Criminals and straw purchases

This directly contradicts the validity of universal background checks. If one is willing to make a straw purchase for someone they know can't obtain a firearm legally through an FFL, I highly doubt the transfer from straw purchaser to felon requiring a 4473 will curtail the event taking place.

lionking said:

Also how are gangs able to find so many people that will buy guns for them?

Click to expand...

My guess would be girlfriends/significant others, family....

It wouldn't surprise me that gangs keep "clean" members to purchase items others wouldn't be able to.

lionking said:

However background checks do potentially stop someone with a record. Otherwise a gang member with a record would just go buy the gun themselves.

Click to expand...

agreed, but your OP specifically said that they were obtaining the weapons via straw purchases, private sales are not straw purchases. restricting private sales, would have zero impact on those willing to commit a straw purchase for a felon.

Quick!! More gun laws......that the crooks won't obey either.

How to curtail this? I'm not LE, but I would probably say enforcement would be the route I'd choose. And maybe enforcement in the direction of prosecuting the felons who know they aren't allowed to have a gun, but try to get one anyway and get denied. I would think that someone either doing the straw purchase or being denied as a felon leaves a key piece of evidence behind- a signed 4473. I would think that would be like a signed confession.

There's always a family member or someone else they can get to make the purchase for them. Same goes for non gang members.

Addicts will do all sorts of stuff in trade for drugs... I have to imagine that a straw purchase is one of the less horrifically degrading or dangerous ones.

I work at a store that is predominately in a highly Hispanic area. The thing that gets me is that those with Permanent Residence status can buy Firearms. Especially when what they “happen” to want is a 1911 in the 38 Super round. For those here that don’t know this, 38 Super is a legal round south of the border. 45 ACP isn’t because the military and police use it down there.
If they come correct, they can buy the gun, regardless of what we may know is probably going to happen with the gun.

The elephant in the room on this topic is all the people that DO try and buy a gun legally from a FFL and are turned away just to walk out the door.

Those of us that have spent enough time at LGS have undoubtedly seen this. And what, these people just walk out the door having just committed a felony.


Until you can curtail THAT easy to catch problem it's best you leave things like straw purchases alone.

Fix what's fixable first then we can work on the harder ones.

I think you'd see a lot less straw purchases if the penalty is 10 years in a federal prison and a $50,000 fine if it is used in a felony and half that if it is not used but they are still caught. The lawmakers continue to try to take away the rights of the law-abiding citizens and let the actual criminals walk (as mentioned above). What is wrong with this picture?

Until we enforce the laws we currently have, no new laws will “curtail” crime. They will only inhibit those that CHOOSE to follow the laws.

lionking said:

However background checks do potentially stop someone with a record. Otherwise a gang member with a record would just go buy the gun themselves.

Click to expand...

Straw purchases are illegal. Making more laws doesn't cut down on straw purchases. They are obviously willing to break the first law so why not the second law?

FL-NC said:

How to curtail this? I'm not LE, but I would probably say enforcement would be the route I'd choose. And maybe enforcement in the direction of prosecuting the felons who know they aren't allowed to have a gun, but try to get one anyway and get denied. I would think that someone either doing the straw purchase or being denied as a felon leaves a key piece of evidence behind- a signed 4473. I would think that would be like a signed confession.[/QUOTE
If the purchase was NOT completed, was there any violation????

Click to expand...

FL-NC said:

How to curtail this? I'm not LE, but I would probably say enforcement would be the route I'd choose. And maybe enforcement in the direction of prosecuting the felons who know they aren't allowed to have a gun, but try to get one anyway and get denied. I would think that someone either doing the straw purchase or being denied as a felon leaves a key piece of evidence behind- a signed 4473. I would think that would be like a signed confession.

Click to expand...

If there was no transfer....is there a violation???

Good Ol' Boy said:

The elephant in the room on this topic is all the people that DO try and buy a gun legally from a FFL and are turned away just to walk out the door.

Those of us that have spent enough time at LGS have undoubtedly seen this. And what, these people just walk out the door having just committed a felony.


Until you can curtail THAT easy to catch problem it's best you leave things like straw purchases alone.

Fix what's fixable first then we can work on the harder ones.

Click to expand...

Not every person who is denied a sale is a prohibited person...

