At what point is it no longer a straw purchase?


PDA






tuckerdog1
September 8, 2008, 03:45 PM
I have a friend that has no legal issues that would prevent him from buying a firearm. But he does not like the paper trail when buying new from a dealer.

So I have a particular gun he wants, which I bought new from a dealer. I told him I'd sell him mine FTF for whatever it cost me to replace it with another new one. All perfectly legal ( I think ).

So what would be the difference if I just bought a new gun, and turned around and did a FTF with that one? It seems like "time" of my ownership is the only issue. I'd own this one for a few minutes vs the one I'm going to sell him, which I've owned for about a year.

Is the issue a matter of time, intent, both or something else?

Tuckerdog1

If you enjoyed reading about "At what point is it no longer a straw purchase?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Norinco982lover
September 8, 2008, 03:55 PM
Good question. I do not know the "matter of time" I do know that when I was 20 and my wife 21 she bought the gun for us (family tho might be different). There was a previous discussion I was reading today I believe in this section of the forum that stated that it was legal to buy a firearm as a "gift". If yuo know your friend well I would not have a problem selling them a gun you had purchased. I'm sure you know if he has something to hide from the NCIS check or whatever:)

nalioth
September 8, 2008, 04:04 PM
It is "intent".

When you bought your gun you have now, you did not intend to sell it. Selling it to your friend would not be a straw purchase.

Similar situation: You go to your local gun shop and pick up a new gun. You fill out the paper work and go home. When you get home, you show your neighbor and he offers you $75 + what you paid for it. You sell it to him. This is not a straw purchase, either, because when you filled out the paperwork, you had no intentions of selling it.



If you go buy another one for him, you'll be committing perjury when you check the box marked "I am purchasing it for me." It would be a straw purchase.

There is no time limit on this.

TexasRifleman
September 8, 2008, 04:05 PM
So what would be the difference if I just bought a new gun, and turned around and did a FTF with that one? It seems like "time" of my ownership is the only issue. I'd own this one for a few minutes vs the one I'm going to sell him, which I've owned for about a year.

Seems to be to be intent. If you buy a rifle now because someone doesn't want to face an FFL dealer, then sell it to them a year from now, it would still seem to me to be a straw purchase.

If you just happen to have a gun that's been in the closet for years and you want to sell it to a friend because you don't want it and he prefers a private transaction I would think that would NOT be a straw purchase .

Selling a rifle to someone for the price it would cost to replace it doesn't seem to fit the bill for straw purchase either since you will be keeping the newly purchased firearm.

Selling the exact same rifle after owning it for a few minutes would clearly be a straw purchase.

Kinda silly but that's how it sounds to me anyway.

not a lawyer and all that businesss.......

deadin
September 8, 2008, 04:05 PM
If you buy the gun with the intention of reselling it to your friend, I can see a case for a straw purchase. The Feds would have to prove your intent, which could be difficult, but on the other hand, you might have to prove that it wasn't your intent, which might be even harder with an immediate turn around.

zoom6zoom
September 8, 2008, 04:12 PM
he does not like the paper trail when buying new from a dealer. but wants to use you as a cut-out who has the paper on him. Nice friend.

M2 Carbine
September 8, 2008, 04:16 PM
INTENT is the answer.

At the time you bought the gun from the dealer and filled out the paperwork you INTENDED keeping the gun yourself. Isn't that correct?
The transaction was completely legal.

Thereafter there is no time limit that you must keep the gun before deciding to get rid of it.
(of course, also state laws may come into play somehow)


For example,
Say you bought a gun from a FFL at a gun show. AT THAT TIME you had every intention of keeping the gun for probably years.

But on the way home, with your Buddy, you start thinking that you aren't sure that you really want this gun and you Buddy says he'd like to have it.
You can sell it to him.
You did not make a Straw Purchase. You made a honest, legal purchase, then at a later time you decided to sell the gun.

kingpin008
September 8, 2008, 04:27 PM
but wants to use you as a cut-out who has the paper on him. Nice friend.

Amen. I'm not one of those types who are worried about the "paper trail", but if he wants the gun, let him buy it for himself - whether that means from a dealer, or from a FTF sale. Why should you have to deal with the hassle at the dealer's because he doesn't feel like it?

bigjohnson
September 8, 2008, 04:32 PM
First of all, I would have to question the motives of the "friend" who doesn't want to fill out the paperwork but wants the gun.
Secondly, I would be very hesitant to go through with the deal. BATF can come up with some wierd interpretations of the law, and it is NOT a good idea to put yourself in a situation where that wierd interpretation can land you in jail.
Tell your friend that if he wants to buy a gun without paperwork to look somewhere else.

Jst1mr
September 8, 2008, 04:34 PM
but wants to use you as a cut-out who has the paper on him. Nice friend[
+1.
I suspect your "friend" may have a piece of his past that you are unaware of...DON'T do it!

mbt2001
September 8, 2008, 06:00 PM
My understanding of a "straw purchase" was when someone ABLE to legally own and purchased a firearm bought one for someone who was UNABLE to legally own and purchase a firearm.

TexasRifleman
September 8, 2008, 06:07 PM
My understanding of a "straw purchase" was when someone ABLE to legally own and purchased a firearm bought one for someone who was UNABLE to legally own and purchase a firearm.

Don't always trust Wikipedia.

The National Shooting Sports Federation, a group that represents gun dealers among others, defines it to be:

A straw purchase is when a buyer uses an intermediary (the "straw man") to purchase a firearm(s) from a licensed firearms dealer. The purpose is to hide the true identity of the actual purchaser of the firearm(s).

That definition has nothing to do with eligibility, merely the intent to hide the purchase.

TAB
September 8, 2008, 06:10 PM
For some reason this thread makes me think of this old saying:

"I wouldn't touch that with a 10 ft pole. "


I also don't think your friend should own firearms... him not wanting a paper trail, but its ok if you have one. Speaks volumes about his mental state of mind and his morals.

Thernlund
September 8, 2008, 06:17 PM
As others said, "intent" is your problem. Even if the purchase was 10 times removed, any decent DA could probably connect the dots if they were gunning for you (pardon the pun).

