Buying gun from law enforcement friend

Cattafly · Dec 9, 2018

Willjr75 said:
Did you read the decision? You can't buy a gun with intentions of it being for someone else. The cop who got charged with the straw purchase did exactly what you are saying to the letter and it was ruled to be a straw purchase.

I and many don't agree with that decision but it happened.

I would like to see the actual decision and not a recap from a law firm or Wikipedia. How would grampa in Florida legally buy a gun for a friend or family here in NY. There is no question about the gun being a gift even though the end user legally can pass a background check. I understand what is being said but I'd like to see the original decision as I don't believe most of the crap I read on the internet. It's possible I missed a link to it I guess. I know you and many others don't agree with what you have read but there is a ton of gun related information circulating on the internet that is false or just hearsay.

Eddie Gunks · Dec 9, 2018

Cattafly said:
Maybe I put it wrong. Friend buys gun then ships it or takes to FFL. Money transaction is done between private individuals. FFL takes possession of gun and logs it into his books. Friend who is buyer does a 4473 and answers he is the actual buyer at that point. Buyer takes receipt to county clerk and puts gun on their permit. Buyer receives a "coupon" stating gun is now on buyers permit. Buyer takes this to FFL and the gun is transferred. How is this a straw purchase.

That is the definition of straw purchase.

Sorry you are unable to grasp the law. It is extremely clear. You can not buy a gun for someone else (money transaction take place).

You can buy a gun. And then decide to sell it in the future. This is not the same as “buying a gun for someone else”

Again, as pointed out above, read the supreme court case listed in the thread above. It is very clear

Eddie Gunks · Dec 9, 2018

Supreme Court Cracks Down on Straw Purchases of Guns: HoganWillig Blog

@Cattafly

You can google the exact case as needed

Eddie Gunks · Dec 9, 2018

Cattafly said:
How would grampa in Florida legally buy a gun for a friend or family here in NY. There is no question about the gun being a gift even though the end user legally can pass a background check. .

This is the part you are having trouble with. YOU CAN NOT LEGALLY BUY A GUN FOR ANOTHER PERSON, HAVING IT TRANSFERED TO YOURSELF AND THEN SOMEONE ELSE.

you can buy a gun for someone else, NOT do a 4473 and have THE ACTUAL BUYER complete the 4473.

MoMan · Dec 9, 2018

livingston said:
Cuomo should be handling this .....

Jesus!!! Careful what you ask for!!!!!

Acer-m14 · Dec 10, 2018

Eddie Gunks said:
you can buy a gun for someone else, NOT do a 4473 and have THE ACTUAL BUYER complete the 4473.

you can buy a gun for someone else if there not a felon and can pass the NICS .. WTH ..
have the mags pinned .. at his FFL or yours ..

me and Eddy hit the gun store .. i spent my cash on reloading shit ..
oh shit thats a nice pistol .. need some cash .. up to you .. i'll pay ya back ..
i do the NICS .. done deal .. and pay eddy back ..

if i was out in the car .. not good ..

or this guy is up the wazzzoo canal .. the pistol project .. tymppistolproject.com

Eddie Gunks · Dec 10, 2018

Acer-m14 said:
you can buy a gun for someone else if there not a felon and can pass the NICS .. WTH ..
have the mags pinned .. at his FFL or yours ..

me and Eddy hit the gun store .. i spent my cash on reloading shit ..
oh shit thats a nice pistol .. need some cash .. up to you .. i'll pay ya back ..
i do the NICS .. done deal .. and pay eddy back ..

if i was out in the car .. not good ..

or this guy is up the wazzzoo canal .. the pistol project .. tymppistolproject.com

It does not matter who hands over the cash. AS LONG AS THE GUY THAT DOES THE BACKGROUND CHECK IS THE ACTUAL BUYER!

Even if the money man was in the car. As long as teh guy filling the 4473 IS THE ACTUAL BUYER.

Acer-m14 · Dec 10, 2018

Eddie Gunks said:
It does not matter who hands over the cash. AS LONG AS THE GUY THAT DOES THE BACKGROUND CHECK IS THE ACTUAL BUYER!

Even if the money man was in the car. As long as teh guy filling the 4473 IS THE ACTUAL BUYER.

yep .. we could have walked out and chatted .. then i went back in to buy with $$ from you ..

I get it .. some don't

hopefully they will now

Cattafly · Dec 10, 2018

Eddie Gunks said:
This is the part you are having trouble with. YOU CAN NOT LEGALLY BUY A GUN FOR ANOTHER PERSON, HAVING IT TRANSFERED TO YOURSELF AND THEN SOMEONE ELSE.

you can buy a gun for someone else, NOT do a 4473 and have THE ACTUAL BUYER complete the 4473.

Ok, got it. Buy gun then have FFL send it to another FFL without the buyer doing a 4473. Selling FFL logs it out of their book to the receiving FFL. In effect only the ACTUAL buyer does the background check at the receiving FFL. Correct?
It just seems to be a lot of legal hoopla to accomplish the same thing. It seems the Supreme Court is making the law instead of interpreting it. It don't seem to reflect the ATF's definition of a straw purchase.
Thanks for your patience in explaining a totally BS decision by the wackos on the left.

