|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
February 25, 2013, 09:44 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 23, 2004
Posts: 236
|
Straw purchases/sales: time factor ?
A friend asked me about this & I'm curious too, - obviously if someone bought a firearm from a gunshop and then stepped out the door and sold it to someone else, he may very well have a serious legal problem regarding a 'straw purchase'. That is, buying a gun for someone else. On the other hand, if he bought a gun and sold it to someone 5 years later, its obviously not such a straw purchase.
Is a straw purchase defined by some measure of time ? A week, a month, a year. . . or what ? I did a search and didnt find this answered. Thanks P.S. - I actually stopped selling any of my guns years ago. Almost all of the guns I traded in or sold, were models I later became interested in again - or the value of them went way up. I hate buying a gun for a lot more money than I paid the first time around. So I just keep them. I suppose some guys buy and sell so many that keeping all of them isnt practical. |
February 25, 2013, 09:50 PM | #2 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
Let's say you're the guy buying and I'm the guy in the parking lot. If I give you the money to buy the gun on my behalf, and you lie on question 11a, then that's a straw purchase. The essential component is the fact that it's a proxy buy. While the behavior described in your post could certainly risk serious scrutiny, it would not be a straw purchase under the law. Even if it was only for 30 seconds, you were the actual buyer.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
February 25, 2013, 11:05 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 23, 2004
Posts: 236
|
Thanks Tom !
|
February 25, 2013, 11:14 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 27, 2010
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 2,905
|
Tom's answer is right on. I would also add that the "serious scrutiny" he mentioned in his post wouldn't just be from the aspect of a potential straw purchase.
If a private individual (i.e. not a dealer) shows a pattern of frequently buying and then quickly re-selling firearms, they'll probably also be looking at him for dealing in firearms without a license. There's no hard-and-fast rule for how many guns is "too many", how quick is "too quickly", and how often is "too often", but like pornography, judges know it when they see it. |
February 26, 2013, 04:50 AM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 16, 2008
Posts: 1,184
|
The problem for the seller is that the quick turn around time will be used as evidence of intent. Now other factors such as does he have a relationship with the buyer come into play. If you buy a gun and then 30 seconds later sell it to your good friend it appears as if that was your intent from the outset.
Proving what was going in in someone's mind is most commonly done through their actions. If you point a gun at someone and pull the trigger it certainly appears that you intended to kill them. |
February 26, 2013, 06:22 AM | #6 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,414
|
Quote:
|
|
February 26, 2013, 03:18 PM | #7 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 9,995
|
I knew a guy who bought a gun, went directly to the range, and someone there bought it from him. He was LEO with discount and they offered him more than he paid. He had no intention of selling it when he bought it. Not a straw buy.
|
February 26, 2013, 03:27 PM | #8 | ||
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Quote:
So perhaps we can have a common understanding of what a straw purchase is: The actual offense is violation of 18 USC 922(a)(6), making a false statement on the 4473 (specifically about who is the actual buyer), and has nothing to do with the ultimate recipient being a prohibited person. See the ATF publication Federal Firearms Regulation Reference Guide, 2005, at page 165 (emphasis added): So, if --
Some more examples --
Whether or not a transaction is an unlawful straw purpose will often be a question of intent. But prosecutors in various situations can convince juries of intent, often from circumstantial evidence. A slip of the tongue, posting something on the Internet, tracks left by money transfers, timing, etc., have all, in one way or another, and in various contexts, helped convince a jury of intent.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|