "matter of convenience" - whether the friend is the Pope or Usama bin Laden. If you want to entrust your freedom to prosecutorial discretion - have at it.

Click to expand...

Negative..... I am always the actual purchaser in strict compliance with the law and as noted on the 4473.

What I do with it in WI afterwards is no one's business or concern unless I knowingly transfer it to a prohibited person...

Click to expand...

Negative on the negative. Under your scenario, you could handa newly bought firearm to a (non-prohibited) person five minutes after you purchase it as he hands you the purchase price in cash (or anything else of value). I rather believe that a court would think that you are not the true purchaser. Even in WI.

imported post

apjonas wrote:

Negative on the negative. Under your scenario, you could handa newly bought firearm to a (non-prohibited) person five minutes after you purchase it as he hands you the purchase price in cash (or anything else of value). I rather believe that a court would think that you are not the true purchaser. Even in WI.

Click to expand...

There are scenerios where I most certainly could exchange itit 5 minutes later for something else of value and it would most definitely not be a straw purchase on my part.

A jury would aquit.....:dude:

Title 18 Section 44 prohibits a false statement on a 4473. The question in point is if you are the actual purchaser. If you use someone else's money and buy it for them you are a straw purchaser. If you make a purchase as a matter of convenience yetneither you nor your buddy are axe murderers the odds of you being prosecuted for this simple infraction are near zero. If youare andwould befound guilty, you are sunk.If the attention of an officer is on you and your friends such that they are worried about where you purchased your firearms, you have much larger problems at hand than just a potential straw purchase charge....

imported post

Hmm.... Bought the firearm. Spent some complimentry time on the range shooting said firearm. Didn't like the way it felt. Since no returns had to take it home. Well maybe the wifey got mad about spending the money. Now had to sell it to joe Smith down the road to appease the wife or go get a dog house to sleep in.

Sounds plausable to me. Not that I condone straw purchases but how is any body going to prove that something like that didn't happen. I remember a story of a journalist who bought a glock to do a story about open carry. Next week decided she didn't want/need it in her opinion. So she sold it. Could it be argued by an anti prosecuter that she had every intention of selling it when she bought it? Possibly. But the real question is how can you protect yourself from this open ended law that leaves so much to be assumed about the real "intent" of the purchaser at the time of purchase.

Me personally I have bought a pistol as a gift for a relative, but since it truly was a gift I have now worries. Then again how do you prove that money actually changed hands?

Then how do you prove that a FFL dealer knowingly made a sale that was likely to be a straw purchase? Unless that dealer told tehm the proper answers or had them changing them I just don't see it being clear cut either.

Had I walked into a gun store and they refused to sell me a firearm I would never visit that establishment again. After all they are basically implying that I have the intent to commit a crime. Kind of like your neighborhood market saying you can't buy beer cause your kid is in the car and you might be trying to shop for him instead.:banghead:

imported post

Cobra469 wrote:

Hmm.... Bought the firearm. Spent some complimentry time on the range shooting said firearm. Didn't like the way it felt. Since no returns had to take it home. Well maybe the wifey got mad about spending the money. Now had to sell it to joe Smith down the road to appease the wife or go get a dog house to sleep in.

Sounds plausable to me. Not that I condone straw purchases but how is any body going to prove that something like that didn't happen. I remember a story of a journalist who bought a glock to do a story about open carry. Next week decided she didn't want/need it in her opinion. So she sold it. Could it be argued by an anti prosecuter that she had every intention of selling it when she bought it? Possibly. But the real question is how can you protect yourself from this open ended law that leaves so much to be assumed about the real "intent" of the purchaser at the time of purchase.

Me personally I have bought a pistol as a gift for a relative, but since it truly was a gift I have now worries. Then again how do you prove that money actually changed hands?

Click to expand...

Exactly. Prohibited persons are who the effort and money is spent on prosecuting a straw purchase. It would be very difficult to prove otherwise.

imported post

I would think it is easier to prosecute the prohibited person just on the grounds that they generally already know that they can't get one hence why they buy it from private party or try to get somebody to make the purchase in the first place.

Still think it is difficult to prove the straw purchase and teh easier charge would be to charge them for having a weapon that they are prohibited from owning in the first place.

After all how am I supposed to know the guy I sold it to a few days later wasn't supposed to own one?

Then again a private party sales form "might" help to show that a "reasonable time has elapsed to argue that it was not a straw purchase. Especially if there is no history of contact between the seller and buyer before.

imported post

[line]
Question 11a.on Fiream Transfer records Form 4473 dated August 2008.