Cattafly · Dec 10, 2018

The major problem I have with this is, If I have a neighbor kid who does a lot for me and I want to buy him a gun for Christmas I Legally can't take possession wrap it up and surprise him with it. He wouldn't actually take possession until we went and transferred it to him or his guardian at a FFL. According to the Court this then that would be a straw purchase. If this gun is bought and then transferred at the same FFL, would the FFL be liable as he should know that, according to the Supreme Court, that it was a straw purchase?

Eddie Gunks · Dec 10, 2018

Cattafly said:
The major problem I have with this is, If I have a neighbor kid who does a lot for me and I want to buy him a gun for Christmas I Legally can't take possession wrap it up and surprise him with it. He wouldn't actually take possession until we went and transferred it to him or his guardian at a FFL. According to the Court this then that would be a straw purchase. If this gun is bought and then transferred at the same FFL, would the FFL be liable as he should know that, according to the Supreme Court, that it was a straw purchase?

No.

You can gift it to him. (No exchange of money).

nortatoga · Dec 10, 2018

And to all of those upset that the SCOTUS has not taken any other 2A cases!

How they ruled!

Case opinions
Majority Kagan, joined by Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor
Dissent Scalia, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito

Airborneguy · Dec 10, 2018

This is actually one of the few really simple gun laws. I’m surprised its being confused so badly here.

Too many hypotheticals is the problem.

Cattafly · Dec 10, 2018

It seems to me that this would have never of came to be an issue if the receiver of the gun wasn't suspected in a holdup using said gun. I mean no disrespect but that is a very gray law that is not in the description of the ATF's description of a straw purchase. Most of the simple gun laws are left open to interpretation, just look at the SAFE ACT. I personally have talked to the Attny. General of NY and was told to check with the State Police for clarification. The State Police are a law enforcement agency not law makers. If the Attny. General can't answer simple questions how are the State Police going to enforce them? I think their attitude is just write the summons and let the courts handle it from there. So, is a law simple if it can be interpreted so differently by so many people as it must have been if the Supreme court had to rule on it? In this particular case, I bet, not one in a thousand know they are breaking the law by doing it that way. I didn't and I pride myself on staying up to date on gun laws. Was there anything a person could have looked up pertaining to this ruling where an average person, looking to do things the right way, could have found that his actions would equate to a straw purchase? It seems a good way to make a criminal out of a person who thought they were obeying the law.

cgrutt · Dec 10, 2018

Cattafly said:
It seems to me that this would have never of came to be an issue if the receiver of the gun wasn't suspected in a holdup using said gun. I mean no disrespect but that is a very gray law that is not in the description of the ATF's description of a straw purchase. Most of the simple gun laws are left open to interpretation, just look at the SAFE ACT. I personally have talked to the Attny. General of NY and was told to check with the State Police for clarification. The State Police are a law enforcement agency not law makers. If the Attny. General can't answer simple questions how are the State Police going to enforce them? I think their attitude is just write the summons and let the courts handle it from there. So, is a law simple if it can be interpreted so differently by so many people as it must have been if the Supreme court had to rule on it? In this particular case, I bet, not one in a thousand know they are breaking the law by doing it that way. I didn't and I pride myself on staying up to date on gun laws. Was there anything a person could have looked up pertaining to this ruling where an average person, looking to do things the right way, could have found that his actions would equate to a straw purchase? It seems a good way to make a criminal out of a person who thought they were obeying the law.

It doesn't appear that the receiver of gun purchased had anything to do with suspected bank robbery or subsequent conviction but I agree with you that if defendant wasn't suspected of committing bank robbery this would never have been an issue at all. My guess it was just an add-on charge or they charged him with lying on Form 4473 because that is all they had to run with.

As far as being law being confusing Supreme Court making laws etc apparently they guy was convicted for answering "yes" on Form 4473 when in fact he was not the actual buyer/transferee. The form and instructions seem pretty clear about who is and is not the actual buyer/transferee even giving clear examples in instructions. See here

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjAAegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw2wqSjpoV4XgKTrkaDYsBId

Before yesterday I thought incorrectly that Abramski purchased gun on behalf of uncle and gave it to him without a second background check. I now see that was not correct however giving actual facts about case it is clear he was not actual buyer/transferee and should not have answered "Yes" to question 11a. Not sure what all the fuss is about?

Airborneguy · Dec 10, 2018

You’re just making it worse. There’s no philosophical angle here. It’s very clear, and simple.

If you’re not buying the gun with the intention of keeping it, its a straw purchase.

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

You can sell a gun you originally intended to keep.

Pretty clear.

