[rugerdude]

Okay, I'm 17 years old with no criminal history at all and in no way prohibited from posessing a firearm. My state allows me to posess a long-arm by myself and a handgun under special circumstances or under adult supervision/parental consent.

Now, I just read the ATF definition of straw purchase. I had previously believed that it was only a straw purchase if the actual recipient was prohibited from owning that gun. The law states that even if they were perfectly fine to go buy it themselves, it is still illegal.

What concerns me is that because I am 17 I have to be gifted a gun, as was the case with 5 of my guns, but the other 5 were bought with my money for me to shoot.

I still live with the purchaser of these guns (my father), they are kept at his house and he does have full authority over them, but I'm the only one who uses them because he's just not into the sport.

Is this illegal?

Is this going to look illegal at a gunshow if I'm haggling and holding then my dad pays the price with my money? In 4 cases including the purchase of a handgun, the situation was just like the one I described above, but nobody cared (FFL and Academy sports were the sellers) even when I handed him the cash.

Any clarification ont he law would be great.

[Frog48]

I hate to rain on your parade, but... if he used YOUR money with the intent of purchasing the guns for YOU, its a straw purchase.

Its a stupid law, but its the law.

[HankB]

A LOT of us bought their first gun at an age when Dad had to sign for it.

IANAL, but unless the son/daughter becomes involved in something criminal, I think the BATmen would have an incredibly difficult time successfully prosecuting a parent for buying their child a gun, or letting Junior use his own money to buy one while they fill out the paperwork. Especially if both keep their mouths shut about whose money is being used. (Heck, maybe the son was just holding Dad's money for Dad, and did the haggling for practice under the father's direction - a little unusual, but let anyone outside the family PROVE otherwise.)

[Frog48]

I agree with HankB; dont do anything stupid, and there wont be much to worry about.

[The Lone Haranguer]

It takes seemingly forever to get up to 18 (or 21 for a handgun, or buying a beer, for that matter), doesn't it? ;) But trust me, the years will fly by after that. :D

But until you do, your father will have to buy the guns under his own name and gift them to you. There is no law against that.

[LAR-15]

18 is the legal age to buy a handgun private purchase

Everyone knows that!

[Ed Ames]

You are a minor child. Legally that puts you in about the same situation as a slave in colonial times. Your guardians can take the money, the guns, even your clothes away and you have no recourse. In that context it's hard to defend the idea of this as a straw purchase. It's not legally your gun no matter what you and your parents call it.

Now... when you hit 18 you enter another phase. At that point you are a quasi-citizen. You can vote, own firearms (in most states) and so on but we still don't trust you. No drinking, no buying handguns, no buying handgun ammo. At that point if you give mom $500 to buy that nice pistol you think you need you've got a genuine straw purchase.

What a world. :(

[waterhouse]

IANAL, but unless the son/daughter becomes involved in something criminal, I think the BATmen would have an incredibly difficult time successfully prosecuting a parent for buying their child a gun, or letting Junior use his own money to buy one while they fill out the paperwork.

While I would normally agree with you 100%, since it has always seemed to me that intent is a hard thing to prove, it won't be that hard to prove when they hit the Print Screen button and bring the printout of him admitting it into court.

While I try not to fall for most of the tin hattery, admitting that you and your father have committed a felony on a public internet forum doesn't seem like a great idea. It's entirely up to you, but you might want to edit your post.

Is this going to look illegal at a gunshow if I'm haggling and holding then my dad pays the price with my money?

Not only will it look illegal, it will actually be illegal (at least if the seller is a dealer and not a private party.)

If it is your dad's money, and he bought it as a gift for you, everything is legal. If it is your money, and you ask him to use your money to buy you a gun, and he fills out ATF From 4473, he is being dishonest on question 11.a (Are you the actual purchaser of the firearm . . ?) and the gov't frowns on that.

[Art Eatman]

The federal law/regulation specifically allows a parent to give a gun to a minor child. All the stipulations about "control" and all that do apply, but that has nothing to do with the purchase, itself. (Different states have different laws so I won't make any effort beyond federal law.)

