Buying gun for a friend...

[wishin]

This from the ATF website:

Straw Purchase - The acquisition of a firearm(s) from a Federally
licensed firearms dealer by an individual (the straw
purchaser) for the purpose of concealing the identity
of the true intended receiver of the firearm(s)......

Even if the question ever arose, a first year law student could successfully argue
that the "purpose" was convenience, not the concealment of the receiver's identity. My point is you're not taking any low road here and there's really no risk.

 

[Top_Gunn]

Passages like this on the ATF web site are not law. The crime committed when you make a straw purchase is lying on the Form 4473. If you tell the truth on the form, the dealer won't sell you the gun. If you lie, you're committing a crime, no matter what your purpose.

 

[NavyLCDR]

^^^^ and that is exactly right. The "crime" is lying on the form 4473, regardless of intent.

 

[TexasRifleman]

Even if the question ever arose, a first year law student could successfully argue
that the "purpose" was convenience, not the concealment of the receiver's identity

But that's not what the Form 4473 says so it doesn't matter.

The form says:

Are you the actual buyer of this firearm? Warning: You are not the actual buyer if you are acquiring the firearm(s) on behalf of another person. If you are not the actual buyer the dealer cannot transfer the firearm to you.

Notice that it gives you no reasons, no exceptions, nothing like that. You lie on this question it's a crime.

Even if you were able to argue that it was not a straw purchase you would still have committed a crime by lying on the form to obtain a firearm.

So your first year law student would have successfully defended you all the way to prison.

 

[TFred]

But that's not what the Form 4473 says so it doesn't matter.

The form says:

Are you the actual buyer of this firearm? Warning: You are not the actual buyer if you are acquiring the firearm(s) on behalf of another person. If you are not the actual buyer the dealer cannot transfer the firearm to you.

Notice that it gives you no reasons, no exceptions, nothing like that. You lie on this question it's a crime.

Even if you were able to argue that it was not a straw purchase you would still have committed a crime by lying on the form to obtain a firearm.

So your first year law student would have successfully defended you all the way to prison.

Your conclusion is based on your assumption of the legal definition of "on behalf of." Do you have any source to cite what that may be?

I will reiterate the two examples in the instructions of the form. The first is quite clear that the other person's money must be used to make it illegal. I have seen no official source that says as long as you use your own money and you then choose to make a private sale at some point in the future, that is not legal.

I'm not saying it is legal, but I am saying that I've seen nothing that specifically says it is not.

I don't think we can resolve this with any more certainty one way or the other until we can find a legal case definition for "on behalf of". The term reminds me of an auction with an anonymous bidder on the phone with someone in the room, who would be bidding "on behalf of" that other person.

The quote from the ATF site about concealing the identity is another reason why this rule is stupid. That quote clearly portrays an intent for the law which is not codified in the rules. When intent and codification of rules mis-match, something must be fixed!

TFred

 

[PavePusher]

Sigh. Reason #29634 to do away with the BATFE.

 

[deadin]

If he stops in and purchases the firearm on his way to visit me.........

We must assume that you told him to go ahead and pick it up and you will pay him when he gets to your place. ( I don't imagine that you told him "I think I mught want one of those. Go ahead and pick it up and I'll decide if I want it or not when you get here.")

I believe most any prosecutor could make a case of "aquired on behalf of another" under these circumstances.

 

[TexasRifleman]

The quote from the ATF site about concealing the identity is another reason why this rule is stupid. That quote clearly portrays an intent for the law which is not codified in the rules. When intent and codification of rules mis-match, something must be fixed!

Can't argue with that, nor can I argue with your assertion that it "might" be legal.

But this is the ATF, a government agency who decreed that every 14 inch shoestring in the United States was an illegal machinegun. It took them 2 years to realize what they had done and back off of their statement.

So, given their history and behavior, to suggest that anything even remotely resembling a straw purchase would be OK on a technicality is dangerous ground. That's just the reality of a government agency run amok.

Since the danger vs the reward is so lopsided you'd have to be crazy to buy a gun for someone else in any case other than the very specific examples given of "gifting". It's just not worth it.

Reason #29634 to do away with the BATFE.

Pretty much says it all.....

 

[TFred]

So, given their history and behavior, to suggest that anything even remotely resembling a straw purchase would be OK on a technicality is dangerous ground. That's just the reality of a government agency run amok.

And I can't argue with that either! Or I guess we should all be saying:



TFred