Penalty for "straw purchase?"

[Langenator]

The thread about the Columbine video, specifically the fact that the girlfriend bought some of the guns for the killers, got me wondering-what exactly are the criminal penalties for making a straw purchase-i.e. buying a gun with the specific intent of giving it to a person who cannot legally have said gun. A fine? Probation? Prison time?

Maybe we should make the penalty for this more severe-I would propose that any person making such a purchase be automatically receive the same sentence as the person they bought the gun for, for any and all crimes committed with the gun, plus a minimum additional five years. If the gunner is killed in the commission of the crime(s), give the buyer whatever the gunner would have gotten had he lived.

Comments?

 

[P95Carry]

I think the keyword here would be ''knowingly'' .... which would prove intent. In which case ... I would have to agree on severe penalties.... that tho in itself would have to be graded on the degree of consequence of said sale. If purely and simply ... a sale to a person not legally able to possess but otherwise of good standing ... then maybe not too harsh .. but if the weapon were to be used for homicide then .... yes, ''accessory after the fact'' IMO... two extremes there.

If a sale was made in all good faith and that could be proven then I do not think the seller should be liable.

There's more that could be said cos this is potentially quite a convoluted situation ..... any case would have to assessed strictly on its specific merits and de-merits.

 

[C.R.Sam]

P95...I am easy to confuse, and you did it.
I read your responding post as refering to penalties to seller.

I read Langenator's initial post to be questioning penalties to purchaser.

You guys on same track ?

My personal opinion is that the seller should bear no guilt if they had no indication that it was a straw purchase.

And that the straw purchaser should charged for the violation implied by the purchase......and further for any crime committed by the end user using that gun.

Sam

 

[Standing Wolf]

My personal opinion is that the seller should bear no guilt if they had no indication that it was a straw purchase.

By definition, a straw purchase is the deliberate, intentional purchase of a firearm for someone who's disqualified from purchasing it. There's nothing accidental or unintentional about it.

 

[C.R.Sam]

Agree with the definition.
If illicit purchaser answers falsely on the 4473 and has convincingly told the seller that the gun is for themselves....seller sold in good faith. Buyer broke the law.

Sam

 

[P95Carry]

Sam ... sorry to confuse!!! I confuse myself at times!

I wrote that response in about 10 stages ... due to countless interruptions etc .... and i think I wandered off track a bit. I was, as is probably fairly obvious, analyzing things with regard to the culpability of a seller ... as against the purchasor.

Mind you ... the ''straw purchasor'' has of course committed a crime thru intent .. one of the points I was abstrusely trying to make ....

I'll be better after a night's rest Sam ...

 

[Hkmp5sd]

You are looking at a couple of different situations. A straw purchase for someone that can legally own the gun, straw purchase for a prohibited person (felon) and straw purchase for a minor.

Relating to the Columbine shooting, if I interpret everything correctly, a person would get 5 yrs/$5000 for falsely filling out the 4473. The person would then get 10 yrs/$10000 for transferring the firearm to a minor with the knowledge the minor was going to do something illegal with them.

And there is the chance that if the person knew exactly what the minor was planning (ie shooting spree), they can be charged with conspiracy for the murders.

 

[HABU]

I am legally able to buy a firearm. I wish I could find someone to make my purchases for me so that .gov doesnt know I own it. I guess I yam a bad bad man.