Okay: You gave the money to your father. Fine, it's a gift. He bought a firearm. He gave you the firearm as a gift. That's fully legal.

A straw purchase is one where the buyer knowingly buys a firearm for a person who is legally restricted from owning firearms. "Legally restricted", primarily a felon or a nutzoid. It would apply in the case of an adult who buys for an underage minor who is not his family member, possibly.

Art

[Andrewsky]

If you have your dad buy you a gun, it's probably best not to be present when he does it.

[waterhouse]

A straw purchase is one where the buyer knowingly buys a firearm for a person who is legally restricted from owning firearms. "Legally restricted", primarily a felon or a nutzoid.

Art, this is not the case. A straw purchase has nothing to do with the criminal or mental history of either party. A straw purchase is simply one person buying a gun and filling out the 4473 even though someone else will actually own the gun, with the exception of gifts (real, actual, gifts, not "I give you this money as a gift, how about you go buy me a gun and give it to me as a gift.")

[Art Eatman]

"...with the exception of gifts."

If such were the case, the intent of the strawman law would be totally wiped out, as all such purchases would be declared to be gifts.

Somebody search and cite. It's been posted before...

[waterhouse]

I will search and cite, as I have done many times in the past. The myth that a straw purchase must involve criminals who cannot otherwise purchase firearms continues to live on. That is one case of a straw purcahse, but not the only case.

First, there is no actual "straw purchase law." You won't find it in any law book. The crime is, I believe, perjury, and is a felony. If you are not the actual purchaser, and you write YES on question 11.a), you have lied.

I would guess that this is normally hard to prosecute, as they would generally have to play both the "follow the money" game and the "what was the intent of the purchaser at the time of purchase" game.

But the OP clearly states that his dad had no intention of buying a gun for himself, and that his dad did not purchase it as a gift, but instead took the OP's money and purchased it for the OP.

Here is what the Federal Firearms Regulations Guide has to say on the subject, emphasis added:


16. "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.

http://www.atf.gov/pub/fire-explo_pub/geninfo.pdf , page 25 of 32

I am aware also of US vs. Charles Ray Polk. No. 96-40836, Fifth Circuit, which seems to say that if you are both legal to own a gun you will be OK, but the ATF doesn't seem to agree with this, and they will be the ones prosecuting.

[joab]

All you have to do is read the back of 4473

A straw purchase is when you use someone else's money to buy them a gun
It doesn't matter if they are prohibited or not

The intent of the law was to eliminate one way prohibited persons could obtain firearms, but the reality of the law is that it prevents me from picking up a gun at the show for my perfectly legal LEO BIL when he can't get off duty

Theft is against the law plain and simple
Some people steal to support a drug habit, which is also illegal
Some steal because they are desperately poor, which is not illegal

As with straw purchases the reason behind the act is not what makes the act illegal the act itself is illegal

[Zundfolge]

A straw purchase is one where the buyer knowingly buys a firearm for a person who is legally restricted from owning firearms. "Legally restricted", primarily a felon or a nutzoid.
No, a straw purchase is when the person filling out the 4473 has to lie to say "Yes" to the question; "Are you the actual purchaser of this gun?"

Doesn't matter if the "actual purchaser" is a supreme court justice or chief of police, if the person filling out the 4473 is not the "actual purchaser" BAM its a straw purchase.

Basically a "Straw Purchase" as a form of Perjury.

Now in the case of the OP, he's a minor child and as such has zero right to property (unless he's been emancipated by the court) ... so "his" money is actually his parent's money ... so by way of that technicality, his father used his own money to purchase the guns and therefore is the "actual purchaser".

But I wouldn't want Agent Schmuckatelli to stumble across this thread on a slow afternoon. :uhoh:

[LAR-15]

Gift them the money.

[waterhouse]

You are a minor child. Legally that puts you in about the same situation as a slave in colonial times. Your guardians can take the money, the guns, even your clothes away and you have no recourse. In that context it's hard to defend the idea of this as a straw purchase. It's not legally your gun no matter what you and your parents call it.

