Walmart did not sell me 22 lr ammo and Im 18 :/

You might have inadvertently said something wrong. I had a couple kids come into my store one day, one was a Marine buying handgun ammo for his friend. He told me he was doing so, and therefore I had to require ID for the second person, they told me he was under 21 and that's why the older friend had to buy the ammo. I had to deny the purchase. :banghead:

I really felt bad, because I was being very friendly with them and basically unintentionally lead them into telling me that.


I hate these ridiculous laws. :cuss:

denni said:

She goes gets the ammo and starts tinkering with the computer. She tells me the machine is telling her i have to be 21, even though a sign on top says 18 for rifle & Shotgun ammunition :O, and 21 for handgun ammo.

Click to expand...

Once again, Garbage In, Garbage Out (GIGO) trumps reason, rationality, and the law. It's a lot more common than you might think, almost always a result of a programming or data input i.e. "human error." The second human error was made by both the clerk and the three managers who continued to perpetuate the error.

I quickly realize that these are anti gun nuts and there is no point in wasting my time there, they just listen to what the machine says not the law!

Click to expand...

Just because they let a cash register do their thinking for them doesn't mean they're gun nuts. It means they're not able to rationally think for themselves. Admittedly, that's a quality that's shared with a lot of gun nuts, but that's beside the point.

hogeater f6 said:

Bought some 20 ga shells a few months ago and she asked if it was for a handgun. I just stood there and said 'huh?'

Click to expand...

yeah, you might use shotgun shells in a FLARE GUN PISTOL.

Once...

Who does biz with Commie Mart anyway? I DONT. F Mart in my book.

This is what I call the Lawyer Syndrome. Some control freak corporate Manager says to their F lawyer "tell us what to do to be absolved of any liability."

Y'see, several years ago, 'the Ambulance Chaser profession (lawyers) werent making enough money prosecuting product liability cases, so the whole works got shifted to "personal injury" and the awards went crazy', a lawyer told me.

When awards are multi million, corporations get nervous.

Of course, the lawyer is paid to tell the company whatever they want to hear, stupid, ridiculous, illegal, immoral or not. Theyre a big corp in bed with Givernment, so what?

So, they make stupid "rules" like this, and yes, they can do that, its their company/store (commies as they are...) and theres no law to the positive (that they have to sell it to one over 18/21, just to the negative of a prohibition to sales to minors.

NEVER MIND the Constitution doesnt exclude "minors" as "people" or "Citizens" but thats another Goverment contrived attack on our Rights.

So they hide behind their rules and its more convenient to hire stupid people to stand on the front line to "enforce them" because they get a thrill down their leg from someone giving them authority to "enforce" something against someone else (and theyre cheap to hire)

Never mind their "rule" is contrary to law, but some paranoid Manager feels like hes safe...

Target, last night, had a sign on their photo copy machine that no one could copy a picture that wasnt more than 75 years old. This is Bravo Sierra, because:

1.) last I READ US copyright law, Copyright protection had been extended to 70 YEARS, not 75
2.) who do they think they are to determine who the Copyright owner is? Thats determined by the owner a/o Copyright Office, not some arrogant moron at Target.
3.) You copying a copyrighted work on their machine does not expose them to any liability, they arent doing the copying. "Allowing someone to use a copy machine" does not constitute Copyright infringement.

But, people feel important (I think the PC term is "empowered") to play stupid little power games with others.

I play them back by telling them what they can do with their product/service, that I either dont need it/them and can buy elsewhere.

Jack House said:

You might have inadvertently said something wrong. I had a couple kids come into my store one day, one was a Marine buying handgun ammo for his friend. He told me he was doing so, and therefore I had to require ID for the second person, they told me he was under 21 and that's why the older friend had to buy the ammo. I had to deny the purchase. :banghead:

I really felt bad, because I was being very friendly with them and basically unintentionally lead them into telling me that.


I hate these ridiculous laws. :cuss:

Click to expand...

what you did was deny a purchase to someone legally allowed to do so. The "for someone else" thing is a smokescreen you a/o your company are hiding behind.

Does the LAW specify that he cant do that? (LAW not opinion?)

The pertinent quesion is "who is buying it"?

This is like the "straw purchase" crap the Feds play. Whats the diff between me making a straw purchase for a felon, or my buying it, going to his house afterwards and reselling it to him?