11a. Are you the actual transferee/buyer of the firearm(s) listed on this form? Warning: You are not the actual buyer if you are aquiring the firearm(s) on behalf of another person. If you are not the actual buyer, the dealer cannot transfer the firearm(s) to you. (see Instructions for Question 11.a.) Exception: If you are picking up a repaired firearm(s) for another person, you are not required to answer 11.a. and may proceed to question 11.b.



The emphasis's are as they actually appear on the 4473 form.

imported post

So if a 17 year old gives his parents money to by a long gun for him would that be a straw purchuse?

imported post

Captain Nemo wrote:

You are not the actual buyer if you are acquiring the firearm(s) on behalf of another person. If you are not the actual buyer, the dealer cannot transfer the firearm(s) to you.

Click to expand...

Mom, read the rules.

imported post

Cobra469 wrote:

Hmm.... Bought the firearm. Spent some complimentry time on the range shooting said firearm. Didn't like the way it felt. Since no returns had to take it home. Well maybe the wifey got mad about spending the money. Now had to sell it to joe Smith down the road to appease the wife or go get a dog house to sleep in.

Click to expand...

Not too far from the way in NEARLY happened at my house. I purchased a rifle (my money, my intent etc) but didnt inform my wife that I was going to buy it (was on sale!!!!!-works for them why not us???) so she started to b*tch about it once I brought it home. I was contemplating selling it to maintainpeace I changed my mind after she started talking about "her" money. Needless to say I still have the rifle.

imported post

bigdaddy1 wrote:

I purchased a rifle (my money, my intent etc) but didnt inform my wife that I was going to buy it (was on sale!!!!!-works for them why not us???) so she started to b*tch about it once I brought it home. I was contemplating selling it to maintainpeace I changed my mind after she started talking about "her" money. Needless to say I still have the rifle.

Click to expand...

It always works that way....... :banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

been there, done that!

imported post

Excellent tap dancing. However the question was whether or not a transaction is a straw purchase (and thus illegal) NOT what are the odds of you getting caught, prosecuted, jail time, winning the lotto. Even if there is no intent in your mind, a rapid turnover of ownership doesn't look too good. Again, if you want to leave your freedomto the whim of a prosecutor hot for a gun crime conviction - have at it.


Interceptor_Knight wrote:

apjonas wrote:

Negative on the negative. Under your scenario, you could handa newly bought firearm to a (non-prohibited) person five minutes after you purchase it as he hands you the purchase price in cash (or anything else of value). I rather believe that a court would think that you are not the true purchaser. Even in WI.

Click to expand...

There are scenerios where I most certainly could exchange itit 5 minutes later for something else of value and it would most definitely not be a straw purchase on my part.

A jury would aquit.....:dude:

Title 18 Section 44 prohibits a false statement on a 4473. The question in point is if you are the actual purchaser. If you use someone else's money and buy it for them you are a straw purchaser. If you make a purchase as a matter of convenience yetneither you nor your buddy are axe murderers the odds of you being prosecuted for this simple infraction are near zero. If youare andwould befound guilty, you are sunk.If the attention of an officer is on you and your friends such that they are worried about where you purchased your firearms, you have much larger problems at hand than just a potential straw purchase charge....

Click to expand...

imported post

Here is a link to a BATFE training document. Hope this helps:

http://www.atf.gov/training/firearms/ffl-learning-theater/episode-4.html


Check out the very last paragraph of the transcript. Now think of this:

You go with someone else to purchase a firearm, say your sister, wife, brother, etc. She/he is not prohibited and neither are you. She/he fills out the 4473 but YOU pay for it with cash, credit card, etc. Is that a straw purchase? Nope. I have done this a few times and did it just a few days ago.

imported post

Very fine line there rcawdor57. If you pay for a firearm and give it to someone as a gift (accept no money for it) then you/they answer yes to question 11.a. on the 4473 form. However if a person gives you money to buy a firearm for them then you must answer no to question 11.a.

If a non-prohibited person fills out the 4473 form and passes the background check and you pay for the firearm the ATF doesn't consider that a straw purchase they consider it a gift.



Whether a purchase is considered a gift, legal purchase or "straw" purchase is dependent on the background check andother qualificationsof the person taking final possession of that purchase. Sometimes that slope can get rather slippery.

imported post

Captain Nemo wrote:

Very fine line there rcawdor57. If you pay for a firearm and give it to someone as a gift (accept no money for it) then you/they answer yes to question 11.a. on the 4473 form. However if a person gives you money to buy a firearm for them then you must answer no to question 11.a.