Cattafly · Dec 10, 2018

I guess I just get upset when supposed lawmakers make things so difficult on the average law abiding citizen who is trying to do the right thing. I apologize if I have offended anybody but as you can see lawmakers make it extremely difficult on the law abiding.
In that court case I can understand why they did what they did as nephew was fired for theft from the police force and uncle used gun in commission of a crime. Again, sorry for offending anyone if I did.

cgrutt · Dec 10, 2018

No offense taken and no apologies necessary AFAIC lol...

nortatoga · Dec 10, 2018

Cattafly said:
I guess I just get upset when supposed lawmakers make things so difficult on the average law abiding citizen who is trying to do the right thing. I apologize if I have offended anybody but as you can see lawmakers make it extremely difficult on the law abiding.
In that court case I can understand why they did what they did as nephew was fired for theft from the police force and uncle used gun in commission of a crime. Again, sorry for offending anyone if I did.

The uncle had nothing to do with the bank robbery!

Former Roanoke police Officer Bruce Abramski Jr.: Seeing both sides of the law

Cattafly · Dec 10, 2018

Airborneguy said:
You’re just making it worse. There’s no philosophical angle here. It’s very clear, and simple.

If you’re not buying the gun with the intention of keeping it, its a straw purchase.
Pretty clear.

Not trying to ruffle anybody's feathers but if I get a deal on a gun that I know is worth much more than I paid for it, I have made a straw purchase by putting it on gun broker or selling it to another individual? I have no intention of keeping it, in this case, and my only intention is to make a profit. I know this isn't what this case was about but still I have no intention of keeping it. Again, like I said gray areas of law that I can't possibly know how a court would rule if the eventual buyer commits a crime with it.

Cattafly · Dec 10, 2018

nortatoga said:
The uncle had nothing to do with the bank robbery!

Former Roanoke police Officer Bruce Abramski Jr.: Seeing both sides of the law

The 3 or four other articles I read were unclear as to that fact. Thank you for setting me straight.

Airborneguy · Dec 10, 2018

Cattafly said:
Not trying to ruffle anybody's feathers but if I get a deal on a gun that I know is worth much more than I paid for it, I have made a straw purchase by putting it on gun broker or selling it to another individual? I have no intention of keeping it, in this case, and my only intention is to make a profit. I know this isn't what this case was about but still I have no intention of keeping it. Again, like I said gray areas of law that I can't possibly know how a court would rule if the eventual buyer commits a crime with it.

Its not gray, I don’t see how it’s “gray” at all. If you buy a gun intending to sell it, you need to be a licensed dealer or else you just committed a crime.

If you buy a gun, decide you no longer want it and decide to sell it, you did not commit a crime.

Odds of this scenario resulting in a charge: near 0. But that doesn’t make the law unclear. It’s really simple. Maybe that’s where the confusion is coming from?

Cattafly · Dec 10, 2018

Airborneguy said:
Its not gray, I don’t see how it’s “gray” at all. If you buy a gun intending to sell it, you need to be a licensed dealer or else you just committed a crime.

If you buy a gun, decide you no longer want it and decide to sell it, you did not commit a crime.

Odds of this scenario resulting in a charge: near 0. But that doesn’t make the law unclear. It’s really simple. Maybe that’s where the confusion is coming from?

So what you are saying is a court or Law enforcement has the right to decide what my intentions are? I may buy something in the morning, kick myself in the ass for doing it, in the afternoon and sell it. So who decides what my intentions were?

Edwardteach72 · Dec 10, 2018

Wait do we have any idea what gun this is that they dont make 10 round mags for?

togmaster · Dec 10, 2018

This is the main reason (not really) that I never sell a gun. I only buy them.

livingston · Dec 10, 2018

Justincase said:
It's a Walther PPQ M1.

Walther 10 Round Factory Mag Magazine for PPQ M1 9mm | eBay
Walther 10 Round Factory Mag Magazine for PPQ M1 9mm

PPQ M1 Classic 9mm 10 Round
This magazine fits Walther PPQ M1 Classic firearms that are chambered in 9mm. The capacity is 10 rounds.

Airborneguy · Dec 10, 2018

Cattafly said:
So what you are saying is a court or Law enforcement has the right to decide what my intentions are? I may buy something in the morning, kick myself in the ass for doing it, in the afternoon and sell it. So who decides what my intentions were?

No one just decides, the evidence must point either way. This isn’t a “slippery slope” situation. You’re making it much more complicated than it is, especially since the first examples you gave were clear cut straw purchases.

Buying gun from law enforcement friend

.40 S&W

.338 Win Mag

.338 Win Mag

.338 Win Mag

.308 Win

.308 Win

20×102mm Vulcan

.338 Win Mag

20×102mm Vulcan

.40 S&W

.40 S&W

.338 Win Mag

.338 Win Mag

.338 Win Mag

.40 S&W

.338 Win Mag

.338 Win Mag

.40 S&W

.338 Win Mag

.338 Win Mag

.40 S&W

.40 S&W

.338 Win Mag

.40 S&W

.308 Win

.475 A&M Magnum

.450/400 Nitro Ex

.308 Win

20×102mm Vulcan

.338 Win Mag