Most often it a girlfriend making the straw purchase. The real problem is that the Feds will not prosecute the one making the straw purchase. They don’t want to waste the time and money to put someone in prison for just one year.
From time to time they will go after someone for making a straw purchase, but most often they have other charges.
The Feds also want to keep a high conviction rate so, they pick and choose the cases that have an 85% or higher chance of winning.
They also like cases where they have multiple charges on the defendants.

GunnyUSMC said:

Most often it a girlfriend making the straw purchase. The real problem is that the Feds will not prosecute the one making the straw purchase. They don’t want to waste the time and money to put someone in prison for just one year.
From time to time they will go after someone for making a straw purchase, but most often they have other charges.
The Feds also want to keep a high conviction rate so, they pick and choose the cases that have an 85% or higher chance of winning.
They also like cases where they have multiple charges on the defendants.

Click to expand...

Wasn't there recently one woman that had like twenty charges for this or something like that. I believe I heard about that somewhere but I am not absolutely sure on that one.


Edit I tried looking it up but can't find it.

Roamin_Wade writes:

If they come correct, they can buy the gun, regardless of what we may know is probably going to happen with the gun.

Click to expand...

This applies to anyone, not just lawfully-admitted foreigners. A person with "permanent residence" status holds an immigrant visa (sometimes referred to as a "green card" because of the color they once were.) Any lawful resident of the US can, unless otherwise prohibited by any of the same criteria that would prohibit any of us, can purchase, own, and possess firearms in accordance with the same laws that would apply to a US citizen (though some local jurisdictions may not issue carry licenses to them.)

A person issued an immigrant visa has been vetted, perhaps even more so than many of us who hold carry licenses/permits.

If a permanent resident breaks the law by trafficking firearms or ammunition within, or from, the US, then that's when enforcement should take place (of course, their immigrant visa can very well be revoked as well.) Trying to enforce such laws before they're known to have been committed goes against everything most of us stands for, as does lumping all lawful immigrants into a prohibited class just because a few break the laws (why does that practice sound familiar?)

OrangeCat said:

Wasn't there recently one woman that had like twenty charges for this or something like that. I believe I heard about that somewhere but I am not absolutely sure on that one.

Click to expand...

We had ten or more guns used in crimes linked back to one woman. The last I remember the Feds had not charged her.

GunnyUSMC said:

We had ten or more guns used in crimes linked back to one woman. The last I remember the Feds had not charged her.

Click to expand...

Maybe that's why it's showing up I don't remember if she was actually charged or if they just traced the purchases back to her.

GunnyUSMC said:

We had ten or more guns used in crimes linked back to one woman. The last I remember the Feds had not charged her.

Click to expand...

Is it possible the gave her immunity in exchange for a bigger fish???
Anything is possible

newfalguy101 said:

Is it possible the gave her immunity in exchange for a bigger fish???
Anything is possible

Click to expand...

Don’t know.

Roamin_Wade said:

I work at a store that is predominately in a highly Hispanic area. The thing that gets me is that those with Permanent Residence status can buy Firearms. Especially when what they “happen” to want is a 1911 in the 38 Super round. For those here that don’t know this, 38 Super is a legal round south of the border. 45 ACP isn’t because the military and police use it down there.
If they come correct, they can buy the gun, regardless of what we may know is probably going to happen with the gun.

Click to expand...

I could be wrong but I thought a licensed ffl could refuse a gun sale for any reason. If not then having a bad feeling about a sale I would just tell the buyer they were put on hold by NICS. Come back in 3 days. If legitimate buyers they might come back. If not then I can sleep knowing I didn't possibly contribute to a criminal enterprise.

ontarget said:

I could be wrong but I thought a licensed ffl could refuse a gun sale for any reason. If not then having a bad feeling about a sale I would just tell the buyer they were put on hold by NICS. Come back in 3 days. If legitimate buyers they might come back. If not then I can sleep knowing I didn't possibly contribute to a criminal enterprise.

Click to expand...

That is true, but, also a catch-22

If it becomes a pattern of denying certian persons, it becomes descrimonation...

Besides, how many times have we made a judgment based on a gut feeling, or a perspns appearance thst proved, given time and more info, to be completely off base??

Surly, I cant be the only one....