It's really for a Judge to decide in the end.

If he needs an "off-the-books" gun so bad, I'd start wondering what the big hangup is all about.

Just tell him to man up and stop being a little girl about it.


-T.

TexasRifleman
September 8, 2008, 06:20 PM
If he needs an "off-the-books" gun so bad, I'd start wondering what the big hangup is all about.

Just tell him to man up and stop being a little girl about it.

I can't really fault him for wanting an off the books, that's his business. It's his willingness to have his buddy take the steps that worry me.

I know lots of perfectly law abiding folks that for whatever reason don't want the paper trail, so they go to gun shows.

It's the willingness to toss his buddy under the bus so to speak that sounds odd.

Thernlund
September 8, 2008, 06:23 PM
Sounds to me like tuckerdog1 offered.


-T.

TexasRifleman
September 8, 2008, 06:27 PM
Sounds to me like tuckerdog1 offered.

LOL yeah I re-read it, guess you're right. That's even worse :)

mbt2001
September 8, 2008, 06:32 PM
A straw purchase is when a buyer uses an intermediary (the "straw man") to purchase a firearm(s) from a licensed firearms dealer. The purpose is to hide the true identity of the actual purchaser of the firearm(s).

I didn't use Wikipedia...

Hiding your identity is the right of all Americans. That is why we have anonymous ballet and privacy laws... I understand that the above is a conservative way to look at it to keep safe, but honestly, how can it be illegal for me to buy a firearm for my brother, supposing he doesn't have a criminal record?

The law has to quit expanding or someday it will eat us all up.

Thernlund
September 8, 2008, 06:34 PM
...but honestly, how can it be illegal for me to buy a firearm for my brother, supposing he doesn't have a criminal record?

The Million Dollar Question.


-T.

TexasRifleman
September 8, 2008, 06:37 PM
Hiding your identity is the right of all Americans. That is why we have anonymous ballet and privacy laws... I understand that the above is a conservative way to look at it to keep safe, but honestly, how can it be illegal for me to buy a firearm for my brother, supposing he doesn't have a criminal record?

The law has to quit expanding or someday it will eat us all up.

Oh don't get me wrong, you'll NEVER hear me defend gun laws. Personally I'd like to see the ATF closed and the Second Amendment be the only gun law in the land.

But, since the law exists, and many people interpret straw purchases that way, it's still a good way to go to jail.

JImbothefiveth
September 8, 2008, 06:38 PM
I suspect your "friend" may have a piece of his past that you are unaware of...DON'T do it
+1

Why doesn't he want the trail? Is he going to rob a store?:scrutiny:

Allright, if he really doesn't want the paper trail, for legitimate reasons, have him go to buy a gun at a FFL. They will background check him BEFORE he can purchase it, after the check, he can simply say he changed his mind. Just don't hand over your money before they check you.


And hey, not to hijack, but if you buy your kid a gun, is it a straw purchase? Like if my kid wants a youth gun, because the adult gun's stock is too big?

TexasRifleman
September 8, 2008, 06:40 PM
And hey, not to hijack, but if you buy your kid a gun, is it a straw purchase? Like if my kid wants a youth gun, because the adult gun's stock is too big?

If your kid isn't old enough to buy one then it's not a straw purchase.
If you give it to him (or anyone) as a gift it's not a straw purchase.

In both cases you ARE the actual purchaser. In the first case you purchase it and let your kid use it, in the second you are the purchaser and you plan to give it away at Christmas. Neither of those are intended to hide the identity of the true purchaser.

People love to get onto Sarah Brady because she gave a shotgun to her son. She's a slimeball, but that's not a straw purchase and is perfectly legal.

Zundfolge
September 8, 2008, 06:42 PM
A straw purchase is a crime because you have to lie on a federal form to do it.

On the form 4473 it asks the question: "Are you the ACTUAL PURCHASER of this firearm?"

If you can answer that question HONESTLY than it is NOT a straw purchase.

Aguila Blanca
September 8, 2008, 06:49 PM
Irrespective of the NSSF web site, they are not a legal source and it is to their advantage to provide the answer that is most likely to keep their members (gun dealers) out of trouble. The Wiki definition seems closer to what the laws and regulations actually say.

I agree with the many respondents who said that "intent is the key." However, IMHO that's only part of the story. If you look up the info on purchases and sales on the BATFE FAQ page, and then look up the actually statutory cites they provide after every answer, I think you'll find that in fact all the law really addresses is purchase by an eligible individual for an individual who is ineligible. That is a straw purchase, and I hope none of us question that.

Another case is two eligible people. (Like this case, maybe.) Person A wants a Ruger Blackhawk but, for whatever reason, doesn't want to buy it. He gives the money to person B, who buys it and then hands it over to person A. Remember, both are eligible, but IMHO this one is still a straw purchase because person B did not use his own money to buy the gun. Therefore, he in essence lied when filling out the 4473 that he is the actual purchaser. How can you be the purchaser when you haven't spent any of your own money?

Now let's look at the same scenario, except that now person A doesn't front any money. Person B buys the gun, then subsequently sells it (for no profit ot loss) to person A. I submit that this is not a straw purchase, because both persons are eligible, and because person B did spend his own money to make the purchase. Person A could have then said "Sorry, I changed my mind," and person B would still be the owner of a Ruger Blackhawk, and his bank account would be correspondingly lighter.

However, in the last scenario, while I do not think it is a straw purchase I do think person B has certainly made the purchase with the intent to resell. While not making it a straw purchase, it does raise the question of whether he perhaps should have an FFL to be engaged in the "business" of buying and reselling firearms. That's a separate question from the straw purchase issue.

Despite the fact I do not think this would be a straw purchase, Mr. Original Poster I will say that I think you are an absolute idiot if you put YOUR name on a 4473 for a firearms so that your "friend" can remain hidden from the records of the transaction. I have no idea what your friend's motives might be, but I would not stick my neck out in such a way to humour a friend's paranoia. If he wants a gun off-paper, he can find a used one in the classifieds and go buy it from a stranger.

