Supreme Court hears possible straw purchase case

[TripleDigitRide]

The Supreme Court took up a new gun rights case on Wednesday, weighing whether it should be a crime for someone to buy a gun for somebody else, if both people are legally allowed to own one. 

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/01/22/supreme-court-weighs-gun-rights-challenge/?intcmp=latestnews

 

 

[Hershmeister]

Full background - this guy was screwed because of a bill of sale! http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/01/argument-preview-checking-up-on-gun-buyers/ A former state police officer, Abramski got caught up — mistakenly – in a federal investigation of a bank robbery in Rocky Mount in 2009, apparently because he was said to look like the bank robber, although the robber was masked. Abramski was ultimately cleared of any role in the bank robbery and of any federal charges related to the robbery. However, during the federal investigation of Abramski, FBI agents searched his former residence in Rocky Mount. That search turned up a receipt that his uncle, Angel Alvarez, had written to him for buying a Glock 19 handgun. Federal prosecutors later said that Abramski, at his uncle’s request, had bought the Glock from a dealer in Collinsville, Virginia, who catered to police officers seeking guns. He allegedly completed the government form, saying “yes” to the question about whether he was the actual buyer. His uncle had sent him a $400 check for the weapon, the government said. The gun was later transferred to his uncle, according to prosecutors, through a firearms dealer in Easton, Pennsylvania. A grand jury accused Abramski of making a false statement about being the actual buyer of the Glock. Under a plea bargain, he agreed to plead guilty to two charges of making false statements, conditioning his plea on his ability to appeal to challenge the validity of the charges against him. He was placed on probation for five years. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld his conviction. Excellent write up of the arguments: http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/01/argument-recap-when-compromise-is-the-problem/

[GlockSpock]

Interesting that this is an issue because it appears that he did a lawful transfer on the sale. If this does turn out to be a huge ordeal, then what does that do to the many people who purchase a firearm as a gift to someone lawfully able to own a firearm? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Oh Shoot]

Interesting that this is an issue because it appears that he did a lawful transfer on the sale. If this does turn out to be a huge ordeal, then what does that do to the many people who purchase a firearm as a gift to someone lawfully able to own a firearm? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

It wasn't a gift. The uncle gave him the money for it, apparently upfront, which seems to be the real issue.

 

It's listed as specific example on the 4473 itself as diff between legal and illegal:

 

"ACTUALTRANSFEREE/BUYER EXAMPLES:

 

Mr.Smith asks Mr. Jones to purchase a firearm for Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith gives Mr. Jones the money for the f irearm. 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."

 

It's the only thing I can think that the charge is based on, as it would be perfectly legal for the guy to buy the handgun and then gift or sell it to his uncle, assuming the interstate transfer was handled by an FFL (which it must have been, as no charges apparently filed for that).

 

- OS

Edited January 23, 2014 by Oh Shoot

[Guest PapaB]

This will be interesting to watch.

The idea has come up in the C & R forum here. Can't buy a crate of mosin's and split them up among those with C & R licenses because it's still considered a straw purchase. To me that's a prime example of bureaucratic denseness or mental NINO (Nothing In, Nothing Out).

[Fallguy]

Sounds like the classic "He wasn't guilty of what we originally went after him for, so we've got to come up with something else to charge him with"

 

Also seems to me another prime example of why not to do any paperwork on private party transfers.

Edited January 25, 2014 by Fallguy

[E4 No More]

Humm, at the police department for which I worked we had to purchase our own weapons. Our Chief of Police encouraged us to purchase them through the city so that there were no taxes, paperwork, and generally less expensive. So wouldn't every local government that did the same be guilty of the same?

[Guest PapaB]

Humm, at the police department for which I worked we had to purchase our own weapons. Our Chief of Police encouraged us to purchase them through the city so that there were no taxes, paperwork, and generally less expensive. So wouldn't every local government that did the same be guilty of the same?

 

Government is rarely guilty of any of the crimes it commits. They have the power to proclaim themselves unregulated by the law, and they often do just that

[E4 No More]

Government is rarely guilty of any of the crimes it commits. They have the power to proclaim themselves unregulated by the law, and they often do just that

Not for a federal law. Fed trumps local, remember? I tell ya, if the local governments were thoroughly investigated there would be numerous crimes discovered in just about every one of them. Judges acting as revenue collectors, judicial misconduct, police misconduct, and political misconduct making up the most.

[bersaguy]

Just another case of them trying to cover their azzes om Fast and Furious. The Feds wire all allowing straw buyers to get away in that case and did nothing. Now let 1 guy do something totally legal and they come down on him like a ton of bricks...."That's the Federal way"............jmho

[nightrunner]

IMO this here is simply a case of someone abusing the LEO discount given by Glock.

[KahrMan]

IMO this here is simply a case of someone abusing the LEO discount given by Glock.

 

That was my first thought as well.  Hey nephew, here is some money, go buy me one of those discounted glocks.