Now in the case of the OP, he's a minor child and as such has zero right to property (unless he's been emancipated by the court) ... so "his" money is actually his parent's money ... so by way of that technicality, his father used his own money to purchase the guns

Interesting point that I hadn't thought about, thank you both for that perspective.

[ozarkhillbilly]

Art Eatman and Ed Ames are correct it is not a straw purchase if you are under age. When you become of age it would still be a un winnable case for the BATF because of the father son relationship.

[Zundfolge]

it is not a straw purchase if you are under age
Age and relationship don't have anything to do with it.

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/ffrrg/ltright.htm

Go down to number 4.

Buying a gun with someone else's money is a Straw Purchase. Period. I outlined a possible loophole citing common law traditions, but again, I wouldn't want to be the test case.

[Art Eatman]

From the ATF website as to the parent/juvenile (juvenile = under 18) arrangement. The key is "consent of parent", and as long as the juvenile has the written permission on his person during legal activities, he's golden.

"The Gun Control Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. Chapter 44, provides in
pertinent part as follows:

18 U.S.C. 922(x)

(x)(1) It shall be unlawful for a person to sell, deliver, or
otherwise transfer to a person who the transferor knows or has
reasonable cause to believe is a juvenile--
(A) a handgun; or
(B) ammunition that is suitable for use only in a handgun.
(2) It shall be unlawful for any person who is a juvenile to
knowingly possess--
(A) a handgun; or
(B) ammunition that is suitable for use only in a handgun.
(3) This subsection does not apply to--
(A) a temporary transfer of a handgun or ammunition to a juvenile or
to the possession or use of a handgun or ammunition by a juvenile if the
handgun and ammunition are possessed and used by the juvenile--
(i) in the course of employment, in the course of ranching or
farming related to activities at the residence of the juvenile (or on
property used for ranching or farming at which the juvenile, with the
permission of the property owner or lessee, is performing activities
related to the operation of the farm or ranch), target practice,
hunting, or a course of instruction in the safe and lawful use of a
handgun;
(ii) with the prior written consent of the juvenile's parent or
guardian who is not prohibited by Federal, State, or local law from
possessing a firearm, except--
(I) during transportation by the juvenile of an unloaded handgun in
a locked container directly from the place of transfer to a place at
which an activity described in clause (i) is to take place and
transportation by the juvenile of that handgun, unloaded and in a locked
container, directly from the place at which such an activity took place
to the transferor; or
(II) with respect to ranching or farming activities as described in
clause (i) a juvenile may possess and use a handgun or ammunition with
the prior written approval of the juvenile's parent or legal guardian
and at the direction of an adult who is not prohibited by Federal,
State, or local law from possessing a firearm;
(iii) the juvenile has the prior written consent in the juvenile's
possession at all times when a handgun is in the possession of the
juvenile; and
(iv) in accordance with State and local law;
(B) a juvenile who is a member of the Armed Forces of the United
States or the National Guard who possesses or is armed with a handgun in
the line of duty;
(C) a transfer by inheritance of title (but not possession) of a
handgun or ammunition to a juvenile; or
(D) the possession of a handgun or ammunition by a juvenile taken in
defense of the juvenile or other persons against an intruder into the
residence of the juvenile or a residence in which the juvenile is an
invited guest.
(4) A handgun or ammunition, the possession of which is transferred
to a juvenile in circumstances in which the transferor is not in
violation of this subsection shall not be subject to permanent
confiscation by the Government if its possession by the juvenile
subsequently becomes unlawful because of the conduct of the juvenile,
but shall be returned to the lawful owner when such handgun or
ammunition is no longer required by the Government for the purposes of
investigation or prosecution.
(5) For purposes of this subsection, the term ``juvenile'' means a
person who is less than 18 years of age.
(6)(A) In a prosecution of a violation of this subsection, the court
shall require the presence of a juvenile defendant's parent or legal
guardian at all proceedings."