Thernlund
September 8, 2008, 06:51 PM
And hey, not to hijack, but if you buy your kid a gun, is it a straw purchase?

Gave my step-daughter a 9mm Sig SP2022 as a "first apartment" present last year. I don't expect I broke the law.

The ATF hasn't kicked down my door yet anyway. :D


-T.

TexasRifleman
September 8, 2008, 06:52 PM
The Wiki definition seems closer to what the laws and regulations actually say.

Which I notice no one has been able to quote......

How about this one from a legal dictionary. Straw man purchases exist in more than just the gun world. Note the bold...

straw man n. 1) a person to whom title to property or a business interest is transferred for the sole purpose of concealing the true owner and/or the business machinations of the parties. Thus, the straw man has no real interest or participation but is merely a passive stand-in for a real participant who secretly controls activities. Sometimes a straw man is involved when the actual owner is not permitted to act, such as a person with a criminal record holding a liquor license.


The wiki definition doesn't seem to appear very often, or to hold water in general.

The ATF question on the 4473 is pretty clear. It doesn't ask anything other than if you are the ACTUAL purchaser. It doesn't seem to care WHY.

blackcash88
September 8, 2008, 06:57 PM
Yeah, but how are they going to prove "intent"? Just say you bought it and your friend had a really traumatizing incident and needed a gun "right now". You had compassion for him as a friend so you sold it to him, but that wasn't on your mind when you bought it, right? Wink, wink...

Also, are you going to leave yourself wide open and not require any sort of transaction paper work for the FTF sale? I know I wouldn't. That way, if it went missing/stolen down and road and used in a crime, when they track it back to you as the original owner, you have proof of selling it to your friend. If you do the paperwork/receipt, I sure hope your friend isn't stupid enough to realize it's basically the same thing as him buying the gun outright from an FFL.

Treo
September 8, 2008, 07:36 PM
W/ 2 exceptions all of my guns were bought "off the grid" I'm not a crook I just don't want Uncle Sugar to know how many guns I have. ( especially those that may fall under some future AWB.)

That said, the whole concept of the friend saying " I don't a paper trail, you buy it for me" stinks.

I've managed to find every gun I wanted ( except a 97B) in the newspaper. Tell your friend to start lookin'.

Thernlund
September 8, 2008, 07:46 PM
W/ 2 exceptions...

I doubt the number of guns is going to matter much if Uncle Sam decides to go for you. In the "gov't is out to get you" context, one gun and you're a gun owner. So after you've filled out one 4473, what's the difference?


-T.

SCKimberFan
September 8, 2008, 09:35 PM
let me see if I understand...

You have a gun that you have had for a year. Your friend wants to buy it from you. You want to buy another firearm for you.

Where does straw purchase come into play on this? :confused:

green country shooter
September 8, 2008, 09:56 PM
There are two separate offenses, both of which are federal felonies. People sometimes conflate the two and label both straw purchases.



1. The first offense is transferring a firearm to a forbidden party. It doesn't matter whether you are a dealer or not for this section. The actual law is 18 U.S.C. 922 (d). The list of forbidden parties is too long to list here. Here's the first part of it:


(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person—
(1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;
(2) is a fugitive from justice;
(3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802));
(4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to any mental institution;



2. The second offense is what most licensed gun dealers think of as a straw purchase, buying a gun with the intention of reselling. If you do this you are acting as a dealer without a license. When you buy a gun with the intention of reselling you are violating this section. This is what most people consider a straw purchase, but straw purchase is not a statutory term, so people can use it to mean whatever they want, I guess.

Some people seem to think that there is no harm in selling to a non-forbidden person, so it can't be illegal. That's not how federal law works. Federal is enforced without any sense of fairness or reasonableness. It is enforced according to the letter of the law, which does not mention whether the transferee is a forbidden party or not.

Here is that section of the law.

18 section 922 (a)

922. Unlawful acts
(a) It shall be unlawful—
(1) for any person—
(A) except a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer, to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in firearms, or in the course of such business to ship, transport, or receive any firearm in interstate or foreign commerce

And here is the part that makes the declaration on the form 4473 a crime, namely perjury: 18 922 (a) (6)

(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;


If you think federal perjury is no big deal, I suggest you google the following persons: Martha Stewart and Scooter Libby, neither of whom was ever convicted of a substantive crime, and both of whom are now federal felons barred from ever owning a firearm.


You may find section 922 at this web site, which is a good one for federal law.

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

dalepres
September 8, 2008, 10:01 PM
So your buddy gets a gun with no paper trail and you risk 10 years over interpretation of the law. Some buddy.

Aguila Blanca
September 8, 2008, 10:21 PM
The ATF question on the 4473 is pretty clear. It doesn't ask anything other than if you are the ACTUAL purchaser. It doesn't seem to care WHY.
Yes, the BATFE question on the 4473 is clear, and does not ask the reason.

It also is not the law. It is a question written by the BATFE based on their omniscient/omnipotent understanding (?) of the law.

So your buddy gets a gun with no paper trail and you risk 10 years over interpretation of the law. Some buddy.
That does pretty well sum it up, doesn't it?

bobbarker
September 8, 2008, 10:40 PM
Got the answer. Thanks.

wyocarp
September 8, 2008, 10:48 PM
It is not a straw purchase as described. And I know many people who don't like to buy new guns so as to not have a paper trail. It's no big deal. It is a personal preference. I would do it too if I could find all the guns I want.

Thernlund
September 8, 2008, 11:34 PM
If a family member buys a gun for you, and then legally transfer's it to you, is that a straw purchase?

Family doesn't matter. It's completely legal to buy a gun as a gift for anyone. I've given guns as gifts to both friends and family.

It's illegal to buy a gun FOR somebody. That is, complete the purchase with their money in their stead either because they can't or won't.

As this pertains to the OP...

A) He is selling his own gun to a buddy.

B) He is buying a new gun for himself.

A = Legal
B = Legal
A + B = Illegal IF the two actions are conducted in concert in order to facilitate an effective straw purchase.

