Gun store what to do

[Sam1911]

If you are purchasing a gun as a gift for someone and that person is in the store with you at the time of the purchase and I as the dealer know you are buying it as a gift for that person that is fine. The person receiving the gift will fill out the 4473 and the person giving the gift will pay at the register. The receiver of the gift is the transferee, I know they are taking possession of the gun at that time, it doesn't matter who gives me the money.

Interesting. I would have assumed that the law would want the giver to fill out the 4473, as he/she is the actual purchaser. Having the giftee fill out the form would appear to force a lie on the form as the giftee is NOT the purchaser.

How does the presence of the giftee in the store change who should fill out the form, when if the giftee was waiting at home for the gift the purchaser (giver) would clearly (and legally) filling out the form him/herself?

 

[NavyLCDR]

Two quick examples to clarify. A family comes up to the counter, mom, dad and two sons. After some discussion and looking, the sons each pick out a handgun and mom tells me that the are buying the handguns as gifts for their sons. I sake the sons their ages, one is 21 and the other is 20. I hand the 21 year old a 4473 and the mom a 4473 and the fill them out. Both guns are rung up as one transaction and mom pays for it with a check that has both mom and dad's names on it. No problems, everybody (including ATF) is happy.

So, in this example do you file a report of multiple sales of pistol? Mom has purchased two handguns within a five day period. The report would be required. Yet you don't have the forms 4473 to show the multiple sales to the same person.

It says right in the instructions to form 4473 that the PURCHASER of a firearm as a gift fills out the form 4473, not the recipient of the gift. While your intentions seem to be honorable, you are not complying with the regulations regarding who completes the form 4473.

Nowhere in the instructions to the form 4473 that the recipient of the gift is the purchases. In fact, you are causing the recipient of the gift to commit a Federal felony! You are telling the recipient of the gift to state that they are the purchaser of the firearm, when clearly they aren't! You are CAUSING a "straw purchase" to happen, at least on the records on the form 4473.

 

[jerkface11]

You are CAUSING a "straw purchase" to happen, at least on the records on the form 4473.

UHOH someone here will report him for that!

 

[merlinfire]

You can legally buy a gun as a gift for someone else.

I'm sure you're right concerning the law, but I'm not sure what the practical difference is.

 

[NavyLCDR]

I'm sure you're right concerning the law, but I'm not sure what the practical difference is.

The practical difference is who spent the money for the gun. If it is a gift, person A pays for the gun, the money comes from person A, person A fills out the form 4473, and person B gets a gun that they did not pay for.

If it is a straw purchase, person A pays for the gun at the counter, the money comes from person B, person A fills out the form 4473, and person B gets a gun that they paid for without completing the form 4473.

In Corey's case of the recipient of the gift of the gun being present and completing the form 4473, the recipient of the gift is committing a Federal felony because they are making the false statement on the form 4473 that claims they are the actual purchaser of the firearm, when clearly they aren't.

 

[NavyLCDR]

I would really love to hear Corey's explanation to the ATF why he sold two guns to mom as gifts to two brothers and brother A fills out a form 4473 and brother B does not.

"Well, Sir, Brother B could not fill out the form 4473 because he was under 21 and getting a handgun, you know that is illegal for me to do so his mom had to fill out the 4473!"

 

[woad_yurt]

But, what "legally inconvenient" thing could occur?

The only legal repercussions would be inconvenient investigation and monitoring by the ATF and local law enforcement as in several other cases of gun stores which were the retail sources of guns used in crimes.

That's what I was talking about when I said "legally inconvenient." Who wants to go through that when you're merely trying to make a living? It seems that ATF folks going through your business with a fine-toothed comb would throw a wrench in anyone's gears.

 

[Lord Teapot]

who cares, i'm of the opinion that every citizen has the right to own a gun, there's nothing in the constitution about keeping that right from felons, etc.

 

[Black Butte]

who cares, i'm of the opinion that every citizen has the right to own a gun, there's nothing in the constitution about keeping that right from felons.

So you're all for allowing serial felons with a demonstrated propensity for violence to freely purchase firearms? Call me crazy, but I don't want the guy who held up three liqueur stores and causally threw shots at the police and innocent bystanders to legally be allowed to acquire guns.

Also, it doesn't automatically follow that an individual should have the right to do something just because the Constitution is silent on that particular issue. The Constitution reserves for the states police power which is “clearly necessary to the safety, comfort and well being of society” (People v. Jackson and Michigan Plank Road, 1861).

 

[jerkface11]

So you're all for allowing serial felons with a demonstrated propensity for violence to freely purchase firearms? Call me crazy, but I don't want the guy who held up three liqueur stores and causally threw shots at the police and innocent bystanders to legally be allowed to acquire guns.

Also, it doesn't automatically follow that an individual should have the right to do something just because the Constitution is silent on that particular issue. The Constitution reserves for the states police power which is “clearly necessary to the safety, comfort and well being of society” (People v. Jackson and Michigan Plank Road, 1861).

If someone is so dangerous you can't trust them with a gun why aren't they in prison? And if they are that dangerous do you really think a guncontrol law will stop them from arming themselves? If so what level of guncontrol are you comfortable with? And yes banning someone from owning guns infringes on their right to keep and bear arms. So yes it's unconstitutional.

 

[Nushif]

Call me crazy, but I don't want the guy who held up three liqueur stores and causally threw shots at the police and innocent bystanders to legally be allowed to acquire guns.

Just to throw something out there .... how about the guy who embezzled funds? Or the guy who stole a car? Or the guy who carried more than three ounces of weed? Or the guy who tagged the wrong house? Or the guy who carried a gun across the wrong state line? Or the guy who had an ND?

 

[Black Butte]

If someone is so dangerous you can't trust them with a gun why aren't they in prison?

Felons do go to prison. In fact, the very definition of "felony" is a crime that is punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year.

And yes banning someone from owning guns infringes on their right to keep and bear arms. So yes it's unconstitutional.

Sorry, the Second Amendment doesn't give everyone the carte blanche right to own a firearm. Banning everyone from owning any firearm would be unconstitutional, but banning felons from owning firearms, however, does pass constitutional muster. See post 69.

 

[Black Butte]

... how about the guy who embezzled funds? Or the guy who stole a car? Or the guy who carried more than three ounces of weed? Or the guy who tagged the wrong house? Or the guy who carried a gun across the wrong state line? Or the guy who had an ND?

There is already a process in place whereby felons can petition to reinstate their Second Amendment rights after they have served their time and/or completed their probation. Under the situations you describe above, where violence isn't a factor, petitioners are often successful. Those who have used guns to commit acts of violence will likely not be successful.

 

[Sam1911]

Seems the "what to do" question has been answered -- or at least both viewpoints have been sufficiently aired.

The "should felons be allowed to own guns" question has been done before, and can be done again if y'all wish, but please make that a thread of its own.