[joab]

She was charged with unlawful transfer of a firearm, possession of a firearm by a minor, corruption of a minor, endangering the welfare of a child and two counts of reckless endangerment. (http://www.nbc10.com/news/14324874/detail.html)
Times are changing

[Kentak]

As far as anyone knows, your father, the purchaser, is also the owner of the guns. He lets you use them, which is perfectly legal as long as you are not running afoul of any adult supervision rules when doing so.

Just make sure that your father knows that if anyone asks, he is the "owner" of the guns, because he is, right? Who's to say otherwise? When you turn 21, they are "gifted" to you and you become the legal owner. What's the problem?

K

[Zundfolge]

As far as anyone knows, your father, the purchaser, is also the owner of the guns. He lets you use them, which is perfectly legal as long as you are not running afoul of any adult supervision rules when doing so.
Until you post it on an internet forum ... then EVERYONE knows you gave your dad money and he bought you the guns. :uhoh:


The likelihood of actual prosecution is pretty slim here ... but not impossible. I do believe a good lawyer would get your father off, but I wouldn't want my future staked on the whims of the court.

And Art, maybe I'm blind, but I don't see where any of the part of the law you quoted allows "straw purchases" by fathers for underage sons.

Where the hell is El Tejon when we need him?

[waterhouse]

I agree that there is no law against a father giving a gun as a gift, the child owning it "with consent" and written permission, etc.

I still maintain that any time Person A gives money to Person B so that B can purchase in place of A, it is a straw purchase.

Ed Ames and Zundfolge both point out that it isn't technically the child's money, but the father's, and therefore the child can't give it to the father to make the straw purchase. I wouldn't trust the same loophole to work with an Uncle though.

[Zundfolge]

I also wouldn't want to rely on that technicality either.

Common law traditions don't seem to hold up in court these days unless they are reinforcing the power of the king.

[Art Eatman]

Best I could find right now having to do with straw purchases, specifically, comes from this press release I found at the ATF website:

"US Attorney Charlton added: "Often, people who are prohibited from owning guns try and get around the law by having friends or relatives purchase the guns for them. This is a straw purchase. Illegal firearms traffickers often use straw purchasers to buy guns for them so their own name is not recorded in gun store records. Then they resell these guns to criminals. So when a person is asked to buy a gun for someone else, they must understand that they are being asked to commit a federal felony. When a person makes a straw purchase, they are not just risking prison time; they are arming gang members, felons, and illegal aliens."

Notice that he's speaking to cause--prohibited from owning guns--and the intent to evade the law. He's not talking about the father/son thing. Neither Rugerdude nor his father are prohibited persons insofar as gun ownership.

[rugerdude]

Agent Schmukateli can do what he pleases if he really wants to track down my "dangerous felon straw purchasing" behind and prosecute, I really hope he's got something better to do. I'm not going to hide something in fear of the G-man finding out. I'm not trying to sound tough or anything like that, it's just that I don't believe I have anything to hide.

Oh well, if they do catch me (I'm in my super secret bunker plotting to destroy modern civilization) some of you can come with me to court for conspiracy!:):eek:

Am I the only one that thinks it's messed up that this law is so unclear to the people on here who are the very people who SHOULD know it.


Okay, riddle me this: I used to be on a competetive skeet shooting team where all of the people were under 18. How are the shooters supposed to get a gun for themselves if their parents don't magically know what "gift" to give?

[Zundfolge]

Art, watch the little training video I linked (or click the link under it and read the transcript ... but you'll miss the groovy music) ... it covers the law more broadly than the press release.

Am I the only one that thinks it's messed up that this law is so unclear to the people on here who are the very people who SHOULD know it.
Read my sig.

Okay, riddle me this: I used to be on a competetive skeet shooting team where all of the people were under 18. How are the shooters supposed to get a gun for themselves if their parents don't magically know what "gift" to give?
Read a catalog ... go to the gun shop on Friday, point out the one you want ... dad goes back on Saturday and has them gift wrap it. Just don't give dad the cash, walk in with him, point at the one you want and then have him lie on the 4473.

