[XD Fan]

I know that it is not legal for a family member to give me money to go to a gun store and buy them a gun. That kind of activity could result in an all-expenses paid trip to Club Fed. My question is; Does this apply to face to face sales. Hypothetical example: a guy lives in TX but finds an AR or Glock on an online classified web page. The seller resides in Atlanta where our original guy’s cousin also lives. Everything would be face to face. No FFL involved. Would it be illegal for the Texan to send money to his cousin to buy the gun for him? I am thinking this would be an illegal straw purchase. In addition I am suspicious that it would violate firearms transfer laws too. Anyone know with any degree of certainty?

[22-rimfire]

Your answer is here. http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/unlicensed-persons.html#gca-unlicensed-transfer

[mjw930]

No way for that to work legally due to interstate residence issues.

A person may sell a firearm to an unlicensed resident of his State

The only legal way to transfer a handgun from a GA resident to a TX resident is through an FFL in TX.

[XD Fan]

Thanks. Confirms my suspicions.

[anchorman]

I was curious about this too. I know it isn't legal to buy a gun with intent to sell it to someone else, rather than keep it for yourself. Is it legal to buy one FTF with the intent of selling it to someone else if you sell it to that person through an FFL?

[22-rimfire]

It is a matter of the details. Technically if he gave you the money, it would be a straw purchase. But you can buy the gun for yourself. As an individual who is not a resident of Texas, I don't believe you can sell or gift the gun to him without the services of a FFL dealer. But he could come to Atlanta and purchase the same gun from a FFL dealer in Atlanta or have the private seller transfer the gun though a dealer in Atlanta directly to him.

[mgkdrgn]

Your cousin in Atlanta can -buy- it for you... but when he delivers it to you, or you go pick it up, that is when you both become felons.

IF you cousin then shipped it to an FFL in YOUR home state to complete the sale, then all would be fine and dandy.

[6.5x55swedish]

one thing I never understood about a strawman purchase is how they would prove intent? If I bought a gun and put one box of shells through it, put it on the shelf and sell it a year later that is obviously not a strawman purchase, but what if I buy it, shoot it and sell it immediately to the guy next to me at the range and only owned it for an hr? Is that a strawman or a legal sale?

[foolsgold80z]

Legal sale.

[HILLBILLY-06]

I was curious about this too. I know it isn't legal to buy a gun with intent to sell it to someone else, rather than keep it for yourself. Is it legal to buy one FTF with the intent of selling it to someone else if you sell it to that person through an FFL?
What about all the absolute idiots that ran out and baught but loads of AR-15's then Put them on GB for two times what they paid for them, and the same crap with ammo too. Why if that intent to sell thing is so obvious, are they continuing to do it?
I even heard guys talking about doing it, while they were standing in line to pick up the darn things. Bragging about the best get rich opportunity that ever was...
Well why aint they in club fed? just based on the whole intent to sell thing? But I understand what your saying, I just think sometimes people tend to get away with some stuff.

[anchorman]

What about all the absolute idiots that ran out and baught but loads of AR-15's then Put them on GB for two times what they paid for them, and the same crap with ammo too. Why if that intent to sell thing is so obvious, are they continuing to do it?
I even heard guys talking about doing it, while they were standing in line to pick up the darn things. Bragging about the best get rich opportunity that ever was...
Well why aint they in club fed? just based on the whole intent to sell thing? But I understand what your saying, I just think sometimes people tend to get away with some stuff.

Illegal to buy with intent to sell for a private sale without going through an FFL dealer is the answer I guess? If going through a dealer, I'm thinking it doesn't matter why you bought it in the first place. I prefer to earn my money in other ways since doing business in guns is such a messy legal thing.

I was just thinking about this because I saw a gun I wanted in another state (where I have family members), and the person wanted to sell FTF. I was wondering as was the OP how to make sure it was legal to do that.

[TenDriver]

If someone is intent on a FTF sale and is not willing to go through an FFL, I might be inclined to shy away from buying.

I have bought and sold face to face and don't have a problem with it, but if the other party told me in advance they would not use an FFL before the buy or sell occurred, I would have walked on both accounts. Not sure if that's what's happening here.

[Sam1911]

What about all the absolute idiots that ran out and baught but loads of AR-15's then Put them on GB for two times what they paid for them, and the same crap with ammo too. Why if that intent to sell thing is so obvious, are they continuing to do it?
That's actually NOT a problem. The law doesn't say you can't buy something with the intent to sell it later for a profit.

The law says you can't be dealing in guns without a license. The line gets blurry when we talk about small numbers of purchases and sales, but there's nothing illegal about buying a gun and putting it up for sale on GunBroker for 16x what you paid.

A straw purchase is different. A straw purchase involves you buying a firearm on behalf of another person. Buying it with the intent to sell it isn't a straw purchase. Buying it to GIVE to someone else is not a straw purchase.