If they were just a coincidence, no big deal. But the OP already laid out the plan. The net result of these two otherwise legal actions: Illegal.


-T.

deadin
September 8, 2008, 11:55 PM
bobbarker, your post #33 is so convoluted it is hard to follow, but it sounds like you are trying to find a way to get a handgun across a state line without benefit of a FFL? If so, no can do and stay within the law. Not even within family unless someone dies and bequeaths the gun in the will.

jeepmor
September 9, 2008, 12:05 AM
Tell your friend to find a good Nickel Ads or similar for strictly face to face purchases where applicable.

Treo
September 9, 2008, 12:34 AM
In my non-law school educated opinion, if you're going to that much effort to make sure it's not a straw purchase, it's a straw purchase.

That said

I doubt the number of guns is going to matter much if Uncle Sam decides to go for you. In the "gov't is out to get you" context, one gun and you're a gun owner. So after you've filled out one 4473, what's the difference

Honestly I can't see the same goverment that has a hard time organizing a piss test twice a year for an active duty army unit pulling off a national gun grab. So possibly I mispoke by mentioning our dear uncle. If they ever tried they'd probably put a 2nd Lt. in charge of it.

What I can see is a Katrina/ Greenburg Kansas gun grab. or perhaps an Oklahoma style " All owners of a type X firearm will report to the following location for a "voluntary" ballistics check."

In case A I have 2 guns officer here they are ( I have a CHP they'll never believe I own zero guns) and hand them the Llama and the Taurus.

Case B you can't come looking for what you don't know I have.

evan price
September 9, 2008, 12:41 AM
I've got a friend who I have known for many years who has absolutely no record of any kind, and he only wants to buy FTF "Off the record" because he fears someday the black helicopters will swoop down and demand it be turned in if there is a 4473 somewhere with his name on it.
Paranoid? Maybe...

Aguila Blanca
September 9, 2008, 12:52 AM
I've got a friend who I have known for many years who has absolutely no record of any kind, and he only wants to buy FTF "Off the record" because he fears someday the black helicopters will swoop down and demand it be turned in if there is a 4473 somewhere with his name on it.
Paranoid? Maybe...
I am quite sympathetic to those who hold such beliefs. I haven't gotten around to energizing my personal black helo DEW system just yet, but I don't discount the possibility of the gummint going off the deep end some day, so I can understand people wanting to buy guns "off paper."

What I can't understand is wanting to potentially put a friend in the position of possibly engaging in a felony just to humor my concerns about what the government might do ... someday. Frankly, that does not sound like much of a friend at all. As I posted earlier in this thread, and as several others have also posted -- IMHO this "friend" should just peruse the classifieds, find a total stranger who is selling what he wants, drive over and buy it in a straight face-to-face deal. None of this "You sell me yours and you replace it so my name doesn't show up anywhere" stuff. With "friends" like that, who needs enemies?

waterhouse
September 9, 2008, 11:11 AM
For the OP, what you are describing it not a straw purchase. It does go to show the stupidity of the law, but it is not a straw purchase.

Irrespective of the NSSF web site, they are not a legal source and it is to their advantage to provide the answer that is most likely to keep their members (gun dealers) out of trouble. The Wiki definition seems closer to what the laws and regulations actually say.

I think the NSSF definition probably corresponds with what the law actually says (as well as how the ATF interprets it), while the Wiki definition probably corresponds with the original intent of the law.

The ATF has made it completely clear that there need not be a prohibited person for a straw purchase to take place. Since the ATF will be on the prosecution's side of the courtroom, it may be wise to accept their interpretation.

Art Eatman
September 9, 2008, 12:49 PM
The BATFE regulations are stickied at the top of the main page of this forum. It might save a lot of wasted time if folks would first read them, then opine about the meaning.

Simplest put, "straw purchase" means buying a gun for somebody outlawed from buying/having/possessing/using/whatever. This ain't that.

"Engaged in business" is a whole 'nother deal and not really germane. "Business" is an ongoing activity by which a person attempts to make a profit.

Tom Servo
September 9, 2008, 01:03 PM
I've dealt with a few people who worry about the "paper trail." If I lived in a state that required gun registration, I might worry as well, but you're in Texas. They don't register guns there.

The only paperwork that would exist on him would be the 4473, which stays in the dealer's files unless the BATFE has a reason for pulling it. Although a background check is called in, they don't know what kind of gun it is (beyond "long gun" or "hand gun"), and that information is purged within 24 hours.

Unless something criminal happens with the weapon, the government won't know he has it.

blackcash88
September 9, 2008, 01:25 PM
The only paperwork that would exist on him would be the 4473, which stays in the dealer's files unless the BATFE has a reason for pulling it.

Like during a nationwide ban or confiscation, right? ;)

NavyLCDR
September 9, 2008, 04:15 PM
Simplest put, "straw purchase" means buying a gun for somebody outlawed from buying/having/possessing/using/whatever. This ain't that.

Respectfully, you are quite wrong on this. I asked my friendly BATF local office this question:

I have a person, in the military, who works for me who is 19 years old. It is perfectly legal for him to buy a handgun from me in my state. I know he wants xyz handgun, so I buy xyz handgun, knowing that he wants one, and sell xyz handgun to him.

The BATF agent, who is a very friendly retired CPO from the Navy, stated that in fact it would be a straw purchase because I had no intent of making xyz handgun my own personal firearm for my own personal use. It did not matter whether or not the second person was perfectly legal to own the firearm or not, and it did not matter whether or not any attempt was made to hide the second person's identity. The only thing that mattered was that I had no intent to purchase the firearm for my own use.

blackcash88
September 9, 2008, 04:29 PM
NavyLT, based on your post, how is it people are able to buy guns as gifts for another? The original purchaser didn't have any intent to own it, either.

Thernlund
September 9, 2008, 05:21 PM
Devils advocate...

The OP said he would sell his buddy a firearm he already owns, and replace said firearm later with a new one for himself.

I say it's still illegal (strictly speaking). A straw purchase once removed is still a straw purchase.