I understand the intent of the law, but for the most part the law is stupid ... As far as I'm concerned the only time a straw purchase should be illegal is if the "straw purchaser" is buying a gun for a prohibited person.

[Art Eatman]

rugerdude, we're all sorta writing and posting nearly at the same time. Go back and read some of the prior posts.

You have no problems at all, as near as I can tell from all this reading of ATF stuff--which is what I said in my very first post.

[rugerdude]

and if dad wants Jr. to be responsible and pay for it using the money that Jr. worked hard for?

[waterhouse]

Okay, riddle me this: I used to be on a competetive skeet shooting team where all of the people were under 18. How are the shooters supposed to get a gun for themselves if their parents don't magically know what "gift" to give?

When I was 6, my mom brought me in to try on a baseball glove. I didn't have any money, because I was 6, but we needed to make sure the glove fit, so I had to go try it out. Then she paid for it, with her money, and gave it to me.

If the same exact thing had been done with a gun, it would have been fine. You can go pick out the gun, fondle it, whatever. But when the buyer buys it, they have to use their money, and then they have to give it to you as a gift. It is when your* money enters the equation that things become unlawful. [this example is strictly based on straw purchase rules and does not take into account any laws concerning the transfer of a gun to a minor]

*as mentioned, in the case of a minor, it is possible that there is no such thing as your money.

and if dad wants Jr. to be responsible and pay for it using the money that Jr. worked hard for?

I never said it was a good law, but it is the law, and if dad wants Jr. to be responsible and not commit a felony (even though it is a stupid felony) he will find some other item that Jr. also wants (like, perhaps, ammo, or a scope, or a reloader, or any number of other items that don't involve a 4473) and have Jr. responsibly spend his money on those items.

[Zundfolge]

One thing that really sucks about the way the straw purchase law works is that if I go into a gun shop with a friend of mine that doesn't know a lot about guns and I say "You should buy that one" and he tries to buy it, there's a lot of clerks that will smell straw purchase and refuse ... even though I'm just a consultant, not the end recipient of the gun.

Again, Art, I respectfully disagree ... I don't think its clear from what I've read from the ATF site that rogerdude is 100% in the clear ... I suspect he and his father will be left alone, I also suspect that a cleaver lawyer could weasel his way around it ... but a staunch anti ATF agent and a slimy anti gun DA could make some serious trouble for them over this, and there's no guarantee they'd come out on the happy side of it.


Anyway, I really wish El Tejon or one of the other actual lawyers on the forum would weigh in on this one.

[rugerdude]

Ah the "justice" system.

If onlyI were rich and famous I could just go buy illegal machineguns while the kid who is doing something more responsible than just being given a gun has to worry about prosecution.

[waterhouse]

To be fair, even if you were rich and famous* the ATF gets upset when you buy illegal machineguns :D

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=309123

*I had never heard of the guy, so the famous part is certainly debatable.

[Art Eatman]

Uh, rugerdude, go check out today's http://www.ajc.com and read about the rapper, IT or TI or some such name. He's rich and famous--or, used to be rich...

Midnight, Eastern Time Zone. I'm gone to beddie-bye.

:D, Art

[waterhouse]

Well Art, even when we disagree, we find a way to agree. :)

[Zundfolge]

He's rich and famous--or, used to be rich...
He's got kind of a baby face too ... he's gonna be famous where he's going :uhoh: :neener:

[rugerdude]

Yeah, I was referencing that. Hope he gets what he deserves.

Well, thank you guys for your input. I need to sign off now, but I'll check in again tomorrow and let my father know of this.

[mp510]

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/ffrrg/ltright.htm

See specifically:
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/ffrrg/transcripts/ltfour.htm
It's a pretty easy to understand cartoon that helps educate the viewer on straw purchases.

[rdhood]

Now in the case of the OP, he's a minor child and as such has zero right to property (unless he's been emancipated by the court) ... so "his" money is actually his parent's money ... so by way of that technicality, his father used his own money to purchase the guns and therefore is the "actual purchaser".