NONE, except some idiot in Gubmint feels important because they made a rule and hoops for someone to jump through

Capn Camo said:

This is like the "straw purchase" crap the Feds play. Whats the diff between me making a straw purchase for a felon, or my buying it, going to his house afterwards and reselling it to him?

NONE, except some idiot in Gubmint feels important because they made a rule and hoops for someone to jump through

Click to expand...

You do realize that too would be illegal, correct?

Capn Camo said:

yeah, you might use shotgun shells in a FLARE GUN PISTOL.

Click to expand...

I don't think flare guns come in 20ga; only 12 ga. Also, they are supposed to have shortened chambers so 2 3/4" and larger ammo will not fit. Of course if one did put shotgun shells in a flare gun and fire it I would not want to be that person, I rather like having hands and all my fingers.

Capn Camo said:

what you did was deny a purchase to someone legally allowed to do so. The "for someone else" thing is a smokescreen you a/o your company are hiding behind.

Does the LAW specify that he cant do that? (LAW not opinion?)

The pertinent quesion is "who is buying it"?

This is like the "straw purchase" crap the Feds play. Whats the diff between me making a straw purchase for a felon, or my buying it, going to his house afterwards and reselling it to him?

NONE, except some idiot in Gubmint feels important because they made a rule and hoops for someone to jump through

Click to expand...

While you may have a point about the ammo, your analogy to straw gun purchases is inapt. There is a huge difference between making a straw purchase and making a purchase and a separate later sale whose only relation to the purchase is the firearm involved in both transactions. That huge difference is called "intent." If you purchase a firearm with the intent of immediately handing it over to the felon, then you have broken black-letter law. If you purchase a firearm and, at some later point in time, make a separate decision to transfer the gun to someone else, then the law barring straw purchases has not been violated.

Intent may be hard to prove, but not impossible.

eye95 said:

While you may have a point about the ammo.

Click to expand...

Cite? If it's legal for them to do a straw purchase for ammo, then I have no problem with allowing it, corporate policy be damned. But I am fairly certain it is not and am wholly unwilling to risk my freedom by assuming it is.

lil_freak_66 said:

the sad part is,the vast majority of states dont have 18+ conceal permits

Click to expand...

Yes I cant buy a handgun legally till im 21 here in Ca

My experience? When purchasing ammunition for a handgun while at the range, they don't care if you're under 21.

Also, Wal-Mart could arguably be operating within the law by refusing to sell 22 LR to those under 21...

Federal law regulates the sale of ammunition to young people. It bars licensed manufacturers or dealers from selling long gun ammunition to anyone who they believe is under age 18. Also they may not sell handgun ammunition to anyone they reasonably believe is under age 21 (18 USC § 922(b)(1)).

Since 22 LR is commonly used in handguns, it could be classified as both handgun ammunition AND long gun ammunition, placing it in the 21 and over age bracket by default. Not saying I agree with the law, I think its a load of crap. But, that's how its worded.

I had a similar situation at age 19 when I wanted to buy some .22 ammo. I checked out a copy of the law from my college's library, dissasembled my Marlin Model 60 and took them both to the store. Had the sales clerk read the law, showed him my rifle and he said "Oh!! OK, how many boxes do you want?"

Ignorance is fixable, stupidity is permanent!

Funny thing, isn't it? You can walk in and buy boxloads of 7.62X54r's, 7.62X39's, 12 gauge shotshells, and .308's, which are all far more powerful, fatal, and longer-ranged (shotgun excepted), but can't buy some modest .22lr's because they can be used in a handgun...

NavyLT said:

The "straw purchase" statute is 18 USC 922 (a)(6) and applies equally to ammunition as it does to firearms:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000922----000-.html

(a) It shall be unlawful—
(6) for any person in connection with the acquisition or attempted acquisition of any firearm or ammunition from a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, licensed dealer, or licensed collector, knowingly to make any false or fictitious oral or written statement or to furnish or exhibit any false, fictitious, or misrepresented identification, intended or likely to deceive such importer, manufacturer, dealer, or collector with respect to any fact material to the lawfulness of the sale or other disposition of such firearm or ammunition under the provisions of this chapter;

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

In Jack House's case, there was no straw purchase, nor an attempt at one. If the over-21 guy had lied and said it was for him, then he would have broken the law. Of course, unless Jack's spidey senses were tingling and he refused to sell, no one would have ever known.