-T.

SCKimberFan
September 9, 2008, 06:07 PM
T - I respectfully disagree.

I have a friend that has no legal issues that would prevent him from buying a firearm.

I ask again.

He has a firearm that he has had in his possession for a year. It was bought with the intent to keep it. (If I understand the OP correctly.) He has a friend who wants to buy that gun, the one has he owned for a year. He can sell that gun to the prospective buyer - based on the quote above - without any ramifications. He can then go buy another gun for himself.

Where does the term "straw purchase" enter into this equation?

waterhouse
September 9, 2008, 06:11 PM
I say it's still illegal (strictly speaking). A straw purchase once removed is still a straw purchase.

There is no such thing, legally pertaining to firearms, as a straw purchase. What I mean is that you will find no codified law concerning the term "straw purchase." You cannot be charged with making a straw purchase, because they can only charge you with breaking laws that are actually on the books.

You will be charged with perjury.

"Straw purchase" is just a shortened form of the ATF saying "On XXXXX date, you lied on question 11.a of the Form 4473, when you stated that you were the actual buyer of the gun mentioned on the form (listed collectively in sections 26, 27, 28, 29, and 30), and then you signed your name to the form certifying that the answers to all questions were true and correct, under penalty of perjury."

If you read the paragraph right above where you sign your name, this is basically what it is saying.

Therefore, if you sell a gun you own, and you replace it with an exact copy, they are going to have a pretty impossible time proving that you committed perjury.

It is very hard to say that someone lied on a form, and that they are not the actual buyer of a specific gun, when that specific gun is sitting in their safe.

Thernlund
September 9, 2008, 06:11 PM
Heh. Then it's just sematics, isn't it? In which case, this is now a circular argument.

Po-tay-to, po-taw-to.


-T.

Art Eatman
September 9, 2008, 09:00 PM
NavyLT, regardless of what you heard from one individual agent, I suggest you read what the regulations say.

Paragraph 478.32, beginning on Page 33, with the pertinent part being on Page 34, right-hand column.

Nowhere does it speak to what the purchaser is otherwise going to do.

A legal person buying for another legal person is not a straw purchase. Parent to family member, sib to sib as a gift, friend to friend, etc.

Sure, it's wise to use an agent's opinion as a guideline. But it is not definitive. It's no different from telephone advice from somebody at IRS: If it's not in writing from the legal department, it's not definitive.

Read. The. Regulations.

green country shooter
September 9, 2008, 09:11 PM
Since the term "straw purchase" is not defined in the law itself, I guess you can make it mean whatever you want.

I realize Art is a moderator, but he is wrong. If you buy a gun for someone else, it is a federal felony. It does not matter whether the person is prohibited from owning a gun or not. It does not matter what the BATFE says, either. What matters is what the law says and what the U.S. attorney for your district says. I quoted the law above, but everyone seems to be ignoring it. There is nothing in the law relating to lying on the form 4473 about the other person being a prohibited party.

evan price
September 10, 2008, 01:41 AM
Green Country Shooter, the USC you cited clearly says, "Engaged in business". To be engaged in business is the thing to debate in this- and obviously the intent is to eliminate the kitchen-table FFL's who actually do not have an FFL.
While I personally would not like to get ten years in a Federal Pound-you-in-the-A**-prison for a debate on what the meaning of "engaged" is, I respectfully disagree since all crime revolves around intent. If the OP's INTENT was not to resell a firearm then it is not a crime.

I had a gun once that I bought & shot it one range trip and decided it wasn't for me, and since a buddy had told me, "If you ever want to get rid of that, call me!" I called him. He paid me what I paid for the rifle. He's quite happy with it. I used the money to buy something else.

Am I an (unindicted) felon?

NavyLCDR
September 10, 2008, 03:58 AM
+1 Green Country Shooter.

Just so we clarify, Art. You are saying that it would be perfectly legal for a 19 year employee of mine, whom I can legally sell a handgun to in Washington, to come to me and say, "Sir, I want an XD45 for self defence, Sportmans Warehouse has them on sale, will you buy it for me?"

I say, "Sure! Since you are legal to buy from me, I will buy the gun and sell it to you!" I buy the gun at SW, walk out to the parking lot and sell it to my 19 year old employee.

So all of that is legal, Art?!? Let me ask you this, would you do it with the BATF present?

GIFTS are a completely different case and it doesn't matter if the gift is to a family member or not.

RDak
September 10, 2008, 06:22 AM
I'm not getting this one.

There is a paper trail to you and then you would say you sold it to him. (I assume you'd get a receipt. If not, you still sold it to him.)

This isn't a strawman sale and there is a paper trail IMHO.

What am I missing? :confused:

(NavyLT: In Michigan, your example would be a strawman purchase IMHO, unless you both had a pistol purchase permit from the local police.)

blackcash88
September 10, 2008, 08:24 AM
Fuggedaboutit. NavyLT is too dense to get it. I worked with WAAAY too many Navy O-3s and learned to not expect much intellectually from them. And this is coming from a retired O-6.

waterhouse
September 10, 2008, 09:25 AM
Paragraph 478.32, beginning on Page 33, with the pertinent part being on Page 34, right-hand column.

Nowhere does it speak to what the purchaser is otherwise going to do.

A legal person buying for another legal person is not a straw purchase. Parent to family member, sib to sib as a gift, friend to friend, etc.

Sure, it's wise to use an agent's opinion as a guideline. But it is not definitive. It's no different from telephone advice from somebody at IRS: If it's not in writing from the legal department, it's not definitive.

Read. The. Regulations.


Art, we've been through this before. The regulation you are quoting basically says "You cannot knowingly sell a gun to a prohibited person." This is a law. It is not the "straw purchase" law. The straw purchase law deals with the truthfulness of your answers at the time when you fill out and sign the 4473.

If you buy a gun for yourself, and 5 years later a guy wants to buy it from you, and he tells you the reason he wants to buy your gun is that he is a convicted felon so he can't go into a store and buy one, and you sell him the gun, you have broken the law you cited, but you never made a straw purchase.