Yep.

[nezumi]

I'm in a similar situation (although for a silly reason).

My wife and I are buying a gun. She doesn't have a driver's license or state ID, therefore can't be run through NICS. Can I buy her a gun with our shared money?

Related, I like seeing numbers saying 'x number of people own guns'. If I gift it to her, is there any paperwork I can do to make sure she's counted as a female with a gun when they get those demographics?

[Rumble]

Nezumi -

I am not a lawyer - I'm just a Google searcher. But it looks like you can gift firearms to your spouse, parent, child, or sibling (etc.) in MD. However, the recipient must send an application to transfer/purchase a firearm to the Secretary of the Maryland State Police within 5 days of receiving the firearm. (I found this info on http://www.mdgunsafety.com/mspfaq.htm)

I don't know what that form looks like, but I assume that it would require the recipient to show residency via DL or something similar. Therefore, my guess is that you cannot purchase a handgun and gift it to your wife, if she can't provide the necessary documentation to complete the application.

But I could be wrong.

[joab]

My wife and I are buying a gunThere is only one buyer on the 4473
There is no space for a co owner, so you buy the gun and it is also hers by community property laws

[Art Eatman]

Looks like to me that the best way to deal with it is that whatever gets bought is owned by the purchaser, but is used as a family gun. Son/daughter/wife is the most-often user.

Helluva note when honest folks gotta play mind games and word games to avoid trouble with Big Nanny. However, it's been that way for several thousand years...

Art

[Sistema1927]

Isn't it sad that we even have to have this thread?

The BATF, creating criminals since 1934.

All those gun control laws, and no impact on crime. Heck, I am old enough to have taken my lawn mowing money down to the Western Auto store in order to buy myself my own .22 rifle AT AGE TWELVE. Seems to me that violent crime was much less in those days.

[kludge]

I think it's kinda obvious that when an adult buys a Savage Cub, or a Chipmink, or most youth models for that matter... it's not for him/her.

[waterhouse]

I think it's kinda obvious that when an adult buys a Savage Cub, or a Chipmunk, or most youth models for that matter... it's not for him/her.

And there is nothing illegal about that either. There is no straw purchase if a father or Aunt or friend of the family buys a GIFT for a son or nephew or brother or anyone else.

[nezumi]

Well, in that case, since I have a boy who will be old enough to shoot in another 9 years, I can say it's a 'family gun'. If I didn't have kids though, it might be tough to say it belonged to anyone other than my wife or the cats.

I'll have to ask my local gun shop about that form. Hopefully they'll understand these stupid laws better than I.

[Crunker1337]

I believe there is an exception if your parent/guardian bought it for you.

[rugerdude]

Well I've slept on it, and here's my conclusion:

My dad bought/is going to buy the gun. He has full rule over it regardless of whether or not I chip in. If he ends up having little interest in it and allows me to shoot it, well that's fine with me. His birthday is actually on the day of the show, so say I give him a few hundred dollars for being a good dad.:)

Nothing to prosecute, not worth the trouble anyway as I'm in no way affecting anyone else (oops, forgot that that doesn't matter).

I over reacted a bit with this thread and had lost sight of the fact that the guns really are his. For me to shoot, but belonging to him. There is really no further issue here.

Thanks guys.

[SteveS]

Again, Art, I respectfully disagree ... I don't think its clear from what I've read from the ATF site that rogerdude is 100% in the clear ... I suspect he and his father will be left alone, I also suspect that a cleaver lawyer could weasel his way around it ... but a staunch anti ATF agent and a slimy anti gun DA could make some serious trouble for them over this, and there's no guarantee they'd come out on the happy side of it.


Anyway, I really wish El Tejon or one of the other actual lawyers on the forum would weigh in on this one.

I am a lawyer, though to be honest, I have not handled a straw purchase case. I don't have time to go into a detailed analysis right now, but I believe the poster I quoted above is correct. While the possibility of the ATF going after this type of purchase may be low, it could be possible under current law to prosecute the father, based on the information provided.