If a non-prohibited person fills out the 4473 form and passes the background check and you pay for the firearm the ATF doesn't consider that a straw purchase they consider it a gift.



Whether a purchase is considered a gift, legal purchase or "straw" purchase is dependent on the background check andother qualificationsof the person taking final possession of that purchase. Sometimes that slope can get rather slippery.

Click to expand...

Not a gift at all, this is completely legal. There is no "slippery slope". Let me say this again "If my wife, brother, etc...fills out the paperwork and are NOT prohibited (ie, they PASS the NICs check) and another person pays for it there is absolutely no "fine line" here. Never did I say the firearm was being transferred to a prohibited person.

The last time this happened with me was when my wife PAID for my firearm a week ago. Was that illegal? Nope. Too many people are missing the intent of this law. If you fill out the 4473 form and buy a gun for someone who cannot buy it for themselves then it is a straw purchase once you transfer that firearm to them.

http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2010/04/040710-atf-usao-industry-join-forces-against-straw-purchases.pdf

“If you purchase a firearm for someone who cannot legally do so, that stroke of a pen
could cost you up to 10 years in federal prison with no parole,” stated U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Texas John E. Murphy. “Ask yourself, ‘Is it worth it?’”

Added this link: http://www.dontlie.org/index.cfm

imported post

Please drop the "prohibited person" aspect. It just confuses the issue. Everybody knows (I hope) that a p.p. cannot purchase. Now, if A and B go together and A fills out the 4473, why would B pay for the firearm? Was he simply holding A's cash because his pockets are bigger? Who is to be the owner? That is who has control over the firearm, who would have the right to sell or bequeath it? If that person does not equal the 4473 filler-outer (and it is not a bona fide gift situation), you have a straw purchase. If A thinks B should have a firearm but B is poor, A can give B $ sufficient to buy an appropriate item (well in advance is recommended). Why? Because B is the true purchaser, A was simply a generous benefactor before the fact. There is an understanding thatB not Awill have control over the firearm after the sale is complete. A cannot give the seller his (i.e. A's money) if B fills out the form. Why? Because A is the true purchaser. Even if A plans to give the firearm to B. At the point of purchase, A exercises dominion over the firearm. As noted, it is possible for the 4473-person to use a gift of $ from another to pay for it. If what you are saying is that the gift of $ occurs after the 4473 is filled out and the 4473 person knowingly did not have the means to pay for the firearm when the form was completed - he could not have been the true purchaser. On the other hand if he suddenly realizes that he forgot his money belt and borrows the $ - no problem (although it would look suspicious to an FFL). When you boil it down it is a matter of intent. Who has the cash and who fills out the forms are indicia of intent. The best way to avoid trouble is to ensure that the 4473 is filled out by the person who uses his own money to pay and intends to possess and exercise ownership over the firearm for the forseeable future. Except for a gift any purchase using somebody (non-4473 signer) else's money and/or involving transferring the firearm to their possession and control in the near future is suspect.



rcawdor57 wrote:

Captain Nemo wrote:

Very fine line there rcawdor57. If you pay for a firearm and give it to someone as a gift (accept no money for it) then you/they answer yes to question 11.a. on the 4473 form. However if a person gives you money to buy a firearm for them then you must answer no to question 11.a.

If a non-prohibited person fills out the 4473 form and passes the background check and you pay for the firearm the ATF doesn't consider that a straw purchase they consider it a gift.



Whether a purchase is considered a gift, legal purchase or "straw" purchase is dependent on the background check andother qualificationsof the person taking final possession of that purchase. Sometimes that slope can get rather slippery.

Click to expand...

Not a gift at all, this is completely legal. There is no "slippery slope". Let me say this again "If my wife, brother, etc...fills out the paperwork and are NOT prohibited (ie, they PASS the NICs check) and another person pays for it there is absolutely no "fine line" here. Never did I say the firearm was being transferred to a prohibited person.

The last time this happened with me was when my wife PAID for my firearm a week ago. Was that illegal? Nope. Too many people are missing the intent of this law. If you fill out the 4473 form and buy a gun for someone who cannot buy it for themselves then it is a straw purchase once you transfer that firearm to them.

http://www.atf.gov/press/releases/2010/04/040710-atf-usao-industry-join-forces-against-straw-purchases.pdf

“If you purchase a firearm for someone who cannot legally do so, that stroke of a pen
could cost you up to 10 years in federal prison with no parole,” stated U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Texas John E. Murphy. “Ask yourself, ‘Is it worth it?’”

Added this link: http://www.dontlie.org/index.cfm

Click to expand...