Unlike firearms, it's not illegal to "straw purchase" ammunition, only to make a false statement in order to do so. It would have been perfectly legal for the older fellow to buy the ammo from Jack, and turn right there at the counter and hand it to the younger guy, and take his money in return.

Possession of handgun ammunition by someone under 21 is perfectly legal. Even purchasing it is legal (absent any false statements). The only legal liability is on the part of an FFL who sells to someone under 21 knowing that it is for use in a handgun.

sultan62 said:

When I was 18-20 I tried using the excuse on .357 that it was for a lever action rifle one time and it worked, though it didn't work most of the time. I've never had issue with the .22 though. Even now I say it's for rifle regardless because I'm less likely to get carded.

Click to expand...

Worked with my .44mag

A straw purchase is any purchase where someone buys something for another. For any reason.

The only question is whether a straw purchase for ammo is illegal, the answer seems to be yes.

Jack House said:

A straw purchase is any purchase where someone buys something for another. For any reason.

The only question is whether a straw purchase for ammo is illegal, the answer seems to be yes.

Click to expand...

Only if the person is ineligible anyways (specific underaged circumstances, felons, etc.)

NavyLT said:

Please don't confuse making a straw purchase of a firearm with providing a firearm to a prohibited person.

Click to expand...

I didn't. What did I write that caused you to infer that I had?

Jack House said:

A straw purchase is any purchase where someone buys something for another. For any reason.

The only question is whether a straw purchase for ammo is illegal, the answer seems to be yes.

Click to expand...

It is the false statement that is illegal.

Again, in your case, there wasn't a false statement. Buying handgun ammo for someone else isn't illegal absent any false statements. For that matter, if someone makes false statements, it's illegal even if it's not for someone else. If I buy a box of .22LR for my own use and I'm asked whether it's for a handgun or rifle, and I answer "rifle" while intending to use it in a handgun, it's an illegal purchase.

You've already provided the cites and quotes, so I won't repeat them. I simply think you're reading them incorrectly.

NavyLT said:

The statute making a "straw purchase" of a firearm illegal is the exact same statute that makes a "straw purchase" of ammunition illegal.

Click to expand...

I know this, and I frequently correct people on this point when they suggest that "straw purchases" only apply if the actual purchaser is a prohibited person.

I see how I could have worded my statement better, but you had to read quite a lot into it to infer I was referring to prohibited persons.

NavyLT said:

What you posted was this:



The statute making a "straw purchase" of a firearm illegal is the exact same statute that makes a "straw purchase" of ammunition illegal. If there was no false statement made regarding the "straw purchase" of a firearm, there would be nothing illegal about the "straw purchase" either. The false statement made during a "straw purchase" of a firearm is when the first question on the form 4473, "Are you the actual purchaser of this firearm" is answered yes, when the real answer is no. Which violates the exact same statute if someone says that the ammunition they are buying is for a rifle, when it really is intended to be used in a handgun.

For example: my next door neighbor is completely legal to buy a handgun on his own. Let's say he doesn't want to wait the five days required in Washington without a CPL when buying from a dealer, so we make an agreement and I buy the gun he wants using my CPL, we walk out of the gun store, he gives me $400 and I give him the gun. What "straw purchase" statute is broken?

If that same gun was in my personal collection, I could sell it to him for the $400, no waiting period, no paperwork and be perfectly legal and yet me buying the exact same gun from the dealer on his behalf is illegal.

Click to expand...

KBCraig said:

I know this, and I frequently correct people on this point when they suggest that "straw purchases" only apply if the actual purchaser is a prohibited person.

I see how I could have worded my statement better, but you had to read quite a lot into it to infer I was referring to prohibited persons.

Click to expand...

If you use your own money then yes, you are the actual purchaser.

If you use your own money and then sell the gun to a person that is not a prohibited person then yes, you are still legal.

If you use your own money to purchase a handgun as a gift for your 18 year old child then yes, you are still fine.

If you use your own money to purchase a rifle as a gift for a family member then yes, you are fine.

Use your own money, then you are always the actual purchaser.