[mightyike]

Last Xmas I went to J&G in Prescott (from Phx) to purchase a special select CZ52 in 7.65 Tok for a Xmas present.

I had no idea about 'straw purchase' and made the mistake by telling the older man that it was a Xmas present for a dear friend....

Well he puffed up like a toad and told me it was ILLEGAL and that they could GO OUT OF BUSINESS if he sold me the gun.....

I was disgusted. In this country, I have to keep my mouth shut nowadays. Like China and Russia. It was a Xmas present. Present are not straw purchases....

So, I learned my lesson. Trip to Prescott for nothing. I didn't recognize it anyway....big change from 1980's.

[another okie]

"His birthday is actually on the day of the show, so say I give him a few hundred dollars for being a good dad."

Aaargh! Aren't you listening? That's still a straw purchase.

The law looks to the substance of the transaction, not the form. And federal law is enforced with absolutely no sense of equity or fairness or proportion. Ask Martha Stewart and Scooter Libby about perjury prosecutions. Neither was convicted of any substantive crime, just perjury, which is what you are doing (or your father is doing in this case) when he says he is the true purchaser if he is not.

What kind of son would entice his father to commit a federal felony? Can't you wait until you come of age?

Now a straw purchase is only a crime because of the the form 4473. If you buy from a private individual, the straw purchase rules do not apply, though of course the seller must just be selling his own guns and not be buying and selling with the intent of making a profit.

Yes, your father may legally give you a gun, as Sarah Brady gave her son a rifle. But if you give him the money for it, under whatever pretense, you are conspiring to commit perjury and he is committing perjury.

I'm sorry the law is this way, but it's pretty clear, and now that you've discussed your intent on a bulletin board the prosecution would be pretty easy. So don't do it.

[joab]

I'll have to ask my local gun shop about that form.Don't worry as soon as you go to buy a gun they will present it to you

But here's a copy

http://www.ocshooters.com/Gen/Form-4473/ATF-Form-4473.htm

[rugerdude]

No, he's buying a gun for himself with money given to him. I may benefit but it is still his gun, as with all of the others that are "mine" in the sense that I shoot them and maybe paid for them, but his in the sense that he is the purchaser, they belong to him, and I can not touch them without his say-so.

Instead of: "here, have this money and buy this gun to transfer possesion over to me" it is "Here, have some money and buy this gun to keep yourself, under your terms, and in your house." His name is on the 4473 along with his adress and he will have the gun to show anyone who wants to trace it to him.

No straw man, as he is the owner and purchaser even if I pick it out and pay for it. It is in effect the legal alternative to the "legal straw man" i.e. the guy isn't barred from owning the gun, but has someone else buy it for him for some reason or another.

Basically, a straw purchase is using someone else's money to buy them a gun.

There is no law saying that you can't use someone else's money to buy yourself a gun.

[HankB]

Somewhere in Washington, a couple of BATmen reading this thread are laughing themselves silly at all the fearful handwringing over firearms transactions between a lad and his dad . . .

[Wheeler44]

Somewhere in Washington, a couple of BATmen reading this thread are laughing themselves silly at all the fearful handwringing over firearms transactions between a lad and his dad . . .
No kidding, and because of this gun crime will be lower today than yesterday.

Yeah right,

Wheler44

[another okie]

Rugerdude, you are obviously determined to do this no matter what anyone says. But if the reason you give him the money is in the expectation that he will buy a gun that you want, that's a straw purchase. Good luck to you.

[rugerdude]

The ATF makes no distinction based upon who WANTS it. All they care about is the gun belonging to the signer of the 4473.

[tsidorus]

ok ive been reading this on and off... you could also argue being a minor, everything you have and earn actually belongs to your guardian... i know not the position that i would have taken at 17 but might make you feel like less of a felon... but then again i dont know many people that dont break the law to at least some degree... its all about justification...


btw my shift key is broken, i know im not capitalizing or punctuating things properly. deal with it you anal english majors


-tsi