From Green Mountain Shooter's post above. Read. The. Law.
And here is the part that makes the declaration on the form 4473 a crime, namely perjury: 18 922 (a) (6)

(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;

It is available here:
http://trac.syr.edu/laws/18/18USC00922.html

That law is the law the straw purchase concept is based on. I'm not getting this from a random ATF agent. I sat down for over an hour with an ATF attorney and an assistant US attorney to talk with them about this. That law states that ANY false statement on the 4473 is a crime. No where does the law say anything about prohibited persons.

What about gifts? Take guns out of the equation. Lets say you go to buy a book. You pay for the book, and give it to your friends as a gift. You were the actual purchaser of the book. Now let's say your friend wants a book, and you happen to be heading to the book store. He hands you his credit card, or some cash, and asks you to buy the book for him. Although you are making the transaction at the store, your friend is the actual purchaser of the book. That is why question 11.a on the 4473 states "Are you the actual buyer of the firearm(s) listed on this form." That is why there is a "legitimate gift" allowance. If you are buying a legitimate gift, you are the actual buyer.

And because people have trouble interpreting the law, the ATF has an entire section in the Federal Firearms Reference devoted to explaining the straw purchase law.


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. In the 5th Circuit, you will probably be able to get away with buying a gun for another lawful person, but you will spend a heck of a lot of money defending yourself. In other words, in some parts of the country you have some legal precedent to buy a gun for another law abiding citizen, but the people who prosecute such things still hold that you do not have the lawful ability to do so.

Nothing above should be taken to say that I agree with the laws as they are written.

DMF
September 10, 2008, 10:46 AM
It seems like "time" of my ownership is the only issue.No it's about intent. The intent which you clearly defined with this comment:But he does not like the paper trail when buying new from a dealer.The intent would be to lie about who the actual purchaser of the firearm is, so that he can avoid filling out the 4473. Which is illegal.

DMF
September 10, 2008, 10:49 AM
My understanding of a "straw purchase" was when someone ABLE to legally own and purchased a firearm bought one for someone who was UNABLE to legally own and purchase a firearm.That is not true. Anytime someone fills out the 4473 and purchases the firearm or another person (not a gift) it's a straw purchase. It does not matter if the the true purchaser of the firearm is prohibited or not.

Robusto
September 10, 2008, 10:56 AM
If you go buy another one for him, you'll be committing perjury when you check the box marked "I am purchasing it for me." It would be a straw purchase.

I'm not a lawyer (yet), and laws do vary from state, but I think that the key part here is if you have a reasonable belief that that person would not legally be able to buy a gun him/her self.

The intent to keep it your self is not relevant because buying a gun as a gift is totally legal as long as you obey the transfer laws, whatever they be in your state. Also, most of us buy guns with the realization that we may sell them in the future.

My thoughts, your friend is either not telling you the whole story or is totally paranoid.

deadin
September 10, 2008, 11:12 AM
I'm not a lawyer (yet), and laws do vary from state

The laws concerning the 4473 are Federal and are the same in every state.
Some states may have even more stringent requirements in place, but they really aren't germaine to this discussion.

tuckerdog1
September 10, 2008, 04:38 PM
Hey all, thanks for the feedback. First, I was not concerned what I was doing was a straw purchase. But was curious,
as "time" seemed to be the only factor in the sale of the currently owned gun. But I guess it comes down to intent & who's $$$ is buying the gun.

As to my friend maybe having something in his past that could make it illegal to own a firearm...well that could be true of any good faith FTF...Hell, my own family members could have something in the closet I'm unaware of. I've known this fellow & his family for over 10 years. Good upstanding people ( PTA, Girl Scouts, etc. ). They came to me asking for advice on firearms, because they know I'm into them. He has begun to get the feeling he needs to prepare for the S to HTF. His idea was to go to a gunshow and buy off the grid ( several firearms ). I had this one, that was exactly what he was looking for. I made the offer to do this whole deal. I bought it new, so there is already the dreaded paper trail to me. So big deal if there is a 2nd one. Should be nothing to fear with a good faith FTF sale.

Tuckerdog1

thesecond
September 10, 2008, 04:50 PM
To the original poster, Tuckerdog1, the following is not from a practicing attorney, nor should it be interpreted as legal advice, only MHO:

To sell your first gun ("Gun A") to your buddy is a transaction which would not violate 922(a)(6), but may violate 922(d).

At the time of your purchase, you did not knowingly make any false written statements with the intent to deceive or knowing such falsity would be likely to deceive, e.g., the FFL or the ATF. Gun A was purchased by you and actually for you on that particular day in the past. Thus, all other facts equal per form 4473, there would be no violation of 922(a)(6).

The mere fact that Gun A, subsequently, is transferred to your buddy, does not sufficiently inform us of any intent at the time of the original purchase of Gun A, for purposes of a prosecution under 922(a)(6). Of course, the record of a statement like the one which follows, could yield a different result:

"I knew back then, when I bought Gun A, that the gun wasn't actually for me, because I was going to sell it to my buddy, and I checked the box yes on question 1-form 4473 anyway, and I did so because if I did not check yes on the box, the FFL would not have sold me the gun."

The relevant issue under 922(d) is your actual knowledge of the fact that your buddy (transferee) is prohibited, or your knowledge of facts which would give a reasonable person cause to believe same. At the present time, you know of no prohibited statuses which apply to your buddy (transferee). He merely stated that "he does not like the paper trail when buying new from a dealer." Now the question is, does your buddy's statement, along with other facts you already know of him (via court documents, news articles, gossip, etc.), oblige you to make further inquiry regarding your buddy's "status"?

In others news:

In contrast to the situation of a sale of Gun A, to sell your second gun (hereinafter "Gun B") to your buddy, you already have expressed the requisite mens rea (state of mind, in this case, knowledge of falsity and intent to deceive the FFL and the ATF with such falsehood) for a possible conviction under 922(a)(6). Further, you also may be charged and convicted of violation of 922(d), depending on what you know, or what you reasonably could be obligated to know, of your buddy, as discussed above.