In the OP's example, TWO felonies are committed. One is the straw purchase, in which he gives his cousin money to go buy him a gun. The other is the illegal transfer across state lines.

[6.5x55swedish]

I agree... If the seller will only do FTF walk away... There is no reason for the seller to not be willing to go through an ffl unless something about the deal is already not legal... Like the seller being a felon.

[CoRoMo]

In the OP's example, TWO felonies are committed. One is the straw purchase, in which he gives his cousin money to go buy him a gun. The other is the illegal transfer across state lines.
Can you cite the law that prohibits making a private purchase on behalf of another individual? Everything I find regarding straw purchases is in reference to purchasing from a dealer. The rule of thumb has always been that the ONLY thing a straw purchase is, is falsely answering 'yes' to question 11a on the 4473 form; http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-4473-1.pdf. Many different scenarios and conditions might result in falsely answering 'yes' to that question, but all are straw purchases.

Without the use of a licensee or a 4473, I don't see how it is a straw purchase violation and illegal.
Page 165 of the 2005 Federal Firearms Regulations Reference Guide:

Quote:
15. STRAW PURCHASES
Questions have arisen concerning the lawfulness of firearms purchases from licensees by persons who use a "straw purchaser" (another person) to acquire the firearms. Specifically, the actual buyer uses the straw purchaser to execute the Form 4473 purporting to show that the straw purchaser is the actual purchaser of the firearm. In some instances, a straw purchaser is used because the actual purchaser is prohibited from acquiring the firearm. That is to say, the actual purchaser is a felon or is within one of the other prohibited categories of persons who may not lawfully acquire firearms or is a resident of a State other than that in which the licensee's business premises is located. Because of his or her disability, the person uses a straw purchaser who is not prohibited from purchasing a firearm from the licensee. In other instances, neither the straw purchaser nor the actual purchaser is prohibited from acquiring the firearm.
In both instances, the straw purchaser violates Federal law by making false statements on Form 4473 to the licensee with respect to the identity of the actual purchaser of the firearm, as well as the actual purchaser's residence address and date of birth. The actual purchaser who utilized the straw purchaser to acquire a firearm has unlawfully aided and abetted or caused the making of the false statements. The licensee selling the firearm under these circumstances also violates Federal law if the licensee is aware of the false statements on the form. It is immaterial that the actual purchaser and the straw purchaser are residents of the State in which the licensee's business premises is located, are not prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms, and could have lawfully purchased firearms from the licensee.
I also missed where the OP specifically noted that the gun would be transferred directly from the Georgian to the Texas without the use of a Texas FFL. If he was implying that when he said, "Everything would be face to face.", then yes, it would most obviously be an illegal transfer across state lines.

[NavyLCDR]

I agree... If the seller will only do FTF walk away... There is no reason for the seller to not be willing to go through an ffl unless something about the deal is already not legal... Like the seller being a felon.
Show me the law that says a felon can't sell a firearm? It is illegal for a felon to possess a firearm, but not illegal to own it or sell it as the lawful owner.

[6.5x55swedish]

Look up the meaning of Possession. You can't legally sell something that you are prohibited from owning in the first place.

[Spats McGee]

Posssession is not synonymous with ownership. It is (theoretically) possible for a felon to own firearms, but not possess them. The first example that comes to mind is a gun owner picking up his first felony conviction. At that point, he can still own his weapons, but he may not possess them.

[CoRoMo]

I know an individual who became prohibited from possessing his firearms but continued the ownership of them while his father possessed them. He was never prohibited from owning the property, just having possession of it. He eventually regained his right to possess his property after a lot of legal work, time and money.

Also, another example of legally buying firearms with the sole intent to sell them would be acquiring an entire lot at say, an estate sale. If a number of guns are all being sold in one lot but you only really just want that one in particular amongst them, you wold be buying the rest with it for the singular purpose to resell them to recoup the money you had to sacrifice in order to acquire the one of the lot that you were intent on keeping.

[Sam1911]

Can you cite the law that prohibits making a private purchase on behalf of another individual? Everything I find regarding straw purchases is in reference to purchasing from a dealerHonestly, I cannot. You may indeed be correct.

[NavyLCDR]

Look up the meaning of Possession. You can't legally sell something that you are prohibited from owning in the first place.

Let's put this in simple terms.....

My buddy owns a less than reliable vehicle. He needs to drive to Florida. I own a reliable car. My buddy takes my car to Florida. He leaves his car behind for me to use in the local area.

Who continues to own the car in Florida? I do. Who has possession of the vehicle in Florida? My buddy does. Can I legally sell the vehicle that I am not in possession of? Yep. All I have to do is sign the title over to someone else. Can my buddy legally sell the car in Florida? Nope. He doesn't own it.

