Question About Straw Purchase Transfers

[Chaz88]

I am little confused on the transferring later.

I buy guns for my kids to use. We live in the same state. My state has no requirement for FFL transfer for private exchanges. When my kids are of age they are not prohibited persons. I gift them the guns they liked using the most and they go on their merry way. Problem?

Another possibility- It is Christmas and my 22 year old lives on their own, in my state, and wants a pistol. I buy it with my money wrap it up with a bow and put it under the tree. Christmas day is great they got just what they wanted then take it and go on their merry way home. Problem?

I am not being facetious I am continually confused about the nuances that these situations turn on when it comes to legality.

[Brian Pfleuger]

You bought the gun, you can gift it to your children. No problem.

The problem comes in using someone else's money to buy a gun when they are not the one filling out the 4473 and the gun will be transferred to their possession.

[Chaz88]

Thanks for moving and answering Brian.

Every time I read the 4473 when buying for my kids to use or as a gift the language of the question has me second guessing legality.

[Brian Pfleuger]

The instructions on the 4473 answer a lot of those questions and give examples but most people never read them. It specifically says that legitimate gifts for a 3rd party are acceptable.

[Chaz88]

The instructions on the 4473 answer a lot of those questions and give examples but most people never read them. It specifically says that legitimate gifts for a 3rd party are acceptable.

I always read the questions carefully, just in case they changed something. But have never carefully read the instructions. Reading is my friend. I will make a point of reading the instructions.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Here's the instructions from the 4473 for question 11a, which is the "Straw Purchase" question:

Question 11.a. Actual Transferee/Buyer: For purposes of this form, you are
the actual transferee/buyer if you are purchasing the firearm for yourself or
otherwise acquiring the firearm for yourself (e.g., redeeming the firearm from
pawn/retrieving it from consignment, firearm raflle winner). You are also the
actual transferee/buyer if you are legitimately purchasing the firearm as a gift
for a third party. ACTUAL TRANSFEREE/BUYER EXAMPLES: Mr.
Smith asks Mr. Jones to purchase a firearm for Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith gives Mr.
Jones the money for the firearm. Mr. Jones is NOT THE ACTUAL TRANS-
FEREE/BUYER of the firearm and must answer “NO” to question 11.a. The
licensee may not transfer the firearm to Mr. Jones. However, if Mr. Brown
goes to buy a firearm with his own money to give to Mr. Black as a present,
Mr. Brown is the actual transferee/buyer of the firearm and should answer
“YES” to question 11.a. However, you may not transfer a firearm to any
person you know or have reasonable cause to believe is prohibited under 18
U.S.C. § 922(g), (n), or (x). Please note: EXCEPTION: If you are picking
up a repaired firearm(s) for another person, you are not required to answer
11.a. and may proceed to question 11.b.

I bolded the gift section. Note the first example they give of an illegal transfer, just after the bolded section. It is essentially the exact question we were discussing in the other thread.

[Chaz88]

That is how I thought it was supposed to work. But with the way times have changed and how thin the bread is sliced on legal and illegal for some things I now have confusion and questions about things that I had not thought much about before and figured common sense applied.

Not so long ago I would have applauded a 15 year old that earned their own money for guns. Now I have to berate the 15 year old for possibly facilitating a felony, or at least try and give a strong hint that they should consider revising their inaccurate statement of the facts.

[Brian Pfleuger]

I whole-heartedly agree.

With any luck, the SCOTUS wil find in favor of the defendent in the Abramski(sp?) case.

Such things are zero victim laws and should not be tolerated. A young man that earns his own money should absolutely be able to have his father buy and hold a firearm for the boy's uses and to later transfer it to him at the appropriate age.

[Frank Ettin]

I've closed this thread to try to avoid us once again entering the straw purchase swamp.

1. The current state of the law is discussed in this thread and generally summarized in this post:

   Originally Posted by Frank Ettin

   
   

   Not really. In fact, a court will look at legislative intent when dealing with a question of how a statute is supposed to be applied in a particular situation. But in doing so, courts will want to hear good arguments based on some solid evidence to support one side's or the other's contention of what legislative intent was or why a statute should be applied one way or another.
   
   

   A while ago I outlined current law on straw purchases in this thread on THR:

   The real issue here is likely to be the language of the statute (18 USC 922(a)(6), emphasis added):

   The general legal definition of "material" is:

   So is the misrepresentation as to who the actual purchaser is material when the subsequent transfer was done at an FFL on a 4473?
   
   The argument may have some merit, and indeed the Fifth Circuit in United States v. Polk, 118 F.3d 286 (5th Cir. 1997) decided that the misrepresentation as to the actual purchaser was not material when the subsequent transferee (the actual purchaser) could legally buy a gun directly.
   
   But the Fourth Circuit in this case does not agree, nor do the Sixth Circuit (United States v. Morales, 687 F.3d 697 (6th Cir. 2012)), and Eleventh Circuit (United States v. Frazier, 605 F.3d 1271 (11th Cir. 2010)).
   
   

   As discussed above, that's not relevant under current law (at least in the Fourth, Sixth and Eleventh Circuits).

2. And as discussed in that thread, the Supreme Court will be looking at the question, so things could change.
   
   
3. But things haven't changed yet.