gun shop scam

[Cokebottle]

It is the 4473 that if defective. At the moment of purchase, anyone filling out the paper work is the buyer. It should be no one elae's business if he later legally sells or tranfers the gun to another.

And it's not a problem to later legally sell or transfer.

I sold a Ruger LCR 3 or 4 months after buying it.

The issue becomes whether the purchase was made with the intent to transfer, which falls under acting as an unlicensed dealer, or, the "Straw Purchase" situation that is often mis-used, when a person buys a gun for another person who is not legally able to make the purchase.

It doesn't matter whether they are prohibited, or the purchase is not legal because of 1-30 or the roster. If I give you money to buy a gun for me, that is a Straw Purchase.


A gift is 100% legal.

[heidad01]

And it's not a problem to later legally sell or transfer.

I sold a Ruger LCR 3 or 4 months after buying it.

The issue becomes whether the purchase was made with the intent to transfer, which falls under acting as an unlicensed dealer, or, the "Straw Purchase" situation that is often mis-used, when a person buys a gun for another person who is not legally able to make the purchase.

It doesn't matter whether they are prohibited, or the purchase is not legal because of 1-30 or the roster. If I give you money to buy a gun for me, that is a Straw Purchase.


A gift is 100% legal.

Thanks. Got it.

[heidad01]

It is the law stupid as it sounds. Why would anyone including the atf give a chet about a none prohibited person buying a gun for another none prohibited person with his money, your money, or Betsy's. Unless if the atf or the supreme court has a grudge against passing on the 20% super discount coupon to your none prohibited family and friends.
Alternately, they can expand the 11a question on the 4473 to an essay instead of multiple choice. That way the buyer can describe the whole story, no one gets their panties all bunched up and we do not have to take so much time and waste it on a useless cause.
Buying a gun and handing it to some one who is legally prohibited from obtaining such should be the only definition of a straw purchase. One legal purchase of a gun plus one legal transfer of a gun should not add up to an illegal something. There is something wrong here.
Just my .02 cents on this.

How nice that you think so. However, no one really cares what you think, and what you think is not what the law is. The opinions of courts about the law affect the lives and property of real people in the real world. Your opinion about what the law should be and $2.00 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

So by all means feel free to continue living in your fantasy world. The real world will, however, continue on about its business with any consideration of your opinions about how things should be.

I am quite adept at following the law and all laws. The fact that I think some are stupid makes no difference.

You made a comment about fantasy without reading or understanding my view. I did not say I will do it outside of the law. Just said that the logic behind it sounds stupid and it does not make sense to me.
Do you agree with all the laws you follow? Probably not. Yet you follow them still believing that it is not right. You gotta live by the law of the land if you do not want trouble. It dies not necessarily mean you agree with the logic.
No need to reply. I do not like arguing on the interwebz.

[Mitch]

I am quite adept at following the law and all laws. The fact that I think some are stupid makes no difference.

That's pretty much what Fiddletown said.

[wpage]

No kid or kin solution..