Who continues to own the car that my buddy left behind? My buddy does. Who has possession of the vehicle left behind? I do. Can I legally sell the vehicle that I am in possession of? Nope. I don't own it. Can my buddy legally sell the car that I am in possession of? Absolutely. All he has to do is sign the title over to someone else.

Now do you understand the big difference between ownership and possession? I can own an item, whether or not I possess it, and whether or not I am even legal to possess it. I can possess an item whether or not I own it. The owner has the legal right to sell it - whether or not they are in possession of it.

I get convicted of a felony and give all my guns to my next door neighbor, but only to store, not as a gift. I put ads on craigslist to sell the guns locally. Buyer meets my next door neighbor to look at the guns. Money comes to me. My next door neighbor delivers the firearms to the seller. Nothing illegal.

[CoRoMo]

The way I've always understood it is, a straw purchase is making a false statement on the 4473, I believe it's that plain and simple.

So when and how does a straw purchaser break the law?
http://permanent.access.gpo.gov/lps41631/2005/p53004.pdf

...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, ... 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.

[Bubbles]

What about all the absolute idiots that ran out and baught but loads of AR-15's then Put them on GB for two times what they paid for them, and the same crap with ammo too. Why if that intent to sell thing is so obvious, are they continuing to do it?
Because believe it or not, the ATF/DoJ does not have an unlimited budget or manpower to track down everyone doing it.

The guys buying guns to flip, if they keep their mouths shut, most likely won't be prosecuted. The ones dumb enough to run their mouths - or worse, brag to the dealer that they're buying the guns to flip because they can get a higher price for an "unpapered" gun - will get some unwanted attention.

[Bubbles]

Illegal to buy with intent to sell for a private sale without going through an FFL dealer is the answer I guess? If going through a dealer, I'm thinking it doesn't matter why you bought it in the first place.
False, I've posted a letter here that I received from ATF stating that it doesn't matter even if you use an FFL to handle the transfer of a gun to the buyer, if you as a non-licensee purchase firearms for the purpose of resale - even if you never take posession - you need an FFL.

[Frank Ettin]

...one thing I never understood about a strawman purchase is how they would prove intent?...Remember that intent is an element of many crimes, and prosecutors convince juries of intent all the time. Whether or how a prosecutor might be able to convince a jury of intent will depend on exactly what took place, how, and what evidence might be available.

Ways of showing intent could include the money trail, improvident statements made to others or on the Internet, and the details of the circumstances. Maybe in a given case a prosecutor won't be able to prove intent, or maybe he will. Pretty much everyone now in prison did not expect to get caught or convicted.

[6.5x55swedish]

Navy: I have to disagree with your interpretation due to the dictionaries definition:

Definition of POSSESSION

1
a : the act of having or taking into control
something owned, occupied, or controlled : property........

If we went with your scenario for the sake of the argument: There would be no reason for the neighbor to refuse a FFL transaction if he indeed is legal to "possess" and sell the gun in question.

[CoRoMo]

Well...

By that definition, I am in possession of something that I simply own but lack access to.

That would put all gun owners in violation of federal law when they set foot on Post Office property -even when they aren't in the vicinity of any of their owned guns- since it is illegal to be on PO property while in possession of a firearm.. and since, to you, possession can mean mere current/active ownership.

[6.5x55swedish]

The term "possession" was used because if "own" was used any felon could simply barrow a gun to get around the law.

A simple google search of "felon gun ownership" will verify that by "possession", ownership is included.

And on the post office thing: The law states :Possession in a Federal building. ;) You can posses sit in your car (if that is legal) or in your home, just not in a Federal Building.

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/44/930

[CoRoMo]

The term "possession" was used because if "own" was used any felon could simply barrow a gun to get around the law.
The word 'possess' is used because that's the act which is prohibited, rather than ownership. You're trying to add ownership to the act of possession but there does not exist a statute that you can paste here that would show this to be true.
And on the post office thing: The law states :Possession in a Federal building.
Don't confuse Post property with Federal property. They are not the same. For one, the prohibition of firearms in federal facilities [18 USC 930] requires substantive postings at all entrances for purposes of prosecution, while the prohibition of firearms in postal facilities [39 CFR 232.1] does not.
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/44/930
Note that this link contains no information about Postal property, only Federal.

Drift apologies all around.

[anchorman]

If someone is intent on a FTF sale and is not willing to go through an FFL, I might be inclined to shy away from buying.

I have bought and sold face to face and don't have a problem with it, but if the other party told me in advance they would not use an FFL before the buy or sell occurred, I would have walked on both accounts. Not sure if that's what's happening here.
I think some people put in ads that they will only do FTF is to make it clear to out of state buyers that they don't want to have the hassle of putting things in the mail. I have an FFL who makes this very easy and reasonably priced, so it doesn't stress me much. others may not want to drive an hour and half each way to avail themselves of the services of an FFL.