Fellow High Roaders, are there any other provisions of title 18 that would apply to this fact scenario, outside of 18 USC 922(a)(6) and 922(d)?

Arrogant Bastard
September 10, 2008, 05:02 PM
I also don't think your friend should own firearms... him not wanting a paper trail, but its ok if you have one. Speaks volumes about his mental state of mind and his morals.

Not necessarily.

Suppose I have a friend who tends towards being suspicious of the government, and post-Katrina, wants a gun that's off the books so police going door-to-door to confiscate weapons will not know to check his residence, and he knows I don't share his concern, because I've bought LOADS of guns with a papertrail.

I don't think that bears on his morals at all.

bubba1
September 10, 2008, 05:33 PM
If there is no 4473, can there still be a "straw purchase"? In other words, is this still an issue for antique firearms (manufactured in or before 1898) or a private sale?

green country shooter
September 10, 2008, 07:06 PM
It is still illegal to transfer a firearm to a prohibited person even if it is a private sale. But it is not illegal to make a private purchase on behalf of someone else. What makes the straw purchase illegal is the lie on the form 4473, not the substance of the transaction. Now, that is the federal law. Your state and local laws may make that transaction illegal.

GRB
September 10, 2008, 07:16 PM
Gave my step-daughter a 9mm Sig SP2022 as a "first apartment" present last year. I don't expect I broke the law.Giving someone a gun as a gift is not a 'straw purchase' type thing, even if you bought the gun today and gave it to someone tomorrow. You bought it for yourself so you could give it as a gift. You did not buy it "FOR" someone else, the for here meaning that you did not make the purcahse instead of them making the purchase so they could avoid the paperwork or whatever other legal issue.

Art Eatman
September 10, 2008, 08:01 PM
Okay. "Actual purchaser" box on the 4473.

Then they tell you this: "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."

Visualize, if you will, a few double-dates to Ruth's Chris Steakhouse...

Sometimes I wonder who's minding the store.

:), Art

jonmerritt
September 10, 2008, 09:00 PM
I had one of my delivery customers ask me if I could buy them a 9mm pistol, after he asked about a good starter pistol. I said no way, go to the Sherrif and get a purchase permit, good for 1 year. Required here in Iowa for a handgun purchase. But you pretty much put your money down with your purchase permit, fill out the form and walk out with it.

ar10
September 10, 2008, 09:58 PM
but wants to use you as a cut-out who has the paper on him. Nice friend.

Exactly, don't do it.
I had a neighbor 2 houses down from me that wanted me to sell him one of my handguns. He stated he was "swamped" at work and didn't have the time to buy one at the only gun store in a 30 mi radius of where we live. I mentioned it to one of the LEO's at the range one day and asked if he could legally verify the guy's background. He could and a couple of days later called me and stated the guy had two DV convictions and he had pleaded guilty on both.
Moral is: I sell him a gun, in my view, it's a straw purchase. If I sold one to him knowing his convictions I would stand a very good chance of loosing my license and convicted of a 5th deg felony.

DMF
September 11, 2008, 09:20 AM
Let's clear up this gift issue.

If you buy a gun with your money, and give it to someone as a gift, and they give you no money or other item(s) of value, for the gun, that is a gift. You purchased it, as a gift for them, with no compensation from them for the gun.

If you buy a gun, and another person gives you some or all of the money for the gun, or trades you something else of value for the gun, either before or after the purchase, it's not a gift.

However, as I've said before, don't just take my word for it, contact a lawyer who is competent and experienced on the issue of firearms laws and ask the attorney.

blkbrd666
September 11, 2008, 09:51 AM
Just to confuse the issue: Has anyone ever been browsing the used gun case at their local shop and see a "steal of a deal" on a gun you have no use for but you just can't pass up the opportunity to get it at that great price? In your head you're thinking, "I can always get my money back on that one". So, you buy it and take it home. You show it to your best buddy and he just can't believe the deal. He wants to buy it and will give you $50 more than you paid less than 2 hours ago...so, you sell it to him.

Now, was it a straw purchase(you never really intended to keep it) or are you now a "Kitchen Table FFL"(you did see yourself making a profit on such a great deal)???

TexasRifleman
September 11, 2008, 09:54 AM
So, you buy it and take it home. You show it to your best buddy and he just can't believe the deal. He wants to buy it and will give you $50 more than you paid less that 2 hours ago...so, you sell it to him.

Now, was it a straw purchase(you never really intended to keep it) or are you now a "Kitchen Table FFL"(you did see yourself making a profit on such a great deal)???

I'd say that's not a straw purchase since you didn't have a specific buyer in mind, you just bought a bargain for yourself that you thought you could sell later. There was no intent to hide who the true purchaser was. How could there be? YOU didn't even know who was gonna end up with it, or how long it would take to move it.

green country shooter
September 11, 2008, 07:53 PM
Come on, people! Why are you so determined to decide sales are not illegal? Do you think dealers have a specific buyer in mind for every gun they buy from a wholesaler? Of course not. The intent to resell is what matters. That's what makes you "engaged in the business."

Evanprice, you seem to think you're contradicting me by saying the OP had no intent to resell. I'm not passing judgment on a set of facts. I agree that if you buy a gun with the intent to resell, you are committing a crime. I'm not willing to express an opinion about a specific set of facts because I don't believe I have all the facts.

Zedo
September 11, 2008, 08:04 PM
Why would you be willing to establish a paper trail for yourself so that your "friend" can avoid making a lawful firearm purchase.

If you sell a gun to him and turn around and purchase an identical replacement, your INTENT is to skirt the "straw purchase" clause of the law.

INTENT is the legal foundation for the law and you're trying to fraudulently circumvent precisely what the law is designed to prevent.

Moreover, BATF can use your computer memory and these posts as evidence if they decide they want to bust you.

You're dealing with a federal weapons charge. It could result in your losing your right to own firearms.

Think about that.

TexasRifleman
September 11, 2008, 09:38 PM
The intent to resell is what matters. That's what makes you "engaged in the business."

