Straw purchases and gifts

[NavyLCDR]

Sorry, but I used to be a WA resident and have more than just a passing knowledge of this topic.

Here is the RCW that applies:
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.20.021

There is no exception for spouse of active duty military members, and the federal law only exempts the military member, not dependents.

Your wife, if she is actually a WA State resident as you claim, was required by WA State law to get a WA State DL or ID within 30 days of becoming a resident of the State. There is no WA State or federal exception to that requirement.

Really?!?

1. You are correct that there is no Federal exemption for spouses.

2. You are NOT correct when you state that there is no WA State exception to that requirement for military spouses. I also had to provide the correct information to the lady who took our fingerprints at the sheriff's office for our CPL's as well, and the Island County Sheriff verified that I was correct.

3. Yes you do have more than a passing knowledge of WA State law, however, you have demonstrated that you might not be aware of the Washington Administrative Code.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx?cite=308-104-008

WAC 308-104-008 No agency filings affecting this section since 2003
Persons exempt from driver's license requirement.

In addition to persons exempt from driver license requirement pursuant to RCW 46.20.025, the following persons are exempt from the requirement to obtain a valid driver's license issued to Washington residents under chapter 46.20 RCW:
(1) A student who maintains his or her legal home of record at a location outside Washington state, or the spouse or dependent of the student, who is at least sixteen years of age and who has in his or her immediate possession a valid driver's license issued to him or her in his or her home jurisdiction. The student must be enrolled as a full-time nonresident student at an institution of higher learning in Washington accredited by the Northwest Association of Schools and Colleges or by an accrediting association recognized by the higher education board, or at a private vocational school as that term is defined by RCW 28C.10.020(7). The student must carry documentation issued by the institution that readily establishes his or her status as a nonresident student. A spouse or dependent of a nonresident student must carry a copy of the documentation issued to the student by the institution and documentation establishing the relationship with the student;

(2) Military personnel who are at least sixteen years of age who have in their immediate possession a valid driver's license issued by the jurisdiction designated as their home of record. A spouse or dependent of a person who meets the criteria of this subsection is also exempt from the driver's license requirement, provided that the spouse or dependent has in his or her immediate possession a valid driver's license issued by the jurisdiction designated as his or her home of record.



[Statutory Authority: RCW 46.01.110. 00-18-069, § 308-104-008, filed 9/1/00, effective 10/2/00; 87-19-129 (Order DS 3), § 308-104-008, filed 9/22/87.]

 

[NavyLCDR]

There's also an issue of intent. It is arguable, based on the facts as recited in post #1 that these are not truly gifts insofar as a gift is understood to be a tangible expression of affection or esteem.

The OP makes it sound like there's a "hidden agenda" to secure handguns for two people who could not purchase them. And the handguns are characterized as gifts to make the whole deal sound kosher.

That's true, Fiddletown. There is one point - the two people in the cases above, CAN legally purchase the firearms. The 19 year old boy is legal to purchase the handgun from a private party, just not an FFL. The military spouse is legal to purchase the handgun from a Washington FFL or a private party. However the spouses inability to show proof to the FFL of state residence's is what precludes them from purchasing from an FFL.

My one and only point in bringing the scenarios up and showing the applicable statute and BATFE interpretation of the statute is this:

There are FFLs who will state that because person A is not eligible to purchase the handgun from an FFL, but person A is otherwise completely legal to possess and purchase that handgun from a private party, that it would be illegal for them to sell that handgun to person B who has expressed the intent to give that handgun as a gift to person A. That statement is false.

There are BATFE agents who claim that person B can only give a gift of a firearm to person A if person A and B are immediate relatives. That statement is false.

I want to make it perfectly clear, that an FFL has every right to choose who they will and will not sell to. I have no problem with that. My purpose is only to analyze the legality of both situations. In regards to case #2, I have purchased 7 handguns from 6 FFLs in two different states that I have been stationed in exactly the way described. (That fact, of course, does not determine the legality of the transactions.) The only reason I had to purchase them and give them as gifts to my wife was because she did not have an in-state driver's license to show to the FFL.

 

[NavyLCDR]

If it's truely a gift, why even say anything that may lead the FFL to think it's possibly a straw purchase? That's like waving a red flag at a bull. Just stupid.

The purpose, deadin, is to be able to allow that person to pick out a handgun that they like and feels good to them. They have to go to an FFL dealer to do that, unless they want to try all the guns in my collection.

I really don't know about the 3 state rule regarding DL, Registration, and Insurance. I abide by it personally, but don't know if it is actual law or not.