[6.5x55swedish]

See United States V Mitchell 2000.

Mr Mitchel had a previous domestic violence conviction from 1996. In 1998 he was arrested for making threats against his wife. When arrested he did not have a gun on him and was not in his home, but his daughter allowed officers to search their home and a handgun was found in the bedroom. Mitchel was charged with Unlawful Possession of a firearm... 5 appeals and the conviction was affirmed.

Why do I suddenly have the feeling there are a bunch of felons with guns on this site?

[Bobson]

I was thinking about this recently too. I live in Phoenix but have been visiting family in Texas for the past week. I've found a couple rifles at small co-op type stores that sell hay and other feed primarily, that I haven't seen anywhere back home. Pretty lame that I legally have no way to buy any of these, despite the fact that if I found em back in AZ, I'd be good to go. If the background check was limited to factors only within a state, it would make sense. Instead, it seems completely arbitrary.

Deleted - this was addressed earlier in this thread.

[Sam1911]

I've found a couple rifles at small co-op type stores that sell hay and other feed primarily, that I haven't seen anywhere back home. Pretty lame that I legally have no way to buy any of these, despite the fact that if I found em back in AZ, I'd be good to go. If the background check was limited to factors only within a state, it would make sense. Instead, it seems completely arbitrary.

OH>>>WHAT?

You CAN buy RIFLES out of state. Perfectly legal unless one of the two states prohibits it (and TX and AZ are not such states). It's just handguns that have to be shipped to an FFL back home.

Go get your rifles, dude. :)

[Bobson]

..wow, I never knew that. I thought it was all guns. You learn something new every day lol.

[Frank Ettin]

...I thought it was all guns....It is all guns. It's just that long guns can be transferred by any FFL, as long as the long gun is legal in the transferee's State of residence and the transfer takes place in a manner that conforms to the laws of both the State in which the transferee resides and the State in which the transfer takes place.

A handgun, on the other hand, must be transferred by an FFL in the transferee's State of residence.

[Bobson]

Thanks for the clarification, Frank.

[NavyLCDR]

See United States V Mitchell 2000.

Mr Mitchel had a previous domestic violence conviction from 1996. In 1998 he was arrested for making threats against his wife. When arrested he did not have a gun on him and was not in his home, but his daughter allowed officers to search their home and a handgun was found in the bedroom. Mitchel was charged with Unlawful Possession of a firearm... 5 appeals and the conviction was affirmed.

Why do I suddenly have the feeling there are a bunch of felons with guns on this site?

The reason Mr. Mitchel was charged with possession of a firearm was because it was in his bedroom! HELLLLOOOOOO! Constructive Possession means that you know where the object is, and you have the means to access it.

1. I own a firearm. It is in my bedroom dresser drawer. No lock between the gun and I that I can't just legally open myself. I know where the gun is, I own the gun, and I can access the gun - all three of those = possession.

2. I own a firearm. It is in my neighbor's safe that I do not have access to OR my neighbor has the gun at a location where I don't know where it is. I am NOT in possession of the gun that I own because I cannot access it because it is either behind a lock that I do not have a key or combination to or because it is in a location hidden from me.

It is perfectly legal for a felon to OWN a firearm so long as it is either locked up where they cannot gain access to it, or if someone has it in a location hidden from them.

You can continue to believe whatever you want to, but you really should study the LEGAL definition of possession, including constructive possession.

[I6turbo]

I agree... If the seller will only do FTF walk away... There is no reason for the seller to not be willing to go through an ffl unless something about the deal is already not legal... Like the seller being a felon.
I don't know.... I can fully understand where a perfectly honest and law abiding person (but one who doesn't particularly trust the gubermint these days) would be unwilling to involve a FFL. I think there are plenty of people who have guns that aren't on any fed book because they bought them years ago and/or they bought them FTF. They don't want to get on the fed's list just for a sale that they could just as easily conduct with some person who doesn't insist that they sign the fed's list.

[bikemutt]

Geez, if a buyer really insists on being background checked for a private sale, have at it. Buy the gun from Mr. FTF, drive to a dealer, hand him the gun and pay him to transfer it to you. Why on earth a buyer would insist on that is beyond me.

[brickeyee]

Navy: I have to disagree with your interpretation due to the dictionaries definition:

Definition of POSSESSION

1
a : the act of having or taking into control
something owned, occupied, or controlled : property........

Word in the law have their ordnary meaning, unless the law defines them in another way.

The '35 NFA defines 'firearms' as machine guns (more than one shot per operation of the trigger).
The definition applies ONLY to that portion of the law.

Many words have multiple meanings, and it is NOT uncommon for a law to carefully call out WHAT meaning they are using FOR THAT LAW.