"Engaged in the business" is not the same as a straw purchase. Read #54 very carefully.

You are confusing 2 different things. Engaged in the business has a specific meaning. Buying one gun because you think you might make a few bucks on it eventually does not appear to meet the definition of either a straw purchase or "engaged in the business"

From ATF:

The term "engaged in the business" means -- as applied to a dealer in firearms, as defined in section 921(a)(11)(A), a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms, but such term shall not include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms;

NonConformist
September 11, 2008, 09:45 PM
Even if you buy it and sell it to a friend, its not a straw purchase unless you know he cant have guns.

So if hes no criminal dont worry about it!

TexasRifleman
September 11, 2008, 09:52 PM
Even if you buy it and sell it to a friend, its not a straw purchase unless you know he cant have guns.

Seriously, go read #54. It is a straw purchase if you intend to hide the actual buyer of the firearm. It's written down very plainly, not sure why this is confusing.

Nowhere does it say anything about whether or not the person can buy a gun on his own, it simply says, again from post #54 right here:

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.

AndyC
September 11, 2008, 10:37 PM
I bought a handgun from a friend FTF and didn't go through an FFL dealer (quite legal in Texas). Whether I bought it because it was a good deal (which it was) or because I wanted to avoid any paper-trail (which it wasn't - I don't care) has no bearing on the legality of the transaction, as far as I can see.

blackcash88
September 12, 2008, 08:36 AM
Settle down, Beavis...

tuckerdog1
September 12, 2008, 07:07 PM
Reading some of the posts, I'm thinking some may misunderstand. I do NOT intend to buy a new firearm, and just turn around and sell it to my friend. I will be selling him the firearm I bought about a year ago. When I bought that one, I had no intention ( at the time ) of selling it. He will get that one. I will use the $$$ from the sale to replace that firearm with another NEW one ( which I have no intention of selling ).

Tuckerdog1

deadin
September 12, 2008, 07:23 PM
So what would be the difference if I just bought a new gun, and turned around and did a FTF with that one?

The difference would be that the above example would be a "Straw Purchase".
Selling him your old one and replacing it with a new one wouldn't be.

Silly as it sounds, the law doesn't have to make sense. It just is.

thesecond
September 12, 2008, 08:48 PM
Tuckerdog1:

I'd be comfortable saying that somewere in this thread is the answer to your very specific question and set of facts. I believe the federal prohibition under 922(a)(6) focuses on the facts at the time of purchase, and whether or not your 4473 declarations are consistent with those facts. As I mentioned in my earlier post, a subsquent transfer of your gun is fine, because, at the time of purchase, such gun was actually purchased for you. Later, you decided you didn't want to keep it, so now you go to 922(d). Make sure, or at least take reasonable steps to confirm that your intended buyer is not a "prohibited person".

For purposes of federal law/prosecution, the straw purchase doctrine is informative, but not controlling law. And the federal statute has no intention of "occupying the field", i.e., it is allowing the states to be more restrictive, if they choose. As such, you must look to see if your state, Texas, has decided to be more restrictive in the area of transfer of firearms (by sale) between individuals. I cannot, at this time, answer whether Texas has codified, modified, or disregarded the "straw purchase doctrine".

I also cannot, at this time answer whether Texas has more types of "prohibited persons" than that indicated by the feds. Make reasonable inquiry about the status of your buddy, with respect to Texas prohibitions on possession, transfer, etc.". And let me add, finally, that I believe not liking the "paper trail when buying new from a dealer", is a personal comment on one's trust of the federal government's integrity regarding records, but it does not necessarily raise any flags as to his qualifications to purchase a firearm. Respectfully,

Thernlund
September 13, 2008, 04:36 AM
Oh screw it. It may be technically illegal in some 'round about fashion, but the odds of something coming of it are fantastically remote.

Just sell him your gun. Buy yourself another one later.


-T.

RDak
September 13, 2008, 08:12 AM
Reading some of the posts, I'm thinking some may misunderstand. I do NOT intend to buy a new firearm, and just turn around and sell it to my friend. I will be selling him the firearm I bought about a year ago. When I bought that one, I had no intention ( at the time ) of selling it. He will get that one. I will use the $$$ from the sale to replace that firearm with another NEW one ( which I have no intention of selling ).

Ok then. What makes you think it would be a strawman purchase?

I see absolutely nothing here that indicates a strawman purchase.

I am totally confused on this one. :confused:

Now, whether or not you get a receipt for the sale to your friend is up to you.

Same for whether or not you have reason to believe he is allowed to own a firearm. If he said "no" to signing a receipt with the serial number on the receipt, I'd never sell him the gun. That is to protect me and shows he isn't suspicious "on the surface" if you get what I mean.

For me, no receipt, no sale.

tuckerdog1
September 13, 2008, 08:35 PM
Ok then. What makes you think it would be a strawman purchase?


I never thought what I was going to do was a straw purchase. But the whole process got me wondering. In the end, we'll both have identical firearms. But doing it one way is legal, and the other is not. Like Dedin said, it's just the law. It doesn't have to make sense.

Tuckerdog1

msb45
September 14, 2008, 12:07 AM
From various news stories and accounts of "forward tracing weapons" I think an "off the book" firearm that got found would be traced to you very quickly.

Could be a recovered stolen gun, a crime, or your buddy gets in a case of legitimate self-defense. If this happens soon after you "bought" the gun it will mean an ATF visit. I wouldn't be surprised if your purchases after that get held in an admin check.

Assuming you're both in the clear do you have a few thousand bucks to have a real lawyer there for your questioning? If it gets messy and you're charged do you $30-$50K?

NavyLCDR
September 14, 2008, 04:30 AM
Could be a recovered stolen gun, a crime, or your buddy gets in a case of legitimate self-defense. If this happens soon after you "bought" the gun it will mean an ATF visit. I wouldn't be surprised if your purchases after that get held in an admin check.

But, in this case, it would not be soon after tuck bought the gun, it would be a year after.

If you enjoyed reading about "At what point is it no longer a straw purchase?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!